MyMedR

Displaying all 4 publications

Abstract:

Sort:

Fulltext Efficacy of Interventional Programs in Reducing Acculturative Stress and Enhancing Adjustment of International Students to the New Host Educational Environment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Aljaberi MA, Alsalahi A, Juni MH, Noman S, Al-Tammemi AB, Hamat RA

Int J Environ Res Public Health, 2021 Jul 22;18(15).
PMID: 34360058 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18157765

This review aimed to systematically outline and meta-analyze the efficacy of psychoeducational, cultural orientation, socio-cultural, and peer-pairing programs in reducing acculturative stress and enhancing adjustment among international students worldwide. The consulted databases were PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, EBSCO, and ProQuest. Eligibility criteria allowed the inclusion of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental trials without applying language, country, publication type or time restrictions. The quality of the eligible studies was appraised by the RoB2 tool of Cochrane for RCTs and JBI critical appraisal tools for quasi-experimental trials. Data items were collected based on PICO acronym by two investigators and reviewed for accuracy by a third one. The evidence was narratively synthesized and validated by proceeding with a random model meta-analysis using Cochrane RevMan software(Version 5.4). The quality of the pooled evidence from meta-analysis was assessed using the tool of GRADE. Out of 29,975 retrieved records, 14 studies (six RCTs and eight quasi-experimental trials) were included. The psychoeducational program significantly reduced acculturative stress and enhanced adjustment. In contrast, cultural orientation and peer-pairing programs significantly enhanced adjustment, but could not reduce acculturative stress. In meta-analysis, acculturative stress was significantly reduced in the psychoeducational intervention versus controls [overall pooled size effect = -3.89 (95% CI: -5.42, -2.53) at p < 0.001]. Similarly, adjustment was significantly enhanced in the psychoeducation and socio-cultural interventions versus control [overall pooled size effect = 3.10 (95% CI: 2.35, 3.85) at p < 0.001]. In conclusion, the psychoeducational program demonstrated superior efficacy in reducing acculturative stress and enhancing adjustment compared to the other interventional programs. However, socio-cultural programs have still been effective in enhancing adjustment. This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42018104211).
The outbreak of Ebola virus disease in 2022: A spotlight on a re-emerging global health menace

Al-Tammemi AB, Sallam M, Rebhi A, Soliman L, Al Sarayrih L, Tarhini Z, et al.

Narra J, 2022 Dec;2(3):e97.
PMID: 38449901 DOI: 10.52225/narra.v2i3.97

Ebola virus disease (EVD) is a rare but highly contagious and lethal disease that occurs predominantly in African countries, with a case-fatality rate of 30-90%. The causative viral pathogens of EVD are within the genus Ebolavirus in the family Filoviridae. The primary route of human-to-human transmission is through direct contact with blood, bodily fluids and secretions from infected individuals. Direct contact with virally contaminated objects and sexual transmission have also been reported. Management of EVD is aggressive supportive care with possibly new therapeutic options. On 20 September 2022, an EVD outbreak was declared in Uganda, caused by Sudan ebolavirus. As of 7 November 2022, a total of 136 confirmed cases, 53 confirmed deaths have been reported, including 18 cases with seven deaths among healthcare workers. In the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), an EVD outbreak was also declared on 22 August 2022 (which ended on 27 September 2022); with only one case, a middle-aged woman. At the time when most countries in the world have been occupied with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the recent human monkeypox outbreak, these two outbreaks of EVD have the potential to significantly add to the burden on global health. Authorities need to augment their multi-faceted response, including stringent contact tracing and border control, to avoid the catastrophe of the 2014-2016 EVD epidemic.
Fulltext Rasch Modeling and Multilevel Confirmatory Factor Analysis for the Usability of the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Aljaberi MA, Lee KH, Alareqe NA, Qasem MA, Alsalahi A, Abdallah AM, et al.

