Category: Statistics

Arch Dermatol Res. 2024 May 25;316(6):260. doi: 10.1007/s00403-024-03031-y.

ABSTRACT

Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune disease that develops due to inflammation and causes sudden hair loss. Ithas been observed that family circumstances may contribute to the development of AA. This study aims to assessthe relationship between the development of alopecia areata in children, family functions, and depression andanxiety levels in their parents.Thirty-nine participants diagnosed with AA and 41 healthy controls (HC), agedbetween 8 and 18 years, and their parents participated in the study. The assessment of the children included thecompletion of a socio-demographic data form, the Parenting Style Scale (PSS), and the Revised Children’s Anxietyand Depression Scale (RCADS). The parents provided information on a sociodemographic form, the BeckDepression Inventory (BDI), and the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI). The children in the control group scoredsignificantly higher on the PSS acceptance/ involvement subscale than those with AA. In the AA group, the numberof authoritative and indulgent (PSS) families was statistically significantly lower than that of the families in the HC,and the number of neglectful families was statistically significantly higher than those of the control group. Totalanxiety and depression t scores (RCADS) were statistically significantly higher in the AA children than in theHC. Our study demonstrates the importance of considering familial factors and parental mental health tounderstand and address alopecia areata in children. Our findings support the psychosomatic component of AA.Implementing comprehensive treatment strategies that target psychological well-being and family dynamics couldprove crucial.

PMID:38795219 | DOI:10.1007/s00403-024-03031-y

Arch Dermatol Res. 2024 May 25;316(6):245. doi: 10.1007/s00403-024-02998-y.

NO ABSTRACT

PMID:38795211 | DOI:10.1007/s00403-024-02998-y

Arch Dermatol Res. 2024 May 25;316(6):266. doi: 10.1007/s00403-024-02997-z.

ABSTRACT

IMPORTANCE: One in five Americans will develop skin cancer during their lifetime. While use of sunscreen can help prevent the development cutaneous cancer, regular use remains low nationwide.

OBJECTIVE: To assess and better understand health care consumer preferences for sun protection products and perceived product accessibility and availability based on socioeconomic factors, race, and ethnicity.

DESIGN: This quantitative survey study was conducted March through June of 2023.

SETTING: Participants were recruited from two university family medicine clinical sites in the Buffalo, New York area, one located in a low and one located in a middle-to-upper socioeconomic neighborhood.

PARTICIPANTS: Eligible participants were 18 years or older, fluent in English, and residents of the Buffalo, New York area. Surveys and consent forms were distributed by scripted verbal invitation, inviting all clinic patients who met eligibility criteria to participate. Participants were asked to self-report their racial/ethnic group as well as other demographic information including age, gender identification, household income, and household size. Information regarding sun exposure behaviors, and affordability/access was obtained using a combination of multiple choice and yes/no questions. A total of 405 participants were recruited. After excluding 235 incomplete responses, 170 surveys were available for analysis.

INTERVENTIONS: None.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Our study aim was to expose health care consumer preferences as well as barriers to access based on socioeconomic factors, race, and ethnicity.

RESULTS: Using a 25-question anonymous survey, 405 participants from two university family medicine clinical sites representing low- and middle-to-high-income neighborhoods, participated in the survey. 170 participants completed the survey questions and were included for analysis. Of those, 61.8% identified as female, 37.6% as male, and 0.6% as other. 51.2% of participants identified as lower income, 38.2% as middle-income, and 10.6% as upper income. The results of the survey revealed disparities in sunscreen use and affordability perceptions across demographic groups. Compared with Hispanics, Caucasians exhibited higher rates of sunscreen use (85 Caucasians, 7 Hispanics; p = 0.0073), prioritized SPF (95 Caucasians, 10 Hispanics; p = 0.0178), and were more likely to perceive sunscreen as unaffordable (6 Caucasians, 4 Hispanics; p = 0.0269). Analysis by Fitzpatrick Skin Type demonstrated differences in sunscreen utilization, with Types I-III using more compared to Types IV-VI (70 Types I-III, 51 Types IV-VI; p = 0.0173); additionally, Type I-III individuals were significantly more likely to cite cost as barrier to sunscreen purchase (40 Type I-III, 65 Types IV-VI; p < 0.0001). Moreover, lower-income individuals were significantly more likely to perceive sunscreen as unaffordable (12 lower-income, 1 middle & upper income; p = 0.0025) and cited cost as a barrier to purchase (46 lower-income, 59 middle & upper income; p = 0.0146) compared to middle-to-upper income counterparts. Though statistical significance was not established, respondents from middle & upper income groups reported higher sunscreen usage rates compared with their lower-income peers.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: These findings highlight the importance of socioeconomic factors and ethnicity on accessibility to sunscreen and the impact of disparities in utilization among different ethnic and socioeconomic groups.

PMID:38795207 | DOI:10.1007/s00403-024-02997-z

Arch Dermatol Res. 2024 May 25;316(6):256. doi: 10.1007/s00403-024-02989-z.

