METHODS: A cross sectional survey was conducted among staff from a tertiary education centre. Subjects were contacted to ascertain their medical history. A total of 320 subjects were interviewed and 195 subjects were eligible and subsequently recruited on a suitable date for taking blood and administration of the questionnaires. The subjects completed questionnaires pertaining to demographic details and coping styles. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to measure the strength of association between lipid profile and coping styles.
RESULTS: Majority of the subjects were non-academic staff (60.0%), female (67.2%), Malay (91.8%), married (52.3%) and educated until Diploma level (34.9%). Academic staff scored significantly higher mean scores in task-oriented coping styles (Mean = 64.12). Non-academic staff scored significantly higher mean scores in emotion (Mean = 48.05) and avoidance-oriented coping styles (Mean = 57.61). Malay subjects had significantly higher mean scores in emotion (Mean = 47.14) and avoidance-oriented coping styles (Mean = 55.23). Non-malay subjects (Mean = 66.00) attained significantly higher mean scores in task-oriented coping styles. Single/divorced/widowed individuals scored significantly higher mean scores in emotion (Mean = 48.13) and avoidance-oriented coping styles (Mean = 56.86). There was a significant negative correlation between TC (r = -0.162) and LDL (r = -0.168) with avoidance-oriented coping styles (p = 0.023, p = 0.019 respectively).
CONCLUSION: Avoidance-oriented coping style was more likely to engender favourable lipid profile. Hence, assessment of coping styles would certainly assist health care practitioners in predicting subjects who would be at a greater risk of developing cardiovascular diseases.
METHOD: This cross-sectional study was conducted between April to June 2020 in Malaysia. Patients who have recovered from COVID-19 for at least 1 month and their family members who were tested with negative results, Malaysian and aged 18-65 years old were purposively sampled. Cold call method was employed to recruit patients while their family members were recruited by their recommendations. Telephone interviews were conducted with the participants after obtaining their verbal consent.
RESULTS: A total of 18 participants took part in this study. Three themes emerged from the interviews: (Ι) experience of stigmatization, (ΙΙ) perspective on disease disclosure, and (ΙΙΙ) suggestion on coping and reducing stigma. The participants expressed their experiences of being isolated, labelled, and blamed by the people surrounding them including the health care providers, neighbours, and staff at the service counters. Some respondents expressed their willingness to share their experience with others by emphasizing the importance of taking preventive measure in order to stop the chain of virus transmission and some of them chose to disclose this medical history for official purpose because of fear and lack of understanding among the public. As suggested by the respondents, the approaches in addressing social stigma require the involvement of the government, the public, health care provider, and religious leader.
CONCLUSION: Individuals recovered from COVID-19 and their families experienced social stigma. Fear and lack of public understanding of the COVID-19 disease were the key factors for non-disclosure. Some expressed their willingness to share their experience as they perceived it as method to increase public awareness and thereby reducing social stigma. Multifaceted approaches with the involvement of multiple parties including the government, non-governmental organization as well as the general public were recommended as important measures to address the issues of social stigma.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Water samples were subjected to in situ and laboratory water quality analyses and focused on pH, turbidity, chlorine, Escherichia coli, total coliform, total hardness, iron (Fe), aluminium (Al), zinc (Zn), magnesium (Mg) and sodium (Na). All procedures followed the American Public Health Association (APHA) testing procedures.
RESULTS: Based on the results obtained, the values of each parameter were found to be within the safe limits set by the NDWQS except for total coliform and iron (Fe). PCA has indicated that turbidity, total coliform, E. coli, Na, and Al were the major factors that contributed to the drinking water contamination in river water intake.
CONCLUSION: Overall, the water from all sampling point stations after undergoing water treatment process was found to be safe as drinking water. It is important to evaluate the drinking water quality of the treatment plant to ensure that consumers have access to safe and clean drinking water as well as community awareness on drinking water quality is essential to promote public health and environmental protection.
METHODS: This study addressed communities of urban and rural Malaysia, including adults aged between 35 and 70 years old at the baseline recruitment. A series of standardised questionnaires were used to assess legume intake, history of comorbidities and socio-demographic information. Resting blood pressure measurements and physical examinations were performed to collect blood pressure and anthropometric data. Bivariate analysis was completed to determine the association between legume intake, socio-demographic characteristics and CVD prevalence. Moderation analysis was used to quantify the moderation effect of minimum daily legume intake on the relationship between BMI and CVD prevalence.
RESULTS: This study found that those who consume less than 3 servings of legumes per day benefit from protective effects against CVD risk (POR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.37 - 0.85). Moderation analysis of a minimum of three servings/day for the relationship between BMI and CVD prevalence showed significant effects. The group that benefited the most from this effect was those with a BMI in the range of 26 to 34 kg/m2.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides new insights into the recommendation for legume intake according to the relationship between BMI and the prevalence of CVD in Malaysian adults. This study recommends that those with a BMI of 26 to 34 kg/m2 should consume at least 3 servings of legumes per day to reduce the risk of CVD. Further prospective research is warranted to affirm these findings throughout the Malaysian population.
METHODOLOGY: This study was a part of the Prospective Urban Rural Epidemiology (PURE) study carried out among adults aged between 35 to 70 years old residing in urban and rural Malaysian communities. A standardised questionnaire was used to assess the socio-demographic information and physical activity level of respondents who provided written informed consent to participate in this study. HGS was measured using Jamar's dynamometer. A total of 3,446 healthy adults of Malay ethnic were included in this study. Descriptive data were used to derive the normative reference values for HGS using means and standard deviations stratified by age and gender. The predictors of HGS were determined using a general linear model (GLM).
RESULTS: Mean HGS ranged from 38.48 (± 9.40) kg for the dominant hand of men aged 35-40 years to 16.53 (± 5.69) kg for the non-dominant hand of women aged 61-70 years. The ANOVA indicated that there was a significant descending trend of HGS as age increased for both genders (p
METHODS: Four validation groups were extracted from a longitudinal community-based study dataset of 12,573 participants aged ≥18 years to validate the Framingham Risk Score (FRS), Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation 2 (SCORE2), Revised Pooled Cohort Equations (RPCE), and World Health Organization cardiovascular disease (WHO CVD) models. Two measures of validation are examined: discrimination and calibration. Outcome of interest was 10-year risk of CVD events (fatal and non-fatal). SCORE2 and RPCE performances were compared to SCORE and PCE, respectively.
FINDINGS: FRS (AUC = 0.750) and RPCE (AUC = 0.752) showed good discrimination in CVD risk prediction. Although FRS and RPCE have poor calibration, FRS demonstrates smaller discordance for FRS vs. RPCE (298% vs. 733% in men, 146% vs. 391% in women). Other models had reasonable discrimination (AUC = 0.706-0.732). Only SCORE2-Low, -Moderate and -High (aged <50) had good calibration (X2 goodness-of-fit, P-value = 0.514, 0.189, 0.129, respectively). SCORE2 and RPCE showed improvements compared to SCORE (AUC = 0.755 vs. 0.747, P-value <0.001) and PCE (AUC = 0.752 vs. 0.546, P-value <0.001), respectively. Almost all risk models overestimated 10-year CVD risk by 3%-1430%.
INTERPRETATION: In Malaysians, RPCE are evaluated be the most clinically useful to predict CVD risk. Additionally, SCORE2 and RPCE outperformed SCORE and PCE, respectively.
FUNDING: This work was supported by the Malaysian Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MOSTI) (Grant No: TDF03211036).