RESUMO
Objective: WhatsApp is the most frequently used social media platform in Saudi Arabia. Inaccurate information could negatively impact public health. The number of studies worldwide investigating health-related misinformation in social media increased steadily, with limited data from Arabic-speaking communities. This study aimed to estimate the validity and safety of Arabic-language health information messages circulated on WhatsApp and identify the different categories of these messages based on their credibility. Participants and Methods: A descriptive, analytical cross-sectional study was conducted from February to April 2021. A total of 374 students were randomly selected from the common first preparatory year college at King Saud University in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, and participated by sharing up to three health-related WhatsApp messages per student that they or their relatives had recently read. Four board-certified physicians reviewed and classified the messages based on their credibility and sources. Results: 282 students provided 326 messages (1.2 messages per student). Most messages (86%) had either invalid or inaccurate content, and 83.7% came from unknown sources. Only 26 messages (8%) of the total were written by trusted scientific sources. Most of the messages from unknown sources or unqualified persons were either invalid or invalid, with potential health risks for the public, and the difference from trusted sources was statistically significant. Conclusion: This study showed a high percentage of inaccurate and invalid health-related messages on WhatsApp. Invalid messages with potential health risks were authored mostly by unknown sources or unqualified persons. Most health messages written by trusted authorities and qualified persons were valid. Trusted scientific authorities should thus be more active in public education on social media platforms. They should advise their communities on how to discern the validity of such messages. More efforts are needed to guide patients from where to obtain accurate and valid health information.
RESUMO
Systemic sclerosis is a chronic multisystem, autoimmune disease with high mortality, and to date, has no effective approved therapy. For patients with the most severe forms of systemic sclerosis, autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy has been proven to be effective, as demonstrated by three randomized controlled clinical trials and at least two registry studies. In the controlled studies, autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy was shown to improve mortality, skin involvement, quality-of-life, and function compared with patients treated with intravenous cyclophosphamide. There is significant transplant-related mortality associated with autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy, as well as infectious and noninfectious serious adverse events, including cardiac and renal compromise. Although the results of autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy clinical trials to date are highly encouraging, a number of important unanswered questions remain. These include the following: What is the optimal transplant regimen; can the spectrum of systemic sclerosis patients who respond to autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy be expanded; how can disease relapse following autologous hematopoietic stem cell therapy be predicted and managed; can treatment-related toxicity and mortality be mitigated; can response or toxicity be predicted; and finally, is there a place for allogeneic stem cell transplants in systemic sclerosis? Systemic sclerosis is an autoimmune disease with multiple immunological, vascular, and fibrotic abnormalities. Immunosuppressive therapy is frequently used, but to date its efficacy has been generally modest. Stem cell transplantation is the most potent immunosuppressive therapy currently available, and as discussed below, may have an important role in the management of systemic sclerosis.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Through a systematic literature search (SLR) and metaanalysis, to determine maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancies involving systemic sclerosis (SSc), to analyze the effect of pregnancy on disease activity, and to examine predictors of fetal and maternal outcomes. METHODS: An SLR was performed for articles on SSc and pregnancy published between 1950 and February 1, 2018. Reviewers double-extracted articles to obtain agreement on > 95% of predefined critical outcomes. RESULTS: Out of 461 publications identified, 16 were included in the metaanalysis. The metaanalysis showed that pregnancies involving SSc were at higher risk of miscarriage (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.22-2.22), fetuses with intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR; OR 3.2, 95% CI 2.21-4.53), preterm births (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.14-4.86), and newborns with low birth weight (OR 3.8, 95% CI 2.16-6.56). Patients with SSc had a 2.8 times higher chance of developing gestational hypertension (HTN; OR 2.8, 95% CI 2.28-3.39) and a 2.3 times higher chance of cesarean delivery compared to controls (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.37-3.8). The definitions of disease worsening/new visceral organ involvement were too inexact to have any confidence in the results, although worsening or new disease manifestations during pregnancy in 44/307 cases (14.3%) and 6 months postpartum in 32/306 cases (10.5%) were reported. The data did not permit definition of predictors of disease progression and of maternal and fetal outcomes. CONCLUSION: Pregnancies involving SSc have increased frequency of miscarriages, IUGR, preterm deliveries, and newborns with low birth weight compared to healthy controls. Women with SSc were more prone to develop gestational HTN and to undergo cesarean delivery. Disease manifestations seem to remain stable or improve in most patients.
