Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) can cause a wide clinical spectrum, ranging from asymptomatic to severe disease with a high mortality rate. In view of the current pandemic and the increasing influx of patients into healthcare facilities, there is a need to identify simple and reliable tools for stratifying patients. Objective: Study aimed to analyze whether hemogram-derived ratios (HDRs) can be used to identify patients with a risk of developing a severe clinical form and admission to hospital. Methods: This cross-sectional and observational study included 500 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19. Data on clinical features and laboratory parameters were collected from medical records and 13 HDRs were calculated and analyzed. Descriptive and inferential statistics were included in the analysis. Results: Of the 500 patients, 43.8% had a severe form of the disease. Lymphocytopenia, monocytopenia, higher C-reactive protein (CRP), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) were found in severe patients (p < 0.05). Significantly higher neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), derived NLR (dNLR), neutrophil-to-platelet ratio (NPR), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte-to-platelet ratio (NLPR) and CRP-to-lymphocyte ratio (CRP/Ly) values were found in severe patients (p < 0.001). In addition, they have statistically significant prognostic potential (p < 0.001). The area under the curve (AUC) for CRP/Ly, dNLR, NLPR, NLR, and NPR were 0.693, 0.619, 0.619, 0.616, and 0.603, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity were 65.7% and 65.6% for CRP/Ly, 51.6% and 70.8 for dNLR, 61.6% and 57.3% for NLPR, 40.6% and 80.4% for NLR, and 48.8% and 69.1% for NPR. Conclusion: The results of the study suggest that NLR, dNLR, CRP/Ly, NPR, and NLPR can be considered as potentially useful markers for stratifying patients with a severe form of the disease. HDRs derived from routine blood tests results should be included in common laboratory practice since they are readily available, easy to calculate, and inexpensive.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.795841.].

Background: Correct measuring of blood and urine creatinine level is necessary for identification and tracking of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Objective: The aim of this study is a comparison of Jaffe and enzymatic methods for measuring creatinine in serum and in urine, in order to determine whether there are any statistical significant differences between them, and whether they are reflected on creatinine clearance calculation and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Methods: Creatinine in serum and urine was measured for the group of patients (N=60; female=34, male=26) from 24 to 69 years of age by using Jaffe’s method on Dimension RxL biochemical analyzer, and enzymatic method on integrated biochemical and immunochemical analyzer Architect ci8200, and obtained levels are used for creatinine clearance calculation and eGFR. Results: The methods correlate well, both in measuring serum creatinine (r 1 = 0.990) and in measuring urine creatinine (r 2 =0.974). There are no statistically significant differences between them (p=0.57). Measuring creatinine using different methods showed no statistically significant differences in the calculated clearances (p=0.93), they significantly correlate (r=0.9722). eGFR, using the MDRD and CKD-EPI formulas, were not statistically significantly different, regardless of the used method. Conclusion: Apart from significant correlations between the used methods, the results of using the Jaffe and enzymatic methods showed no significant differences at measuring serum creatinine level, or creatinine clearance and glomerular filtration rate.

Introduction: Laboratory personnel (LP) represent a high-risk group of healthcare workers for whom the primary laboratory environment and specific work activities are a major source of potential exposure to health hazards. This study aimed to evaluate the developed matrix and assess risk based on self-assessment. Methods: This multicenter, qualitative, and cross-sectional study was conducted on LP employed in biomedical laboratories. The respondents were divided into groups according to their territorial affiliation. The data collection tool used was a six-area questionnaire distributed online through a network of professional associations. For the risk assessment, a matrix was developed with scores ranging from 0 to 650, dividing the risk level into four categories. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used for the statistical analysis. Results: The developed model combined the classification of risk and risk factors with a certainty of p < 0.001. The regression analysis showed that working conditions had the greatest influence on overall risk, followed by physical, biological, and physical hazards. Of the 640 respondents, the medium risk category was the highest in European Union (EU) countries (81.2%). Comparing the values in the high-risk category between the Bosnians and Herzegovinians (BiH) group and the Republic of Serbia, Republic of Northern Macedonia, and Montenegro (SCM) group with the EU group, a doubling (16.6%: 36.7%) and tripling (16.6%: 52.1%) of the proportion was found, respectively (p < 0.001). Overall, 1.7% of the LPs from BiH fell into the high-risk category. Conclusions: The designed matrix provides a reliable basis for identifying risk predictors in the study population and can serve as a useful tool for conducting risk assessments in biomedical laboratories. The results of the risk assessment indicate significant differences between the studied groups and highlight the need for increased control of BiH workplaces through new regulatory requirements.

