To provide a contemporary global prevalence of mental health issues among the general population amid the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We searched electronic databases, preprint databases, grey literature, and unpublished studies from January 1, 2020, to June 16, 2020 (updated on July 11, 2020), with no language restrictions. Observational studies using validated measurement tools and reporting data on mental health issues among the general population were screened to identify all relevant studies. We have included information from 32 different countries and 398,771 participants. The pooled prevalence of mental health issues amid the COVID-19 pandemic varied widely across countries and regions and was higher than previous reports before the COVID-19 outbreak began. The global prevalence estimate was 28.0% for depression; 26.9% for anxiety; 24.1% for post-traumatic stress symptoms; 36.5% for stress; 50.0% for psychological distress; and 27.6% for sleep problems. Data are limited for other aspects of mental health issues. Our findings highlight the disparities between countries in terms of the poverty impacts of COVID-19, preparedness of countries to respond, and economic vulnerabilities that impact the prevalence of mental health problems. Research on the social and economic burden is needed to better manage mental health problems during and after epidemics or pandemics. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD 42020177120.

PPI usage was associated with adverse kidney outcomes; however, these findings were based on observational studies and low-quality evidence. Additional rigorous studies are needed for further clarification.

Background: After the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) globally, upgraded quarantine and physical distancing strategy, strict infection measures, and government's strict lockdown have been abided to confront the spread of the COVID-19 in Thailand. During the COVID-19 pandemic, concerns about the mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population are now arising. Yet, information on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population have not been comprehensively reported in Thailand. As such, we conduct a cross-sectional study, a national online survey to describe the short- and long-term consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand. Methods: This study is a repeated cross-sectional study, an open online voluntary national-based survey during the wave I (April 21–May 4, 2020) follow-up in the wave II (August 3–16, 2020), wave III (November 15–28, 2020), and a 1-year follow-up survey (wave IV: April 21–May 4, 2021) in Thailand. Health care workers at the hospitals and the adult general population will be invited to participate in the online survey via the SurveyMonkey that limits one-time participation per unique internet protocol address. The target sample size of at least 1182 health care workers and 1310 general populations will be required to complete the online survey for each wave of the survey. Sociodemographic characteristics and a set of measurement tools for mental and psychosocial problems for each subcohort including depression, anxiety, stress, resilient copings, neuroticism, perceived social support, wellbeing, somatic symptoms, insomnia, burnout (for healthcare workers), and public stigma toward COVID-19 infection (for the general population) will be collected. For all estimates of prevalence, we will weigh data for all wave analyses under the complex design of the survey. Subgroup analyses stratified by key characteristics will also be done to analyze the proportion differences. For the repeated cross-sectional survey, we will combine the data from the wave I to wave IV survey to analyze changes in the mental health status. We will perform multilevel logistic regression models with random intercepts to explore associations with individual-level and region-level/hospital-level predictors. We also plan to perform an ancillary systematic review and meta-analysis by incorporating data from our findings to all available evidence. Results: Our findings will provide information on the short- and long-term mental health status as well as the psychosocial responses to the COVID-19 outbreak in a national sample of health care workers and the general population in Thailand. Conclusion: This prospective, nationally based, a repeated cross-sectional study will describe the mental health status and psychosocial problems among health care workers and the general population in Thailand during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Faculty of Public Health and Faculty of Pharmacy, Chiang Mai University. The findings will be disseminated through public, scientific, and professional meetings, and publications in peer-reviewed journals. Thai Clinical Trials Registry (TCTR) registration number: TCTR20200425001.

