The Effect of the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Factors Influencing Iranian Medical Residents' Specialty Selection: A Qualitative Study.

Background: Medical students' specialty selection influences the composition of the physician workforce and the effectiveness of health systems. Therefore, the identification of factors that influence the choice of specialty is critical for an evidence-based health policy. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on the determinants of specialty choice among Iranian medical residents. Methods: In early 2022, this qualitative study was conducted among Iranian medical residents in seven provinces, including Tehran, Isfahan, Fars, Khorasan Razavi, Kerman, Kermanshah, and Khuzestan. The participants were selected using a purposeful sampling method. Data were collected using 74 semi-structured in-depth face-to-face interviews. Finally, a thematic content analysis (conventional content analysis) method was applied for data synthesis. Results: The participant's mean age was 28.7±2.5 years, and more than 52% (N=39) were men. Following data synthesis, 10 sub-themes and four main themes were identified, including educational aspects affected by the pandemic, career-related hazards, personal and professional lifestyles affected by the disease, and experiences and beliefs regarding the pandemic. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on medical students' educational, professional, and personal aspects of specialty choices. This study demonstrated how the disease affected the choice of specialty. Therefore, the findings could be used for developing national health policy and planning.

Laboratory-based versus non-laboratory-based World Health Organization risk equations for assessment of cardiovascular disease risk.

BACKGROUND: The WHO model has laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based versions for 10-year risk prediction of cardiovascular diseases. Due to the fact that in some settings, there may not be the necessary facilities for risk assessment with a laboratory-based model, the present study aimed to determine the agreement between laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based WHO cardiovascular risk equations. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we used the baseline data of 6796 individuals without a history of cardiovascular disease and stroke who participated in the Fasa cohort study. The risk factors of the laboratory-based model included age, sex, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diabetes, smoking and total cholesterol, while the non-laboratory-based model included age, sex, SBP, smoking and BMI. Kappa coefficients was used to determine the agreement between the grouped risk and Bland-Altman plots were used to determine the agreement between the scores of the two models. Sensitivity and specificity of non-laboratory-based model were measured at the high-risk threshold. RESULTS: In the whole population, the agreement between the grouped risk of the two models was substantial (percent agreement = 79.0%, kappa = 0.68). The agreement was better in males than in females. A substantial agreement was observed in all males (percent agreement = 79.8%, kappa = 0.70) and males < 60 years old (percent agreement = 79.9%, kappa = 0.67). The agreement in males ≥ 60 years old was moderate (percent agreement = 79.7%, kappa = 0.59). The agreement among females was also substantial (percent agreement = 78.3%, kappa = 0.66). The agreement for females < 60 years old, (percent agreement = 78.8%, kappa = 0.61) was substantial and for females ≥ 60 years old, (percent agreement = 75.8%, kappa = 0.46) was moderate. According to Bland-Altman plots, the limit of agreement was (95%CI: -4.2% to 4.3%) for males and (95%CI: -4.1% to 4.6%) for females. The range of agreement was suitable for both males < 60 years (95%CI: -3.8% to 4.0%) and females < 60 years (95%CI: -3.6% to 3.9%). However, it was not suitable for males ≥ 60 years (95% CI: -5.8% to 5.5%) and females ≥ 60 years (95%CI: -5.7% to 7.4%). At the high-risk threshold of 20% in non-laboratory and laboratory-based models, the sensitivity of the non-laboratory-based model was 25.7%, 70.7%, 35.7%, and 35.4% for males < 60 years, males ≥ 60 years, females < 60 years, and females ≥ 60 years, respectively. At the high-risk threshold of 10% in non-laboratory-based and 20% in laboratory-based models, the non-laboratory model has high sensitivity of 100% for males ≥ 60 years, females < 60 years, females ≥ 60 years, and 91.4% for males < 60 years. CONCLUSION: A good agreement was observed between laboratory-based and non-laboratory-based versions of the WHO risk model. Also, at the risk threshold of 10% to detect high-risk individuals, the non-laboratory-based model has acceptable sensitivity for practical risk assessment and the screening programs in settings where resources are limited and people do not have access to laboratory tests.

Temporal trends of tracheal, bronchus, and lung cancer between 2010 and 2019, in Asian countries by geographical region and sociodemographic index, comparison with global data.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to describe the trends in incidence, mortality, and burden of tracheal, bronchial and lung (TBL) cancer in Asia from 2010 through 2019 and compare with global and other continental data. METHODS: We collected TBL cancer data from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease (GBD) study from 2010 to 2019 in 49 countries and territories in Asia. For all locations, annual case data and age-standardized rates (ASRs) were used to investigate the incidence, prevalence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) of TBL from 2010 to 2019. The relative difference (%) between years was used to show comparative variations of ASRs for the indicators studied. RESULTS: In 2019, more than 55% of TBL cancer cases and deaths occurred in Asian countries. A total of 57% of lung cancer patients lived in Asia and almost 60% of the global burden of lung cancer was imposed on Asian countries. From 2010 to 2019, incidences, deaths, prevalence cases, and DALYs number of TBL cancer increased over 1.34-, 1.31-, 1.31-, and 1.26-fold, in Asia. During this period, the age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR), the age-standardized death rate (ASDR), the age-standardized prevalence rate (ASPR), and the age-standardized DALYs rate (DALYs ASR) of TBL cancer decreased by 1, 3, 4, and 4%, respectively. While at the same time, the decreasing trend of these rates globally and in America and in Europe happened faster. In 2019, age-specific incidence, death, prevalence, and DALY cases of TBL cancer were peaking at 65-74, 70-74, 65-69, and 65-69 years, respectively. In 2019, the highest ASIR, ASDR, and DALYs ASR of TBL cancer was observed in East Asia countries and the highest ASPR in high-income Asia Pacific countries. Central Asia and high-income Asia Pacific countries experienced a decreasing trend in ASIR and ASDR, and the South Asia countries experienced the highest increasing trend from 2010 to 2019. ASPR only decreased in Central Asia, and DALYs ASR only increased in South Asia. In 2019, among high sociodemographic index (SDI) Asian countries, Brunei Darussalam had the highest ASIR, ASDR, and DALYs ASR and the Republic of Korea had the highest ASPR. Among high-middle SDIs, Turkey and Georgia; among middle SDIs, China and Armenia; among low-middle SDIs, Mongolia and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea had the highest ASIR, ASDR, ASPR, and DALY ASR of TBL cancer. Among low SDI Asian countries, Pakistan had the highest ASIR, ASDR, ASPR, and DALY ASR of TBL cancer. CONCLUSION: Most of the global burden of lung cancer occurs in Asian countries, and the decreasing trend of incidence, death, prevalence, and burden of this cancer in these countries is slower than in other regions. Therefore, the implementation of necessary measures in order to reduce the process of this cancer is considered urgent.