Background Pandemics, such as COVID-19, are dangerous and socially disruptive. Though no one is immune to COVID-19, older persons often bear the brunt of its consequences. This is particularly true for older women, as they often face more pronounced health challenges relative to other segments in society, including complex care needs, insufficient care provisions, mental illness, neglect, and increased domestic abuse. To further compound the situation, because protective measures like lockdowns can result in unintended consequences, many health services older women depend on can become disrupted or discontinued amid pandemics. While technology-based interventions have the potential to provide near-time, location-free, and virtually accessible care, there is a dearth of systematic insights into this mode of care in the literature. To bridge the research gaps, this investigation aims to examine the characteristics and effectiveness of technology-based interventions that could address health challenges older women face amid COVID-19. Methods A systematic review of randomized trials reporting on technology-based interventions for older women (≥65 years) during COVID-19 will be conducted. The databases of Web of Science, ScienceDirect, PubMed/MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and Scopus will be searched. Retrieved citations will be screened independently by at least two reviewers against the eligibility criteria. Included studies will be assessed using the Cochrane ROB-2 tool. Data will be extracted independently by the reviewers. Where possible, meta-analyses will be performed on relevant study outcomes and analysed via odds ratios on the dichotomized outcomes. Where applicable, heterogeneity will be measured using the Cochrane Q test, and publication bias will be assessed via funnel plots and Egger’s regression test. Discussion Technology has the potential to transform healthcare for the better. To help society better safeguard vulnerable populations’ health and quality of life, this investigation sets out to gauge the state-of-the-art development of technology-based interventions tailored to the health challenges older women face amid COVID-19. In light of the growing prevalence of population ageing and the inevitability of infectious disease outbreaks, greater research efforts are needed to ensure the timely inception and effective implementation of technology-based health solutions for vulnerable populations like older women, amid public health crises like COVID-19 and beyond. Systematic review registration PROSPERO CRD42020194003

Violence against women is rampant in China. Even though meaningful strides have been made in the country, it remains disturbingly common for men to assault women-verbally or physically, who may or may not be their partners-in broad daylight in China. To make the situation worse, COVID-19, along with its restrictions, has both undermined women's ability to escape from abuse or violence and society's ability to provide timely help to victims. In light of the rising violence against women post-COVID, in this paper, we discuss the policy imperatives for countries like China to establish effective guardrails and support systems to protect women from the dehumanizing and destabilizing crime that is violence against women-a social malaise that not only harms and undermines the safety of society's daughters, mothers, and grandmothers, but also the integrity of local communities and social contract, let along shared humanity and global solidarity at large.

Food safety is a story that unites all civilizations, cultures, and nations, and it is interlaced with various methods for making food safer. Concern for nutritious and safe food is as ancient as humankind itself, and many of the food safety issues that persist today are not new. Diverse records from the ancient world, as well as the religious writings of the three monotheist religions, actually refer to food, its intake, and prohibitions, as well as pathological diseases that may follow from inappropriate intake. Over time, food safety has evolved into a scientific discipline concerned with the handling, preparation, transport, and distribution of food to avoid the transmission of illnesses. The current state of food safety knowledge is the result of past discoveries, innovations, and laws. In modern times, the right to consume safe food is a fundamental human right. It contributes to and promotes sustainable development while supporting the economy, trade, and tourism. Nevertheless, despite significant improvements, we still know relatively little about food-borne illnesses and how infections affect humans.

Tobacco is both toxic and addictive. Mounting evidence shows that tobacco use has a detrimental impact on almost every aspect of human health, causing or worsening deadly public health crises from the cancer epidemic to the COVID-19 pandemic. However, while tobacco use is a threat to both personal and public health, it continues to surge across the world, especially in China and other low- and middle-income countries. To this end, this article argues in favor of using a ban on the sale of all tobacco products as a practical solution to the global tobacco use epidemic. It is our hope that insights provided by our work will inspire swift policy actions in countries such as China and beyond to curb the tide of rising tobacco consumption, so that populations around the world could be better shielded from the pervasive and long-lasting damage that tobacco products cause or compound.

Origins debates regarding Covid-19 are gaining momentum again. In light of the continued infections and deaths of Covid-19 seen in countries rich and poor, rather than focusing the approach with “whodunit”, developing solutions that can help societies become better prepared for future pandemics might be a more meaningful way to move forward. In this paper, we propose a solution that could help society better predict and prevent future pandemics. A system could allow humans to anonymously report potential infectious disease outbreaks without fearing backlash or prejudice and could automatically surveil for potential disease transfers or virus leaks. The proposed autonomous and anonymous pandemic reporting and surveillance system has the potential to help health officials locate infectious disease outbreaks before they form into pandemics. And in turn, it better prevents future pandemics and avoids Covid-19 origins debates.

War could be traumatic. War trauma could often lead to severe and sustained health consequences on people’s physical and psychological health. War trauma is often prevalent in people who either participated in the war or lived near conflict zones, such as military professionals, refugees, and health workers. Advances in information and communication technologies, such as the speed, scale, and scope at which people worldwide could be exposed to the near-time happenings of the war, mean that an unprecedented number of people could face media-induced war trauma. Different from war experienced in person, which could be limited in scope and intensity, media-induced war trauma can be substantially more extensive and comprehensive—news reports on the war often cover all aspects and angles possible, possibly paired with disturbing, if not demoralizing, images, repeatedly 24/7. Although media-induced war trauma could have a profound influence on people’s mental health, particularly factoring in the compounding challenges caused by the pandemic, there is a dearth of research in the literature. To shed light on this issue, in this article, we aim to examine the implications of media-induced war trauma on people’s health and well-being. Furthermore, we discuss the duties and responsibilities of the media industry amid and beyond the current conflicts in Ukraine.