METHODS: This was a cross-sectional validation study among 159 T2DM patients attending a public primary care clinic in Selangor. The DMOQ English version underwent adaptation, translation, face validation and field testing to produce the Malay version. Psychometric analysis was performed using Exploratory Factor Analysis, internal consistency and testretest reliability.
RESULTS: The DMOQ domains were conceptually equivalent between English and Malay language. A total of 13 items and two domains were removed during the validation process (three items during the content validation, three items due to poor factor loadings, five items as they loaded onto two domains which were not interpretable, one item as it did not fit conceptually into the factor it loaded onto and one openended question as it did not fit into the retained domains). Therefore, the final DMOQ Malay version consisted of 21- items within five domains. The Cronbach alpha was 0.714 and the intraclass-correlation coefficient was 0.868.
CONCLUSION: The DMOQ Malay version is a valid and reliable tool which is consistent over time. It can be used to examine the perception of T2DM patients towards the risk of their offspring developing diabetes and possibility of intervention in Malay-speaking patients.
METHODS: Secondary analysis of data extracted from the British Household Panel Survey, a national longitudinal survey (n=5547). Analysis to ascertain whether patterns of attendance for dental check-ups for a period of 10 years (1991-2001) were associated with risk factors for oral cancer such as age, sex, education, social class, smoking status and smoking intensity.
RESULTS: Males, aged over 40 years, less educated manual workers and smokers were significantly less likely to attend for dental check-ups compared with females and younger, higher educated, higher socio-economic class non-smokers (p < 0.05). Throughout the 10-year period, young people, more than older people, had progressively lower odds ratios of attending. Those with more education used dental services more. Heavy smokers were infrequent attendees.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that opportunistic oral cancer screening by dentists is not feasible to include high-risk groups as they are not regular attendees over 10 years. Those who would be screened would be the low-risk groups. However, dentists should continue screening all patients as oral precancers are also found in regular attendees. More should be done to encourage the high-risk groups to visit their dentists.
METHODS: Hospital admissions for selected diagnoses between 1 February 2021 and 30 September 2021 were linked to the national COVID-19 immunisation register. We conducted self-controlled case-series study by identifying individuals who received COVID-19 vaccine and diagnosis of thrombocytopenia, venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, myocarditis/pericarditis, arrhythmia, stroke, Bell's Palsy, and convulsion/seizure. The incidence of events was assessed in risk period of 21 days postvaccination relative to the control period. We used conditional Poisson regression to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) with adjustment for calendar period.
RESULTS: There was no increase in the risk for myocarditis/pericarditis, Bell's Palsy, stroke, and myocardial infarction in the 21 days following either dose of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. A small increased risk of venous thromboembolism (IRR 1.24; 95% CI 1.02, 1.49), arrhythmia (IRR 1.16, 95% CI 1.07, 1.26), and convulsion/seizure (IRR 1.26; 95% CI 1.07, 1.48) was observed among BNT162b2 recipients. No association between CoronaVac vaccine was found with all events except arrhythmia (IRR 1.15; 95% CI 1.01, 1.30). ChAdOx1 vaccine was associated with an increased risk of thrombocytopenia (IRR 2.67; 95% CI 1.21, 5.89) and venous thromboembolism (IRR 2.22; 95% CI 1.17, 4.21).
CONCLUSION: This study shows acceptable safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines among recipients of BNT162b2, CoronaVac, and ChAdOx1 vaccines. This information can be used together with effectiveness data for risk-benefit analysis of the vaccination program. Further surveillance with more data is required to assess AESIs following COVID-19 vaccination in short- and long-term.