NO ABSTRACT

PMID:38795201 | DOI:10.1007/s00403-024-02989-z

Jpn J Ophthalmol. 2024 May 25. doi: 10.1007/s10384-024-01068-0. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To investigate the efficacy of our wearable night-vision aid in patients with concentric peripheral visual field loss.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, single blind, three-group, and three-period crossover clinical study.

METHODS: The study included patients with concentric peripheral visual field loss, a best-corrected visual acuity (decimal visual acuity) of 0.1 or higher in the better eye, and the presence of a central visual field. HOYA MW10 HiKARI® (HOYA Corporation), our original wearable night-vision aid, was used as the test device with three types of camera lenses (standard-, middle-, and wide-angle lenses). Under both bright and dark conditions, the angle of the horizontal visual field was measured using each of the three lens types for each group. The baseline angle was measured when each participant wore the night-vision aid (powered off).

RESULTS: The study included 21 participants. Under bright condition, the perceived horizontal visual field was significantly wider than the baseline setup when using the standard-angle lens (“the standard lens”); the middle-angle lens (“the middle lens”) was significantly wider than both the baseline setup and the standard lens; and the wide-angle lens (“the wide lens”) was significantly wider than the other lenses. Under dark condition, the perceived horizontal visual field was again significantly wider when using the middle lens than the baseline setup and the standard lens, and when using the wide lens, the perceived horizontal visual field was again wider than when using the other lenses. The control in the bright condition was significantly wider (p < 0.001) than when used in the dark condition, while the standard-angle lens in the dark condition was significantly wider (p = 0.05) than when used in the bright condition. In regards to the middle and wide lenses, there was no statistically significant result emerging from either of the illumination conditions.

CONCLUSION: Our wearable night-vision aid with a middle-angle or wide-angle lens appears to provide wider visual field images in patients with concentric peripheral visual field loss, regardless of whether the illumination conditions are bright or dark.

PMID:38795195 | DOI:10.1007/s10384-024-01068-0

Arch Dermatol Res. 2024 May 25;316(6):252. doi: 10.1007/s00403-024-02993-3.

NO ABSTRACT

PMID:38795192 | DOI:10.1007/s00403-024-02993-3

Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 May;12(14):1-182. doi: 10.3310/UDBQ8402.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Acute inpatient mental health services report high levels of safety incidents. The application of patient safety theory has been sparse, particularly concerning interventions that proactively seek patient perspectives.

OBJECTIVE(S): Develop and evaluate a theoretically based, digital monitoring tool to collect real-time information from patients on acute adult mental health wards about their perceptions of ward safety.

DESIGN: Theory-informed mixed-methods study. A prototype digital monitoring tool was developed from a co-design approach, implemented in hospital settings, and subjected to qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

SETTING AND METHODS: Phase 1: scoping review of the literature on patient involvement in safety interventions in acute mental health care; evidence scan of digital technology in mental health contexts; qualitative interviews with mental health patients and staff about perspectives on ward safety. This, alongside stakeholder engagement with advisory groups, service users and health professionals, informed the development processes. Most data collection was virtual. Phase 1 resulted in the technical development of a theoretically based digital monitoring tool that collected patient feedback for proactive safety monitoring. Phase 2: implementation of the tool in six adult acute mental health wards across two UK NHS trusts; evaluation via focused ethnography and qualitative interviews. Statistical analysis of WardSonar data and routine ward data involving construction of an hour-by-hour data set per ward, permitting detailed analysis of the use of the WardSonar tool.

PARTICIPANTS: A total of 8 patients and 13 mental health professionals participated in Phase 1 interviews; 33 staff and 34 patients participated in Phase 2 interviews.

INTERVENTIONS: Patients could use a web application (the WardSonar tool) to record real-time perceptions of ward safety. Staff could access aggregated, anonymous data to inform timely interventions.

RESULTS: Coronavirus disease 2019 restrictions greatly impacted the study. Stakeholder engagement permeated the project. Phase 1 delivered a theory-based, collaboratively designed digital tool for proactive patient safety monitoring. Phase 2 showed that the tool was user friendly and broadly acceptable to patients and staff. The aggregated safety data were infrequently used by staff. Feasibility depended on engaged staff and embedding use of the tool in ward routines. There is strong evidence that an incident leads to increased probability of further incidents within the next 4 hours. This puts a measure on the extent to which social/behavioural contagion persists. There is weak evidence to suggest that an incident leads to a greater use of the WardSonar tool in the following hour, but none to suggest that ward atmosphere predicts future incidents. Therefore, how often patients use the tool seems to send a stronger signal about potential incidents than patients’ real-time reports about ward atmosphere.

LIMITATIONS: Implementation was limited to two NHS trusts. Coronavirus disease 2019 impacted design processes including stakeholder engagement; implementation; and evaluation of the monitoring tool in routine clinical practice. Higher uptake could enhance validity of the results.

CONCLUSIONS: WardSonar has the potential to provide a valuable route for patients to communicate safety concerns. The WardSonar monitoring tool has a strong patient perspective and uses proactive real-time safety monitoring rather than traditional retrospective data review.

