Hebatullah Mohamed Abdulazeem

Background: Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a complex autoimmune disease with 0.4 million new cases diagnosed annually. With its wide variety of visible and invisible manifestations, people living with SLE report being exposed to stigmatization, which impacts their personal and professional lives. However, the current literature is unclear on whether healthcare management teams assess this concern during follow-up. This study aims to synthesize existing evidence on the prevalence and determinants of stigma among people living with SLE. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis gathered evidence from observational studies identified from three databases on 16 July 2025. Dual independent screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment (using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale) were performed. Results were synthesized using descriptive statistics, narrative synthesis, and indicator-level meta-analyses. Results: Within the past two decades, 11 studies comprising 2254 people living with SLE reported and measured stigma- and discrimination-related events using various scales. Stigma was found to be prevalent across its three constructs: interpersonal, perceived, and intrapersonal stigma. This review demonstrated that people living with SLE reported a moderate overall burden of stigma (34.71 [95% CI 26.15, 43.27]), with average stigma scores indicating psychological impact. Additionally, nearly one in two persons (46% [95% CI 28–66%]) experienced at least one form of stigma or discrimination, most commonly social isolation and unfair treatment. Mental health associations were correlated with higher stigma burden. Conclusion: This review demonstrates that stigma and discrimination are not just social challenges but also critical determinants of health. With cautious interpretation, pooled evidence reveals a consistent high prevalence of stigma and discrimination, which act as “toxic” stressors, creating a vicious cycle with psychological stress and psychiatric manifestations and disease activity. There is an urgent clinical need to move beyond a mere biological approach to disease assessment and management and to begin screening for the “invisible” burden of invalidation and discrimination.

Background: Population aging has intensified the global burden of dementia, creating significant challenges for patients, caregivers, and health care systems. While traditional in-person dementia care faces barriers, digital health technologies offer promising solutions to enhance accessibility, efficiency, and patient-centered care. However, evidence on applicability, safety, and effectiveness in dementia care remains fragmented, underscoring systematic evaluation. Objective: This study aims to assess the effectiveness, applicability, safety, and cost-efficiency of telemedicine technologies in dementia care, providing a comprehensive summary of evidence spanning clinical, psychological, socioeconomic, and operational impacts for persons living with dementia and their caregivers and assess alignment with the World Health Organization (WHO) Age-friendly Cities and Communities’ Framework and Dementia Inclusive Society Framework. Methods: An overview of systematic and scoping reviews was conducted following a search in 5 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Epistemonikos, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews), with a gray literature search on February 20, 2024. Eligible studies reported predefined outcomes related to telemedicine interventions for integrated dementia care, including effects on mental health, quality of life, physical activity, hospitalization, financial costs, safety, social isolation, and motor function. Screening and data extraction were performed by 10 reviewers. The findings were synthesized using the Thematic Analysis in Meta-Evidence (TAME) methodology, combining thematic and lexical analyses with single-proportion meta-analysis for comprehensive qualitative-quantitative synthesis. The methodological quality was assessed using the AMSTAR 2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews), with GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research) for outcomes’ confidence in evidence. Results: Ninety-one reviews provided evidence on the impact of telemedicine in dementia care. The most frequently reported outcomes were the effects of remote interventions on psychiatric and psychological well-being, particularly depression and anxiety (relative frequency of occurrence [RFO]=65%, 95% CI 54-75, moderate certainty of evidence). Fifty-seven studies highlighted the positive impact of telemedicine and telehealth on satisfaction and quality of life for persons living with dementia, caregivers, and health care providers (RFO=63%, 95% CI 52-73, moderate certainty of evidence). Remote technology-related interventions for reducing falls and managing behavioral symptoms were also frequently reported (RFO=33% 95% CI 23-44], moderate certainty of evidence). These interventions showed effectiveness in alleviating social isolation and loneliness (RFO=31%, 95% CI 22-41, moderate certainty of evidence). The methodological quality of the included reviews varied significantly, with the majority rated as low or critically low quality. Conclusions: Telemedicine and telehealth have been demonstrated to be effective and valuable tools in dementia care, offering significant benefits across psychological well-being, quality of life, and social impacts for persons living with dementia and their caregivers. This supports the adoption and implementation of telemedicine in dementia care, aligning with the strategies outlined in the United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021‐2030).

