Summary The linkage of individuals with obesity and COVID‐19 is controversial and lacks systematic reviews. After a systematic search of the Chinese and English language literature on COVID‐19, 75 studies were used to conduct a series of meta‐analyses on the relationship of individuals with obesity–COVID‐19 over the full spectrum from risk to mortality. A systematic review of the mechanistic pathways for COVID‐19 and individuals with obesity is presented. Pooled analysis show individuals with obesity were more at risk for COVID‐19 positive, >46.0% higher (OR = 1.46; 95% CI, 1.30–1.65; p < 0.0001); for hospitalization, 113% higher (OR = 2.13; 95% CI, 1.74–2.60; p < 0.0001); for ICU admission, 74% higher (OR = 1.74; 95% CI, 1.46–2.08); and for mortality, 48% increase in deaths (OR = 1.48; 95% CI, 1.22–1.80; p < 0.001). Mechanistic pathways for individuals with obesity are presented in depth for factors linked with COVID‐19 risk, severity and their potential for diminished therapeutic and prophylactic treatments among these individuals. Individuals with obesity are linked with large significant increases in morbidity and mortality from COVID‐19. There are many mechanisms that jointly explain this impact. A major concern is that vaccines will be less effective for the individuals with obesity.

The study confirmed the positive contribution of SMS based mobile phone intervention in most of the selected MCH service indicators, like improvement in the percent of recommended number of ANC visit, percentage of delivery attended by health workers and facilitating the work processes of the health workers in rural Ethiopia.

Background Since early 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic has engulfed the world. Amidst the growing number of infections and deaths, there has been an emphasis of patients with non-communicable diseases as they are particularly susceptible to the virus. The objective of this literature review is to systematize the available evidence on the link between non-communicable diseases and Covid-19. Methods We have conducted a systematic review of the literature on Covid-19 and non-communicable diseases from December, 2019 until 15th of November, 2020. The search was done in PubMed and in doing so we used a variety of searching terms in order to isolate the final set of papers. At the end of the selection process, 45 papers were selected for inclusion in the literature review. Results The results from the review indicate that patients with certain chronic illnesses such as diabetes, hypertension (and other cardiovascular diseases), chronic respiratory illnesses, chronic kidney and liver conditions are more likely to be affected by Covid-19. More importantly, once they do get infected by the virus, patients with chronic illnesses have a much higher likelihood of having worse clinical outcomes (developing a more severe form of the disease or dying) than an average patient. There are two hypothesized channels that explain this strong link between the chronic illnesses enumerated above and Covid 19: (i) increased ACE2 (angiotensin-converting enzyme 2) receptor expressions, which facilitates the entry of the virus into the host body; and (ii) hyperinflammatory response, referred to as “cytokine storm”. Finally, the literature review does not find any evidence that diabetes or hypertension related medications exacerbate the overall Covid-19 condition in chronic illness patients. Conclusions Thus, the evidence points out to ‘business as usual’ disease management model, although with greater supervision. However, given the ongoing Covid-19 vulnerabilities among people with NCDs, prioritizing them for the vaccination process should also figure high on the agenda on health authorities.

Background The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’s (KSA) health sector is undergoing rapid reform in line with the National Transformation Program, as part of Saudi’s vision for the future, Vision 2030. From a nursing human resources for health (HRH) perspective, there are challenges of low nursing school capacity, high employment of expatriates, labor market fragmentation, shortage of nurses in rural areas, uneven quality, and gender challenges. Case presentation This case study summarizes Saudi Ministry of Health (MOH) and Saudi Health Council’s (SHCs) evaluation of the current challenges facing the nursing profession in the KSA. We propose policy interventions to support the transformation of nursing into a profession that contributes to efficient, high-quality healthcare for every Saudi citizen. Key to the success of modernizing the Saudi workforce will be an improved pipeline of nurses that leads from middle and high school to nursing school; followed by a diverse career path that includes postgraduate education. To retain nurses in the profession, there are opportunities to make nursing practice more attractive and family friendly. Interventions include reducing shift length, redesigning the nursing team to add more allied health workers, and introducing locum tenens staffing to balance work-load. There are opportunities to modernize existing nurse postgraduate education, open new postgraduate programs in nursing, and create new positions and career paths for nurses such as telenursing, informatics, and quality. Rural pipelines should be created, with incentives and increased compensation packages for underserved areas. Conclusions Critical to these proposed reforms is the collaboration of the MOH with partners across the healthcare system, particularly the private sector. Human resources planning should be sector-wide and nursing leadership should be strengthened at all levels.

Background: Environmental health is a growing area of knowledge, continually increasing and updating the body of evidence linking the environment to human health. Aim: This study summarizes the epidemiological evidence on environmental risk factors from meta-analyses through an umbrella review. Methods: An umbrella review was conducted on meta-analyses of cohort, case-control, case-crossover, and time-series studies that evaluated the associations between environmental risk factors and health outcomes defined as incidence, prevalence, and mortality. The specific search strategy was designed in PubMed using free text and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms related to risk factors, environment, health outcomes, observational studies, and meta-analysis. The search was limited to English, Spanish, and French published articles and studies on humans. The search was conducted on September 20, 2020. Risk factors were defined as any attribute, characteristic, or exposure of an individual that increases the likelihood of developing a disease or death. The environment was defined as the external elements and conditions that surround, influence, and affect a human organism or population’s life and development. The environment definition included the physical environment such as nature, built environment, or pollution, but not the social environment. We excluded occupational exposures, microorganisms, water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH), behavioral risk factors, and no-natural disasters. Results: This umbrella review found 197 associations among 69 environmental exposures and 83 diseases and death causes reported in 103 publications. The environmental factors found in this review were air pollution, environmental tobacco smoke, heavy metals, chemicals, ambient temperature, noise, radiation, and urban residential surroundings. Among these, we identified 65 environmental exposures defined as risk factors and 4 environmental protective factors. In terms of study design, 57 included cohort and/or case-control studies, and 46 included time-series and/or case-crossover studies. In terms of the study population, 21 included children, and the rest included adult population and both sexes. In this review, the largest body of evidence was found in air pollution (91 associations among 14 air pollution definitions and 34 diseases and mortality diagnoses), followed by environmental tobacco smoke with 24 associations. Chemicals (including pesticides) were the third larger group of environmental exposures found among the meta-analyses included, with 19 associations. Conclusion: Environmental exposures are an important health determinant. This review provides an overview of an evolving research area and should be used as a complementary tool to understand the connections between the environment and human health. The evidence presented by this review should help to design public health interventions and the implementation of health in all policies approach aiming to improve populational health.