METHODS: An anonymous cross-sectional survey was conducted between 4 January and 5 March 2021 in 17 countries worldwide. Proportions and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and vaccine characteristics influencing vaccination acceptance were generated and compared across countries and regions. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the factors associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.
RESULTS: Of the 19,714 responses received, 90.4% (95% CI 81.8-95.3) reported likely or extremely likely to receive COVID-19 vaccine. A high proportion of likely or extremely likely to receive the COVID-19 vaccine was reported in Australia (96.4%), China (95.3%) and Norway (95.3%), while a high proportion reported being unlikely or extremely unlikely to receive the vaccine in Japan (34.6%), the U.S. (29.4%) and Iran (27.9%). Males, those with a lower educational level and those of older age expressed a higher level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. Less than two-thirds (59.7%; 95% CI 58.4-61.0) reported only being willing to accept a vaccine with an effectiveness of more than 90%, and 74.5% (95% CI 73.4-75.5) said they would accept a COVID-19 vaccine with minor adverse reactions. A total of 21.0% (95% CI 20.0-22.0) reported not accepting an mRNA vaccine and 51.8% (95% CI 50.3-53.1) reported that they would only accept a COVID-19 vaccine from a specific country-of-origin. Countries from the Southeast Asia region reported the highest proportion of not accepting mRNA technology. The highest proportion from Europe and the Americas would only accept a vaccine produced by certain countries. The foremost important vaccine characteristic influencing vaccine choice is adverse reactions (40.6%; 95% CI 39.3-41.9) of a vaccine and effectiveness threshold (35.1%; 95% CI 33.9-36.4).
CONCLUSIONS: The inter-regional and individual country disparities in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy highlight the importance of designing an efficient plan for the delivery of interventions dynamically tailored to the local population.
DESIGN: This is a prospective, cohort study involving rural community residents.
SETTING: Rural community resident at Bingkor, Keningau, Sabah.
PARTICIPANTS: 363 individuals aged 13 years old and above.
INTERVENTION: Community-based participatory research to determine the prevalence and risk factors associated with alcohol use.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measurement of alcohol use using Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) and assessment of psychiatric morbidity using Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) questionnaires.
RESULTS: Most alcohol drinkers aged between 36-45 years old, followed by 26-35 years old and 46-55 years old. Interestingly, there are almost similar female to male ratio. Most were Kadazan-Dusun ethnic, non-Muslims, and married. Although only less than a third of the participants received tertiary education, the majority were working. Based on the findings, being a male, non-Muslim and having an obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) (current) posed a significantly higher risk of alcohol consumption.
CONCLUSION: A worryingly high prevalence of hazardous alcohol consumption among the locals is reported. There is a need for population-wide intervention towards preventive measures based on the identified risk factors for hazardous alcohol use.
METHODOLOGY: Patients suitable for BCS who were treated with IORT between January 2016 and June 2019 from three centres were analysed. They were divided into low-risk and high-risk groups based on the risk of recurrence according to the TARGeted Intraoperative radioTherapy (TARGIT) A and B study criteria. Outcomes of interest included local recurrence, wound complications, and radiation toxicity, with a subset analysed for cosmetic and patient-reported outcomes.
RESULTS: Within a median follow-up of 31 months, there were 104 and 211 patients in the low- and high-risk groups, respectively. No significant difference was observed in local recurrence rates (low-risk, 1.0% vs. high-risk, 1.4%; p = 1.000). Both cohorts exhibited low frequencies of severe wound complications ranging between 1.4 and 1.9%. No major radiation toxicities were reported in either group. In the subgroup analysis, low-risk patients had significantly better mean scores in the subscales of inframammary fold and scar. Based on the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcomes questionnaire, seven out of nine parameters were scored similarly between both groups with no significant difference.
CONCLUSION: This study showed that the use of IORT in both low- and high-risk early breast cancers is efficacious and safe with low recurrence rates and an acceptable toxicity profile.
METHODS: Data came from the 2020 ITC Malaysia Survey, a web-based survey of a nationally representative sample of adults who smoked (n=1047) aged 18 and older. They were asked on ever heard of, ever used, and currently using HTPs, and their reasons for using HTPs.