Background: Dementia is a syndrome that compromises neurocognitive functions of the individual and that is affecting 55 million individuals globally, as well as global health care systems, national economic systems, and family members. Objective: This study aimed to determine the status quo of scientific production on use of digital health technologies (DHTs) to support (older) people living with dementia, their families, and care partners. In addition, our study aimed to map the current landscape of global research initiatives on DHTs on the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and support of people living with dementia and their caregivers. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was performed as part of a systematic review protocol using MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Epistemonikos, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Google Scholar for systematic and scoping reviews on DHTs and dementia up to February 21, 2024. Search terms included various forms of dementia and DHTs. Two independent reviewers conducted a 2-stage screening process with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Eligible reviews were then subjected to a bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer to evaluate document types, authorship, countries, institutions, journal sources, references, and keywords, creating social network maps to visualize emergent research trends. Results: A total of 704 records met the inclusion criteria for bibliometric analysis. Most reviews were systematic, with a substantial number covering mobile health, telehealth, and computer-based cognitive interventions. Bibliometric analysis revealed that the Journal of Medical Internet Research had the highest number of reviews and citations. Researchers from 66 countries contributed, with the United Kingdom and the United States as the most prolific. Overall, the number of publications covering the intersection of DHTs and dementia has increased steadily over time. However, the diversity of reviews conducted on a single topic has resulted in duplicated scientific efforts. Our assessment of contributions from countries, institutions, and key stakeholders reveals significant trends and knowledge gaps, particularly highlighting the dominance of high-income countries in this research domain. Furthermore, our findings emphasize the critical importance of interdisciplinary, collaborative teams and offer clear directions for future research, especially in underrepresented regions. Conclusions: Our study shows a steady increase in dementia- and DHT-related publications, particularly in areas such as mobile health, virtual reality, artificial intelligence, and sensor-based technologies interventions. This increase underscores the importance of systematic approaches and interdisciplinary collaborations, while identifying knowledge gaps, especially in lower-income regions. It is crucial that researchers worldwide adhere to evidence-based medicine principles to avoid duplication of efforts. This analysis offers a valuable foundation for policy makers and academics, emphasizing the need for an international collaborative task force to address knowledge gaps and advance dementia care globally. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42024511241; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=511241

Alzheimer’s disease, prevalent in individuals aged 60 and above, constitutes most dementia cases and significantly impairs memory and cognitive functions. With global Alzheimer’s cases projected to triple by 2050, there is a pressing need for effective interventions. Lecanemab, a monoclonal antibody targeting amyloid-beta plaques, shows promise in slowing Alzheimer’s progression. Positive clinical trial results have instilled hope in patients, prompting ongoing research to advance understanding and intervention possibilities. To contribute to this knowledge base, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, focusing on lecanemab’s efficacy and safety at a dosage of 10 mg/kg. This comprehensive approach aimed to address gaps in the current literature, scrutinize research disparities, and guide future investigations. Applying strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, we assessed study details, participant information, and intervention specifics, using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for quality evaluation. Statistical analyses, conducted with R software, included risk ratios and mean differences, assessing heterogeneity and publication bias. The meta-analysis reveals a significant positive effect of lecanemab (10 mg/kg biweekly) on cognitive outcomes in Alzheimer’s disease. Consistent reductions in ADCOMS, CDR-SB, and ADAS-cog14 scores across studies indicate drug efficacy with narrow confidence intervals and no significant heterogeneity. While TEAE shows no significant difference, heightened risks of ARIA-E and ARIA-H associated with lecanemab underscore the need for vigilant safety monitoring in clinical practice. Despite the drug efficacy, the study emphasizes a balanced assessment of benefits and potential risks associated with lecanemab, providing critical insights for clinicians evaluating its use in addressing cognitive impairment in individuals with Alzheimer’s disease.

Digital technologies change the healthcare environment, with several studies suggesting barriers and facilitators to using digital interventions by healthcare professionals (HPs). We consolidated the evidence from existing systematic reviews mentioning barriers and facilitators for the use of digital health technologies by HP. Electronic searches were performed in five databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Embase^®, Epistemonikos, MEDLINE^®, and Scopus) from inception to March 2023. We included reviews that reported barriers or facilitators factors to use technology solutions among HP. We performed data abstraction, methodological assessment, and certainty of the evidence appraisal by at least two authors. Overall, we included 108 reviews involving physicians, pharmacists, and nurses were included. High-quality evidence suggested that infrastructure and technical barriers (Relative Frequency Occurrence [RFO] 6.4% [95% CI 2.9–14.1]), psychological and personal issues (RFO 5.3% [95% CI 2.2–12.7]), and concerns of increasing working hours or workload (RFO 3.9% [95% CI 1.5–10.1]) were common concerns reported by HPs. Likewise, high-quality evidence supports that training/educational programs, multisector incentives, and the perception of technology effectiveness facilitate the adoption of digital technologies by HPs (RFO 3.8% [95% CI 1.8–7.9]). Our findings showed that infrastructure and technical issues, psychological barriers, and workload-related concerns are relevant barriers to comprehensively and holistically adopting digital health technologies by HPs. Conversely, deploying training, evaluating HP’s perception of usefulness and willingness to use, and multi-stakeholders incentives are vital enablers to enhance the HP adoption of digital interventions.