Healthcare (Basel), 2022 Sep 24;10(10).
PMID: 36292305 DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10101858

BACKGROUND: Several instruments are currently used to assess Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) -induced psychological distress, including the 22-item Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R). The IES-R is a self-administered scale used to assess post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The current study aimed to examine the construct validity of the IES-R, based on the Rasch model, with COVID-19-related data, as well as to test the multilevel construct validity of the IES-R within and among countries during the pandemic crisis.
METHODS: A multi-country web-based cross-sectional survey was conducted utilizing the 22-item IES-R. A total of 1020 participants enrolled in our survey, of whom 999 were included in the analyses. Data were analyzed using Rasch modeling and multilevel confirmatory factor analysis (MCFA).
RESULTS: The Rasch modeling results of the IES-R demonstrated that the IES-R is a satisfactory instrument with the five-point Likert scale, asserting that its 22 items are significant contributors to assessing PTSD as a unidimensional construct covered by the items of the IES-R. The MCFA confirmed that the 22-item IES-R, with its three factors, including intrusion, avoidance, and hyperarousal, demonstrates adequate construct validity at the within- and among-country levels. However, the results of the Akaike information criterion (AIC) model determined that the 16-item IES-R is better than the 22-item IES-R.
CONCLUSION: The results suggested that the 22-item IES-R is a reliable screening instrument for measuring PTSD related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and can be utilized to provide timely psychological health support, when needed, based on the screening results.
Fulltext Beliefs Toward Smoking and COVID-19, and the Pandemic Impact on Smoking Behavior and Quit Intention: Findings from a Community-Based Cross-Sectional Study in Jordan

Al-Tammemi AB, Barakat M, Al Tamimi D, Alhallaq SA, Al Hasan DM, Khasawneh GM, et al.

Tob Use Insights, 2021;14:1179173X211053022.
PMID: 34866951 DOI: 10.1177/1179173X211053022

BACKGROUND: The relationship between smoking and coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) is still topical with mixed epidemiological evidence. However, the pandemic may affect people's beliefs toward smoking as well as their smoking behavior and quit intentions. Considering high smoking rates in Jordan, our current study aimed to assess the following domains in a community-based sample from Jordan: (i) the beliefs that surround smoking/vaping and COVID-19 and (ii) the pandemic impact on smoking behavior and quit intention.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Jordan from March 9 to March 16, 2021, utilizing a web-based structured questionnaire. The questionnaire comprised 13 items on sociodemographic, health, and smoking profiles, 14 items to assess beliefs surrounding COVID-19 and the use of combustible cigarettes (CCs), waterpipe (WP), and electronic cigarettes (ECs), and 12 items to assess the pandemic impact on smoking behavior and quit intention.
RESULTS: Of 2424 survey respondents who participated in our study, there were 1163 never-smokers, 1044 current smokers, and 217 ex-smokers. The mean age of participants was 35.2 years (SD: 11.06). Most participants have reported anti-smoking beliefs with around 72.9% believed that WP smoking is related to the risk of contracting COVID-19. Also, 71.7% believed that smoking CC may worsen the COVID-19 clinical course, while 74.1% of respondents believed that smoking has no protective effect against COVID-19. During the pandemic, about 28.1% and 19.3% of current smokers reported increased or reduced smoking, respectively. Besides, 459 current smokers have expressed their plans/intention to quit smoking during the pandemic, of whom 27.5% (n = 126) confirmed that the driving force for their decision is a COVID-19-related reason, such as self-protection (n = 123) and protection of family members (n = 121) which were the most cited reasons. Also, around 63 participants have successfully ceased smoking during the pandemic. However, only 22 of them reported that the main driving motivation of their successful quit attempt was the COVID-19 pandemic.
CONCLUSION: Most participants' beliefs and attitudes were against smoking during the pandemic. Nevertheless, the double-edged effect of the pandemic on smoking habits should be carefully considered, and reliable anti-smoking measures should be strengthened and sustained in the country.