RESULTS: Overall, 25.4% (n= 324; 95% CI:22.3%-28.7%) of Malaysians who smoked reported ever used HTPs with 6.7% (n=85; 95% CI:22.3%-28.7%) were using them daily and 8.1% (n=110; 95% CI:6.4% -10.2%) were using HTPs non-daily. Most of them (57.2%) who dual use were of aged 25-39 and 97.3% were males. Among those who smoked daily, almost half (49.3%) were also using HTP daily. Among those who used HTPs daily and non-daily, curiosity (84.2%, 95% CI:78.4%-90.0%), taste (83.2%, 95% CI:77.3%-89.1%), and appealing technology (78.5%, 95% CI:71.3%-85.6%) were the most reported reasons. Among those who used HTPs daily, curiosity was the top reason (87.9%, 95% CI:78.9%-93.4%), while among non-daily, taste good was the top reason (81.9%, 95% CI:71.9%-88.8%).
CONCLUSIONS: The very high use of HTPs among Malaysians who smoked requires continued public health surveillance that can inform the regulation of these novel tobacco products.
SETTING: A single centre study, Malaysia.
PARTICIPANTS: Adults aged between 18 and 60 years with mTBI as a result of road traffic accident, with no previous history of head trauma, minimum of 9 years education and abnormal cognition at 3 months will be included. The exclusion criteria include pre-existing chronic illness or neurological/psychiatric condition, long-term medication that affects cognitive/psychological status, clinical evidence of substance intoxication at the time of injury and major polytrauma. Based on multiple estimated calculations, the minimum intended sample size is 50 participants (Cohen's d effect size=0.35; alpha level of 0.05; 85% power to detect statistical significance; 40% attrition rate).
INTERVENTIONS: Intervention group will receive individualised structured cognitive rehabilitation. Control group will receive the best patient-centred care for attention disorders. Therapy frequency for both groups will be 1 hour per week for 12 weeks.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary: Neuropsychological Assessment Battery-Screening Module (S-NAB) scores. Secondary: Diffusion Tensor Imaging (DTI) parameters and Goal Attainment Scaling score (GAS).
RESULTS: Results will include descriptive statistics of population demographics, CogniPlus cognitive program and metacognitive strategies. The effect of intervention will be the effect size of S-NAB scores and mean GAS T scores. DTI parameters will be compared between groups via repeated measure analysis. Correlation analysis of outcome measures will be calculated using Pearson's correlation coefficient.
CONCLUSION: This is a complex clinical intervention with multiple outcome measures to provide a comprehensive evidence-based treatment model.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the Medical Research Ethics Committee UMMC (MREC ID NO: 2016928-4293). The findings of the trial will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and scientific conferences.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03237676.
METHODS: A total of 114 autologous stem-cell transplantation patients aged ≥ 18 years old at a national hematology center in Malaysia from April 2019 to December 2020 completed OMDQ-Mal concurrently with physician scores. Internal consistency and reproducibility were determined by Cronbach alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient, respectively. Correlations with physician scores were determined by Spearman correlation. Discriminative validity and construct validity were determined by Mann-Whitney U and CFA, respectively.
RESULTS: OMDQ-Mal demonstrated high internal consistency (α = 0.874). Test-retest reliability between paired days were moderate to excellent (95% CI = 0.676-0.953). Items in OMDQ-Mal had moderate to strong correlations with physician scores (ρ = 0.503-0.721). Discriminative validity indicated that the scores of scales were significantly different between participants with severe and mild conditions. Construct validity results of loading factors 0.708-0.952; composite reliability 0.879-0.974; average variant extracted 0.710-0.841; and heterotrait-monotrait ratio 0.528 established the convergent and divergent validity.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the OMDQ-Mal, which captured important quality of life responses, demonstrated adequate validity and reliability. This was supported by a two-component model CFA. The strong correlation of OMDQ-Mal with both physician scores indicated its potential as a comprehensive patient-reported outcome measure of mucositis of the entire alimentary tract.
METHODS: This was a prospective study carried out in four phases. In phase 1, three gastroenterologists with expertise in IBD generated a total of 21 questions related to the general knowledge of the disease in the English language. Phase 2 involved content and face validity whereby the questions were further validated by other gastroenterologists. In phase 3, the validated questions were translated into three languages namely Malay, Mandarin and Tamil which are commonly used in Malaysia. In phase 4 (statistical validity), administration of the questionnaires to patients and hospital staff were conducted to assess the construct validity, discriminative ability, predictive validity and reliability of the questionnaires.
