Explore the vast range of titles available.

We aim to estimate the prevalence of prediabetes, and diabetes mellitus (DM). We estimated awareness, treatment, plasma glucose control, and associated factors in diabetes, as well as, socioeconomic-related inequality in the prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes. Data for adults aged 35–70 years were obtained from the baseline phase of the Dehgolan prospective cohort study (DehPCS). Diabetes status was determined as fasting plasma glucose (FPG) of ≥ 126 mg/dl and/or taking glucose lowering medication confirmed by a medical practitioner. Prediabetes was considered as 100 ≤ FPG ≤ 125 mg/dl. The relative concentration index (RCI) was used to exhibit socioeconomic inequality in the prevalence of prediabetes and DM. Prevalence of prediabetes and DM, diabetes awareness and treatment, and glycemic control of DM 18.22%, 10.00%, 78.50%, 68.91% and, 28.50%, respectively. Increasing age (p < 0.001), Increasing body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.05), ex-smoker (p < 0.01), family history of diabetes (FHD) (p < 0.001), and comorbidity (p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for DM. Age group of 46–60 (p < 0.05), ex-smoker (p < 0.05), FHD (p < 0.05) were increased chance of awareness. Current smokers (p < 0.05), and higher education increase the chance of glycemic control in DM. Both DM (RCI =  − 0.234) and prediabetes (RCI =  − 0.122) were concentrated significantly among less-educated participants. DM was concentrated significantly among poor (RCI =  − 0.094) people. A significant proportion of DM awareness and treatment can be due to the integration of diabetes into the primary health care system. The high prevalence of prediabetes and diabetes, which is affected by socioeconomic inequality and combined with low levels of glycemic control may place a greater burden on the health system. Therefore, awareness, receiving treatment, and glycemic control in people with diabetes, and the socioeconomic status of people have become increasingly important in the near future.

This study aimed to investigate the validity of self‐reported hypertension and related factors in the Dehgolan Prospective Cohort Study (DehPCS). Data were obtained from 3996 participants aged 35–70 years in the enrolment phase of DehPCS. Self‐reported hypertension and sociodemographic factors were collected by well‐trained interviewers before hypertension diagnosis based on the reference criteria. The history of anti‐hypertensive medication use and/or systolic blood pressure ≥140 (mmHg), or diastolic blood pressure ≥90 (mmHg) were considered as hypertension. Disagreement between self‐reported and reference measures was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV), and kappa values. Binary and multinomial logistic regressions were used to investigate the correlates of validity of self‐reported hypertension. The hypertension prevalence based on self‐reports and the reference criteria was 19.49% and 21.60%, respectively. An acceptable percentage of kappa agreement value of 68.7% and relatively good overall agreement of 89.8% were found. Self‐reported hypertension was guaranteed moderate sensitivity of 72.0% and high specificity of 94.5%, as well as the NPV and PPV of 92/7% and 77/9%, respectively. The chances of false‐positive and false‐negative reporting increased with older age, higher BMI, and a family history of hypertension. Being female, older age, higher BMI, concurrent diabetes, and stronger family ties to hypertension patients significantly increased the chance of reporting true positives relative to true negatives. Although, self‐reported hypertension has an acceptable validity and can be used as a valid tool for screening epidemiological studies, it needs to be investigated because its validity is affected by age, gender, family history of hypertension, and other socio‐demographic characteristics.

Background In this research, data of the DehPCS study were used to assess the validity of self-reported diabetes based on the reference criteria, including the history of taking oral anti-diabetic drugs, insulin injection, or high fasting blood sugar. Methods A cross-sectional analytical study was performed on 4400 participants of the DehPCS study, aged 35–70 years. The reference criteria were oral hypoglycemic drug consumption, insulin injection, and/ or fasting blood sugar ≥126 (mg/dl). The self-reporting diabetes was investigated by well-trained interviewers before the diabetes diagnosis based on the reference criteria. The validity of self-reporting diabetes was assessed using sensitivity, specificity, as well as positive and negative predictive values. Socio-demographic correlates of self-reported agreement were examined by multinomial logistic regression. Results Three thousand nine hundred ninety-six people participated in this study, and the participation rate was equal to 90.8%. The diabetes prevalence among the study population was 13.1% based on self-reports and 9.7% based on the reference criteria. Five hundred twenty-three participants reported diabetes, 213 (41.28%) of whom did not have it. We found a good agreement of 92.3% with an acceptable kappa value of 65.1% between self-reporting diabetes and the reference criteria. Diabetes self-reporting also guaranteed sensitivity of 78.5%, specificity of 93.9%, as well as the positive and negative predictive values of 58.7% and of 98.0%, respectively. Being female, the higher economic class, the higher body mass index (BMI), and the positive family history of diabetes increased the chance of false positive. Being male, older ages and the moderate economic class increased the chance of false positive. Conclusion Self-reporting diabetes is identified as a relatively valid tool which could fairly determine the diabetes prevalence in epidemiological studies. It should be noted that its validity is influenced by some socio-demographic characteristics.