FUTURE WORK: The WardSonar tool can be refined and tested further in a post Coronavirus disease 2019 context.

STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as ISRCTN14470430.

FUNDING: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR128070) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 12, No. 14. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

PMID:38794956 | DOI:10.3310/UDBQ8402

Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2024 May 25:26520. doi: 10.4317/medoral.26520. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: A quantification of the residual bone mass of the mandible (B/A) was utilized in this study to examine the correlation between mandibular fracture and residual bone mass. To improve the clinical utilization rate and reduce the incidence of iatrogenic mandibular fractures, the B/A ratio calculation should be simplified.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data were collected from the Yanbian University Hospital on 175 cases of mandibular fracture with third molar (M3), 67 normal cases without fractures and 20 cases of impacted teeth extraction. Twenty cases of iatrogenic mandibular fracture were collected, and the case records and panoramic radiographs of the patients were recorded.

RESULTS: The average B/A ratio of mandibular angle fracture group was 0.61±0.10.The value of B/A was found to be statistically significant in terms of whether M3 emerged from alveolar bone (P = 0.001), location (horizontal P < 0.001, vertical P < 0.001), the degree of impaction (P < 0.001), the number of roots (P < 0.001), the difference in impaction (P < 0.001), and the fracture type (P = 0.002). The average B/A ratio of normal group was 0.62±0.10. In the statistical results of the B/A value of normal patients, M3 involving alveolar bone (P < 0.001), position classification (P < 0.05), degree of impaction (P < 0.001) and presence or absence of a root (P < 0.05) were statistically significant. The average B/A ratio of iatrogenic mandibular angle fracture group was 0.28±0.08. The average B/A ratio of the extraction group for impacted teeth was 0.62 ± 0.09.

CONCLUSIONS: There is a high risk of mandibular angle fracture when the (B/A) value of the residual bone height (B) in the mandibular M3 area compared to the mandibular bone height (A) in the M3 area is less than 0.4.

PMID:38794938 | DOI:10.4317/medoral.26520

Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2024 May 25:26604. doi: 10.4317/medoral.26604. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Assess the correlation between the position of the third molar (M3) and fractures of the mandibular angle and condyle using panoramic radiographs to offer valuable data references for oral clinical research.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective cross-sectional study was undertaken, involving the collection of 409 cases of mandibular fracture in the Yanbian University Hospital. The case records and panoramic radiographs of mandibular angle fracture (78 cases) and condylar fracture (106 cases) were evaluated.

RESULTS: In the comparative analysis between the mandibular angle fracture group and the condylar fracture group, statistical significance was observed in the variables of M3 existence (P = 0.002), eruption of M3 from the alveolar cavity (P = 0.003), P&G position classification (P = 0.001), deep impactions (Classes IC, IIC, IIIB, and IIIC) (P < 0.001), and the presence of impacted M3 in both groups (P < 0.001).Regarding M3 roots, the mandibular angle fracture group exhibited the highest prevalence of multiple roots at 75.4%, surpassing the 64.6% observed in the condylar fracture group. The prevalence of proximal angles in the mandibular angle group and the condyle group was the highest, accounting for 64.6% and 61.5%, respectively. The percentage of M3 in the two groups was 80% and 43.1%, respectively, with a significant difference (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: Impacted mandibular third molars (M3) elevate the risk of mandibular angle fractures, while their absence or normal eruption reduces this risk and protects against condylar process fractures. The fracture risk is influenced by the M3’s position: P&G Class II and Class B impactions, where M3s emerge partially from the alveolar bone, are significantly associated with mandibular angle fractures. In contrast, the absence of M3 or its placement in P&G Class I and Class A positions tends to correlate with a higher incidence of condylar process fractures.

PMID:38794934 | DOI:10.4317/medoral.26604

Br J Soc Psychol. 2024 May 25. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12762. Online ahead of print.

ABSTRACT

This article seeks to enhance the theoretical understanding of discrimination perception, especially in contexts with relevant statistical information. Previous research has provided important insights into the perception of single, ambiguous instances of discrimination. However, the generalizability of these insights to scenarios involving multiple, repeated instances of discrimination remains unclear. The current research aims to reduce this uncertainty by investigating whether three key determinants of discrimination perception in single instances – perpetrators’ prototypicality, victims’ control, and system-justifying beliefs (SJB) – also influence observers’ perceptions of repeated discrimination. In Experiments 1 and 2, participants perceived stronger discrimination when perpetrators were prejudiced members of the advantaged group. In Experiments 3 and 4, perceived discrimination intensified when victims had low control, a trend significantly noted in tabular presentations but not in sequential ones. In Experiments 5 and 6, a negative correlation between SJB and discrimination perception was observed. The theoretical and practical implications of these results, as well as open questions, are discussed. Overall, these studies advance our knowledge of discrimination perception in multiple instances. They highlight the intricate interplay between statistical data, moral judgements, and individual belief systems, paving the way for a more nuanced exploration of the underlying psychological processes of discrimination perception.

PMID:38794922 | DOI:10.1111/bjso.12762