A systematic review of healthcare provider-targeted mobile applications for non-communicable diseases in low- and middle-income countries.
NPJ digital medicine
2022; 5 (1): 99
Mobile health (mHealth) interventions hold promise for addressing the epidemic of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) by assisting healthcare providers managing these disorders in low-resource settings. We aimed to systematically identify and assess provider-facing mHealth applications used to screen for, diagnose, or monitor NCDs in LMICs. In this systematic review, we searched the indexing databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central for studies published between January 2007 and October 2019. We included studies of technologies that were: (i) mobile phone- or tablet-based, (ii) able to screen for, diagnose, or monitor an NCD of public health importance in LMICs, and (iii) targeting health professionals as users. We extracted disease type, intervention purpose, target population, study population, sample size, study methodology, technology stage, country of development, operating system, and cost. Our initial search retrieved 13,262 studies, 315 of which met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Cardiology was the most common clinical domain of the technologies evaluated, with 89 publications. mHealth innovations were predominantly developed using Apple's iOS operating system. Cost data were provided in only 50 studies, but most technologies for which this information was available cost less than 20 USD. Only 24 innovations targeted the ten NCDs responsible for the greatest number of disability-adjusted life years lost globally. Most publications evaluated products created in high-income countries. Reported mHealth technologies are well-developed, but their implementation in LMICs faces operating system incompatibility and a relative neglect of NCDs causing the greatest disease burden.
View details for DOI 10.1038/s41746-022-00644-3
View details for PubMedID 35853936
Characteristics of Integrated Thoracic Surgery Residency Matriculants: A Survey of Program Directors.
The Annals of thoracic surgery
BACKGROUND: The six-year Integrated Thoracic Surgery (I-6) residency programs have evolved over the past decade. Despite the rising number of programs, there is minimal data published about the criteria utilized by program directors to select candidates. We analyze the characteristics and qualities of successful matriculants using the American Association of Medical College's (AAMC) data reports and survey responses from program directors.METHODS: Using a survey administered via the RedCap service, program directors were asked to rate the importance of a variety of factors in their evaluations of candidates. AAMC data reports from 2018-2020 provided information on the mean matriculant research productivity, United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores, and Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) scores.RESULTS: Responses were received from 19 of 33 (58%) I-6 programs. Program directors consistently rated interview performance as a very important factor in their evaluation of applicants. Matching into the specialty is becoming more competitive, with mean USMLE Step 1, Step 2 CK, and research productivity increasing over the past few years; matriculants had mean Step 1 and Step 2 CK scores of 247.3 and 254.2, respectively, in the 2020 match.CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic surgery program directors place high value on applicant Interview Performance, Letters of Recommendation, and Professionalism. Program directors agree that a forthcoming pass/fail USMLE Step 1 score report will lead to closer scrutiny of other factors during the decision-making process and may cause future evaluation of applicants to be heavily reliant on letters of recommendation and medical school pedigree.
View details for DOI 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2022.01.030
View details for PubMedID 35157846
Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Outcomes in Patients with Autoimmune Connective Tissue Diseases
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. 2021: S204
View details for Web of Science ID 000718303100384
Equitable and Feasible Distribution of SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines for All in Africa.
The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene
As the fight against the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic continues, the necessity for wide-scale, global vaccine rollout to reduce the spread of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and slow its mutation rate remains unassailable. The COVID-19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) initiative's campaign involves a proportional framework to finance and distribute SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in low- and middle-income countries. However, the COVAX framework has critical limitations, including limited funding and the failure to account for the special epidemic risks and needs of its participating nations, as recommended by the World Health Organization's Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization framework. These drawbacks disproportionately impact Africa, where many nations rely on COVAX as their main source of vaccines. The current plan to vaccinate only up to 20% of participating nations' populations is short-sighted from both epidemiologic and moral perspectives. COVAX must commit to vaccinating all of Africa and its initiative must be modified to account for the health and economic infrastructures in these countries. Lessons learned from successful vaccination campaigns, including the West African Ebola outbreak, have shown that vaccinating all of Africa is possible and feasible, and that infrastructure and human resources can support mass vaccination. To halt this global pandemic, global responsibility must be accepted to finance and equitably distribute SARS-CoV-2 vaccines to African nations. We urge COVAX to act swiftly to prevent Africa from becoming the new face of a persisting pandemic.
View details for DOI 10.4269/ajtmh.21-0264
View details for PubMedID 34181573