Although almost three years have passed since the outbreak of the coronavirus (COVID-19), this unprecedented situation is still not under control. Since COVID-19 has the potential to harm the human body, this systematic review aimed to evaluate the outbreak of post-traumatic stress disturbance (PTSD) during the COVID-19 epidemic. We used the search strategy of “novel coronavirus” OR “2019 novel coronavirus” OR “novel coronavirus pneumonia” OR “new coronavirus” OR “coronavirus disease 2019” OR “SARS2” OR “2019-n CoV” OR “SARS-CoV-2” OR “COVID-19” AND “PTSD” OR “PTS” OR “post-traumatic stress” OR “mental disorders”. The exclusion criteria included: a) articles that were not in English or Persian language; b) articles whose full text was not available, c) articles that did not report the prevalence of PTSD, d) articles that were not specific to COVID-19 or included other diseases, e) duplicate publications; f) reviews, abstracts, case reports, case series, and g) studies with target groups other than healthcare workers (HCWs), patients with COVID-19 and general population. After reviewing the articles and checking the exclusion criteria, the full text of 27 articles was reviewed. The studies showed the prevalence of PTSD in the HCW, general population and COVID-19 patients varied from the lowest to the highest as 3.8% to 56.6%, 4.6% to 67.09% and 5.61% to 96.2%, respectively. Given the prevalence of PTSD associated to COVID-19 in the investigated groups, it is recommended to design and implement educational and interventional programs to manage stress and deal with stressful situations such as epidemics.

Objective: Although comorbidity of psychotic disorders and substance use can lead to increase in mortality, less is known about the outbreak and predictors. Psychotic patients tend to be overlooked during assessment; hence, the possibility of an undertreated or missed condition such as increasing substance use. This investigation aimed to measure the prevalence of substance use in psychotic patients and to survey the powerful predictors. Method: In a 1-year cross-sectional study, 311 psychotic patients were assessed using the Structured Interview Based on DSM-5 for diagnostic confirmation as well as questions surveying prevalence and possible predictors of substance use. Results: Prevalence of substance use among psychotic patients was 37.9%. Several variables were identified as factors associated with drug abuse among the psychotic patients. These included male gender, younger age, being currently homeless, a history of imprisonment, and having family history of drug use. The strongest predictors of substance use, however, were family history of drug use, male gender, and being currently homelessness. Conclusion: Policymakers should note the importance of substance use among psychotic patients. Developing active screening strategies and comprehensive preventive plans, especially in the high-risk population, is suggested.

Diabetes is one of the most common non-communicable diseases, which have far-reaching economic and social consequences and threaten the national production and economy of countries. However, diabetes is a disease of self-control. Therefore, self-care strategies can maintain patients’ independence while reducing the burden imposed on health care resources. This study aimed to investigate the factors affecting self-care behaviors in diabetic patients. This study is a systematic review; Google Scholar, SID, Scopus, PubMed, Science Direct, and ISI databases were used; 17,500 articles were found including the keywords “self-care”, “diabetes” and “affecting factors” in the search process, and all studies after 2010 were included. After reviewing the titles and abstracts, 51 studies were included. The studies’ reports on selfcare behaviors and their prevalence were very different depending on the tools used. The studies show the relationship between selfcare behaviors in patients with diabetes and various factors, including demographic, socio-economic, and psychological factors. The most important variables included are educational status, age, gender, marital status, BMI, occupational status, duration of illness, comorbidities, income, having glucometer, perceived severity of the disease and its complications, perceived barriers, diabetes distress, diabetes knowledge, perceived susceptibility, self-efficacy, social and family support, depression, and anxiety. Due to the relationship of demographic, socio-economic, and psychological factors with self-care behaviors in patients with diabetes, it is suggested that a comprehensive program for the management of caring behaviors in diabetic patients should be designed to include all of the above.