This cross-sectional study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors of chronic kidney disease (CKD) among 1,096 primary care type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients in northern Thailand between October 2016 and September 2017. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular rate filtration values of <60 mL/ min/1.73 m 2 . Prevalence with confidence intervals across CKD advanced stages 3-5 were estimated. Factors associated with CKD were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression. The overall prevalence of CKD was 24.4% (21.9-27.0), with severities of 11.4% (9.7-13.4), 6.8% (5.5-8.5), 4.6% (3.5-6.0), and 1.6% (1.0-2.5) for stages 3 A, 3B, 4, and 5, respectively. Regarding age and glycaemic control, individuals older than 75 years and those with a haemoglobin A1c ≥ 8% had the highest prevalence of 61.3% (51.7-70.1) and 38.6% (34.3-43.2), respectively. The multivariable logistic regression model explained 87.3% of the probability of CKD. The six independent significant risk factors of CKD were older age, retinopathy, albuminuria, haemoglobin A1c ≥ 7%, anaemia, and uric acid>7.5 mg/dL. A relatively high prevalence of CKD, especially in older patients and those with diabetic complications-related to poor glycaemic control, was encountered in this primary care practice. Early identification may help to target optimise care and prevention programs for CKD among T2DM patients.Globally, the total number of people with diabetes is estimated to increase from 415 million (8.8%) in 2015 to 642 million (10.4%) in 2040, with the largest alterations expected to occur in the urban population of low-to middle-income countries (LMICs) 1 . Of them, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) accounts for more than 90% of people with diabetes 2,3 . By 2040, the difference worldwide is projected to broaden, with 477.9 million affected people living in urban areas and 163.9 million in rural areas 1 . It has been postulated that the burden of diabetes and its complications in the LMICs may be contributed by the economic development and rapid urbanisation via increased caloric intake and the adoption of a sedentary lifestyle 2,4,5 . More importantly, the most striking demographic change to diabetes prevalence in global terms also seems to be related to the growth of the proportion of the elderly population 6 .Despite rates of diabetes-related complications such as cardiovascular disease decreasing significantly in the past two decades, it has not translated nearly as well as kidney complications 7 . Approximately 10% of deaths in people with T2DM are attributable to kidney failure 8 . It is well-established that diabetes-related chronic kidney disease (CKD) is the leading cause of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) in T2DM patients worldwide 9,10 . In the United States, 2013-2016, approximately 36% of patients with diabetes develop diabetic kidney disease resulting in persistent albuminuria, a reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), or both 11 . Interestingly, the risk of diabetes-related CKD is observed much higher in Asian countries than ...

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on both the physical and mental health of individuals worldwide. Evidence regarding the association between mental health problems and information exposure among Thai citizens during the COVID-19 outbreak is limited. Objective This study aimed to explore the relationship between information exposure and mental health problems during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand. Methods Between April 21 and May 4, 2020, we conducted a cross-sectional, nationwide online survey of the general population in Thailand. We categorized the duration of exposure to COVID-19-related information as follows: <1 h/day (reference group), 1-2 h/day, and ≥3 h/day. Mental health outcomes were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 scale, the Perceived Stress Scale-10, and the Insomnia Severity Index for symptoms of depression, anxiety, perceived stress, and insomnia, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the relationship between information exposure and the risk of developing the aforementioned symptoms. An ancillary analysis using multivariable multinomial logistic regression models was also conducted to assess the possible dose-response relationship across the severity strata of mental health problems. Results Of the 4322 eligible participants, 4004 (92.6%) completed the online survey. Of them, 1481 (37.0%), 1644 (41.1%), and 879 (22.0%) participants were exposed to COVID-19-related information for less than 1 hour per day, 1 to 2 hours per day, or 3 or more hours per day, respectively. The major source of information related to the COVID-19 pandemic was social media (95.3%), followed by traditional media (68.7%) and family members (34.9%). Those exposed to information for 3 or more hours per day had a higher risk of developing symptoms of depression (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.35, 95% CI 1.03-1.76; P=.03), anxiety (adjusted OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.43-2.46; P<.001), and insomnia (adjusted OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.17-1.97; P=.001) than people exposed to information for less than 1 hour per day. Meanwhile, people exposed to information for 1 to 2 hours per day were only at risk of developing symptoms of anxiety (adjusted OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.08-1.69; P=.008). However, no association was found between information exposure and the risk of perceived stress. In the ancillary analysis, a dose-response relationship was observed between information exposure of 3 or more hours per day and the severity of mental health problems. Conclusions These findings suggest that social media is the main source of COVID-19-related information. Moreover, people who are exposed to information for 3 or more hours per day are more likely to develop psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and insomnia. Longitudinal studies investigating the long-term effects of COVID-19-related information exposure on mental health are warranted.