RESULTS: A total of 21 questions were generated initially. Further evaluation indicated that 20 items had adequate kappa and content validity index for relevance (CVI: 0.714 to 1, Kapp: 0.645 to 1) and clarity (CVI: 0.714 to 1, Kapp: 0.645 to 1). The questionnaires in four languages were administered to 213 patients to assess the construct validity. Six items were removed (three for low communality, one for small loading factors, two for cross loading), resulting in 16 final questions. Assessment with 34 hospital staff involving nurses, doctors and clerks showed significant differences in knowledge between the groups (F = 14.007, p
METHODS: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with qualitative interviews was conducted. Each primary care doctor was considered a cluster and randomized to either the control (usual practice) or intervention (DeSSBack) group. Patient outcomes including Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a 10-point pain rating scale were measured at baseline and 2-month postintervention. The doctors in the intervention group were interviewed to explore feasibility and acceptability of using DeSSBack.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with nonspecific LBP participated in this study (intervention n = 23; control n = 13). Fidelity was poor among patients but good among doctors. The RMDQ and anxiety score had medium effect sizes of 0.718 and 0.480, respectively. The effect sizes for pain score (0.070) and depression score were small (0.087). There was appreciable acceptability and satisfaction with use of DeSSBack, as it was helpful in facilitating thorough and standardized management, providing appropriate treatment plans based on risk stratification, improving consultation time, empowering patient-centred care, and easy to use.
CONCLUSIONS: A future cRCT to evaluate the effectiveness of DeSSBack is feasible to be conducted in a primary care setting with minor modifications. DeSSBack was found useful by doctors and can be improved to enhance efficiency.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol of the cluster randomized controlled trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04959669).
METHODS: We obtained the validity and reliability evidence for the SAS-M-SF using a group of 307 pre-university students in Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM), Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia with a mean age of 18.4±0.2 years (70.4% female and 29.6% male). A questionnaire containing the Malay version of Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS-M), the Malay version of the short form Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS-M-SF), and the Malay version of the Internet Addiction Test (IAT-M) was administered on the adolescents.
RESULTS: The SAS-M-SF displayed good internal consistency (Cronbach's α=0.80). Using principle component analysis, we identified a 4-factor SAS-M-SF model. A significant correlation between the SAS-M-SF and the IAT-M was found, lending support for concurrent validity. The prevalence of smartphone addiction was 54.5% based on cut-off score of ≥36 with a sensitivity of 70.2% and a specificity of 72.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: The 10-item SAS-M-SF is a valid and reliable screening tool for smartphone addiction among adolescents. The scale can help clinicians or educators design appropriate intervention and prevention programs targeting smartphone addiction in adolescents at clinical or school settings.
OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of the Borg CR-10 scale to monitor the perceived exertion of office exercise training.
METHODS: The study involved 105 staff members employed in a government office with an age range from 25 to 50 years. The Borg CR-10 scale was self-administered two times, with an interval of two weeks in order to evaluate the accuracy of the original findings with a retest. Face validity and content validity were also examined.
RESULTS: Reliability was found to be high for the Borg CR-10 scale (0.898). Additionally a high correlation between the Borg CR-10 scale and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) was identified (rs = 0.754, P
METHODS: A web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted between 12th and May 13, 2020. Quota sampling was used to attain equal gender and age distributions representative of the Japanese population.
RESULTS: A total of 4127 complete responses were analysed. Higher educational level (B = 0.045, p = 0.002) and household income (B = 0.04, p = 0.009) were associated with a higher increase in preventive measures when comparing before and after the state of emergency was declared. The highest reported social anxiety was a feeling of fear (65.6%), followed by embarrassment (43.8%), keeping infection a secret (41.3%), avoidance (41.3%), and stigma (25.5%). A total of 86.1% of the respondents reported moderate to severe anxiety. The partial least square-based structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) revealed that being female has the greatest effect (B = 0.246, p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre-COVID data were collected between January 1, 2019, to March 18, 2020, when a national lockdown was implemented, which caused the suspension of services at the breast clinic of University Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC). COVID data was obtained from March 2020 until June 2021.
RESULTS: This study compared 374 breast cancer patients in the COVID-19 period with 382 patients in the pre-COVID period. There was no significant difference in the median (range) time to surgery between pre-COVID [45 (26.50-153.50) days] and COVID [44 (24.75-156.25) days] periods. The clinicopathological features of breast cancer showed reduction in in situ carcinoma and increase in Stage 4 diagnoses during the COVID period. There was a reduction in screening-detected carcinoma (9% vs. 12.3%), mastectomy followed by immediate reconstruction (5.6% vs. 14.5%) and adjuvant chemotherapy (25.8% vs. 32.9%) in the COVID period.
CONCLUSION: In this center COVID-19 caused operational changes in breast cancer management, including a reduction in reconstructive procedures and adjuvant treatment. Healthcare disruption and fear of COVID may have caused delayed diagnosis, resulting in a higher frequency of Stage 4 disease and lower proportion of in situ carcinoma during the pandemic. However, there was no delay in the time to surgery, reduction in surgical volume, or change in surgery types.