With the advances in technology and data science, machine learning (ML) is being rapidly adopted by the health care sector. However, there is a lack of literature addressing the health conditions targeted by the ML prediction models within primary health care (PHC) to date. To fill this gap in knowledge, we conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines to identify health conditions targeted by ML in PHC. We searched the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Elsevier, BioRxiv, Association of Computing Machinery (ACM), and IEEE Xplore databases for studies published from January 1990 to January 2022. We included primary studies addressing ML diagnostic or prognostic predictive models that were supplied completely or partially by real-world PHC data. Studies selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment using the prediction model study risk of bias assessment tool were performed by two investigators. Health conditions were categorized according to international classification of diseases (ICD-10). Extracted data were analyzed quantitatively. We identified 106 studies investigating 42 health conditions. These studies included 207 ML prediction models supplied by the PHC data of 24.2 million participants from 19 countries. We found that 92.4% of the studies were retrospective and 77.3% of the studies reported diagnostic predictive ML models. A majority (76.4%) of all the studies were for models’ development without conducting external validation. Risk of bias assessment revealed that 90.8% of the studies were of high or unclear risk of bias. The most frequently reported health conditions were diabetes mellitus (19.8%) and Alzheimer’s disease (11.3%). Our study provides a summary on the presently available ML prediction models within PHC. We draw the attention of digital health policy makers, ML models developer, and health care professionals for more future interdisciplinary research collaboration in this regard.

Background: Oral anticoagulation is the cornerstone treatment of several diseases. Its management is often challenging, and different telemedicine strategies have been implemented to support it. Objective: The aim of the study is to systematically review the evidence on the impact of telemedicine-based oral anticoagulation management compared to usual care on thromboembolic and bleeding events. Methods: Randomized controlled trials were searched in 5 databases from inception to September 2021. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Total thromboembolic events, major bleeding, mortality, and time in therapeutic range were assessed. Results were pooled using random effect models. Results: In total, 25 randomized controlled trials were included (n=25,746 patients) and classified as moderate to high risk of bias by the Cochrane tool. Telemedicine resulted in lower rates of thromboembolic events, though not statistically significant (n=13 studies, relative risk [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.53-1.07; I2=42%), comparable rates of major bleeding (n=11 studies, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82-1.07; I2=0%) and mortality (n=12 studies, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.78-1.20; I2=11%), and an improved time in therapeutic range (n=16 studies, mean difference 3.38, 95% CI 1.12-5.65; I2=90%). In the subgroup of the multitasking intervention, telemedicine resulted in an important reduction of thromboembolic events (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.48). Conclusions: Telemedicine-based oral anticoagulation management resulted in similar rates of major bleeding and mortality, a trend for fewer thromboembolic events, and better anticoagulation quality compared to standard care. Given the potential benefits of telemedicine-based care, such as greater access to remote populations or people with ambulatory restrictions, these findings may encourage further implementation of eHealth strategies for anticoagulation management, particularly as part of multifaceted interventions for integrated care of chronic diseases. Meanwhile, researchers should develop higher-quality evidence focusing on hard clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020159208; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=159208

Journal of Medical Internet Research - International Scientific Journal for Medical Research, Information and Communication on the Internet #Preprint #PeerReviewMe: Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint. Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn. Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period. Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author). Background: Oral anticoagulation is the cornerstone treatment of several diseases. Its management is often challenging, and different telemedicine strategies have been implemented to support it. Objective: The aim of the study is to systematically review the evidence on the impact of telemedicine-based oral anticoagulation management compared to usual care on thromboembolic and bleeding events. Methods: Randomized controlled trials were searched in 5 databases from inception to September 2021. Two independent reviewers performed study selection and data extraction. Total thromboembolic events, major bleeding, mortality, and time in therapeutic range were assessed. Results were pooled using random effect models. Results: In total, 25 randomized controlled trials were included (n=25,746 patients) and classified as moderate to high risk of bias by the Cochrane tool. Telemedicine resulted in lower rates of thromboembolic events, though not statistically significant (n=13 studies, relative risk [RR] 0.75, 95% CI 0.53-1.07; I²=42%), comparable rates of major bleeding (n=11 studies, RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82-1.07; I²=0%) and mortality (n=12 studies, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.78-1.20; I²=11%), and an improved time in therapeutic range (n=16 studies, mean difference 3.38, 95% CI 1.12-5.65; I²=90%). In the subgroup of the multitasking intervention, telemedicine resulted in an important reduction of thromboembolic events (RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.08-0.48). Conclusions: Telemedicine-based oral anticoagulation management resulted in similar rates of major bleeding and mortality, a trend for fewer thromboembolic events, and better anticoagulation quality compared to standard care. Given the potential benefits of telemedicine-based care, such as greater access to remote populations or people with ambulatory restrictions, these findings may encourage further implementation of eHealth strategies for anticoagulation management, particularly as part of multifaceted interventions for integrated care of chronic diseases. Meanwhile, researchers should develop higher-quality evidence focusing on hard clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and quality of life. Trial Registration: PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42020159208; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=159208