BACKGROUND: Southeast Asia is undergoing an epidemiological transition with non-communicable illnesses becoming increasingly important, yet infectious diseases (tuberculosis, HIV, hepatitis B, malaria) remain widely prevalent in some populations, while emerging and zoonotic diseases threaten. There are also limited population-level estimates of many important heath conditions. This restricts evidence-based decision-making for disease control and prevention priorities. Cross-sectional surveys can be efficient epidemiological tools to measure the prevalence of a wide range of diseases, but no systematic assessment of their coverage of different health conditions has been produced for the region.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in Medline, Embase, Global Health, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science Core Collection, and Global Index Medicus, and additionally Google Scholar. Our inclusion criteria were cross-sectional surveys conducted with community-based recruitment, in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand, published between January 1, 2010 and January 27, 2021, and reporting the prevalence of any health condition.
RESULTS: 542 publications from 337 surveys were included. Non-communicable conditions (n = 205) were reported by more surveys than infectious conditions (n = 124). Disability (n = 49), self-report history of any disease or symptoms (n = 35), and self-perceived health status (n = 34), which reflect a holistic picture of health, were studied by many fewer surveys. In addition, 45 surveys studied symptomatic conditions which overlap between non-communicable and infectious conditions. The most surveyed conditions were undernutrition, obesity, hypertension, diabetes, intestinal parasites, malaria, anemia, diarrhea, fever, and acute respiratory infections. These conditions overlap with the most important causes of death and disability in the Global Burden of Disease study. However, other high-burden conditions (e.g. hearing loss, headache disorder, low back pain, chronic liver and kidney diseases, and cancers) were rarely studied.
CONCLUSIONS: There were relatively few recent surveys from which to estimate representative prevalences and trends of health conditions beyond those known to be high burden. Expanding the spectrum of health conditions in cross-sectional surveys could improve understanding of evolving disease patterns in the region.

BACKGROUND: The steep rise in substance use and substance use disorder (SUD) shows an urgency to assess its prevalence using valid measures. This systematic review summarizes the validity of measures to assess the prevalence of substance use and SUD in the US estimated in population and sub-population-based surveys.
METHODS: A literature search was performed using nine online databases. Studies were included in the review if they were published in English and tested the validity of substance use and SUD measures among US adults at the general or sub-population level. Independent reviews were conducted by the authors to complete data synthesis and assess the risk of bias.
RESULTS: Overall, 46 studies validating substance use/SUD (n = 46) measures were included in this review, in which 63% were conducted in clinical settings and 89% assessed the validity of SUD measures. Among the studies that assessed SUD screening measures, 78% examined a generic SUD measure, and the rest screened for specific disorders. Almost every study used a different survey measure. Overall, sensitivity and specificity tests were conducted in over a third of the studies for validation, and 10 studies used receiver operating characteristics curve.
CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a lack of standardized methods in surveys measuring and reporting prevalence of substance use/SUD among US adults. It highlights a critical need to develop short measures for assessing SUD that do not require lengthy, time-consuming data collection that would be difficult to incorporate into population-based surveys assessing a multitude of health dimensions.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42022298280.

OBJECTIVE: This review aims to examine the ceiling effects of EQ-5D-3L (3L) and EQ-5D-5L (5L) in general adult populations and identify the factors influencing these effects.
METHODS: We searched 8 databases for observational studies published in English from inception to 24 July 2023. Ceiling effects were calculated by dividing the number of participants reporting full health at dimension or profile level by the total sample size. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression using the metafor package in R software were performed.
RESULTS: We identified 94 studies from 70 articles, including 4 543 647 adults across 37 countries. The global pooled proportion of individuals reporting full health (\"11111\") was 56% (95% CI 51%-62%) for 3L and 49% (95% CI 44%-54%) for 5L. The self-care dimension showed the highest ceiling effects (3L: 97%; 5L: 94%), whereas pain/discomfort had the lowest (3L: 69%; 5L: 60%). The ceiling effects in East/South-East Asia were higher than in Europe by 25% (95% CI 18%-32%) in 3L and 9% (95% CI -2%-20%) in 5L. Adjusting for mean age and proportion of males, significant regional differences persisted in the overall profile level of 3L, in all 3L dimensions (except for self-care), and 5L dimensions (except for pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression).
CONCLUSIONS: This review highlights significant ceiling effects in the EQ-5D, especially in Asian populations. The 5L version exhibited fewer ceiling effects than the 3L, indicating its superiority for general population surveys. Further research is crucial to understand the disparities in self-reported health outcomes between Asians and other populations.

This systematic review aimed to identify effective methods to increase adolescents\' response to surveys about mental health and substance use, to improve the quality of survey information.
We followed a protocol and searched for studies that compared different survey delivery modes to adolescents. Eligible studies reported response rates, mental health score variation per survey mode and participant variations in mental health scores. We searched CENTRAL, PsycINFO, MEDLINE and Scopus in May 2022, and conducted citation searches in June 2022. Two reviewers independently undertook study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments. Following the assessment of heterogeneity, some studies were pooled using meta-analysis.
Fifteen studies were identified, reporting six comparisons related to survey methods and strategies. Results indicate that response rates do not differ between survey modes (e.g., web versus paper-and-pencil) delivered in classroom settings. However, web surveys may yield higher response rates outside classroom settings. The largest effects on response rates were achieved using unconditional monetary incentives and obtaining passive parental consent. Survey mode influenced mental health scores in certain comparisons.
Despite the mixed quality of the studies, the low volume for some comparisons and the limit to studies in high income countries, several effective methods and strategies to improve adolescents\' response rates to mental health surveys were identified.

BACKGROUND: Dystonia is a condition that affects the ability to control the movement and function of the body\'s muscles. It can cause not only physical problems, but also mental problems, resulting in impaired health-related quality of life (HRQoL). However, the effect of deep brain stimulation on quality of life in acquired dystonia remains unclear.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review from January 2000 to October 2022，determined the eligible studies, and performed a meta-analysis of HRQoL outcomes based on the Short-Form Health Survey-36 (SF-36) after DBS to evaluate the effects of DBS on physical and mental QoL.
RESULTS: A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria and were systematically reviewed. A comprehensive meta-analysis was performed for 9 studies that reported physical and psychological data or physical component summary (PCS), or mental component summary (MCS) for SF-36. The mean (SD) age at DBS implantation was 34.29 (10.3) years, and the follow-up period after implantation was 2.21 (2.80) years. The random effects model meta-analysis revealed that both physical and mental domains of the SF-36 improved following DBS. There was no statistically significant difference between the physical domains (effect size=1.34; p<0.0001) and the mental domains (effect size=1.38; p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis that demonstrates significant benefits in HRQoL following DBS in patients with acquired dystonia. There were significant improvements in both physical QoL and mental QoL.

The use of health surveys has been key in the scientific community to promptly communicate results about the health impact of COVID-19. But what information was collected, where, when and how, and who was the study population?
To describe the methodological characteristics used in large health surveys conducted in Spain early on in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Scoping review. Inclusion criteria: observational studies published between January 2020 and December 2021, with sample sizes of over 2,000 persons resident in Spain. Databases consulted: PubMed, CINAHL, Literatura Latinoamericana y del Caribe en CC de la Salud, Scopus, PsycINFO, Embase, Sociological Abstracts, Dialnet and Web of Science Core Collection. We analyzed the characteristics of the literature references, methodologies and information gathered in the surveys selected. Fifty five studies were included.
Sixty percentage of the studies included had mental health as their main topic and 75% were conducted on the general adult population. Thirteen percentage had a longitudinal design, 93% used the internet to gather information and the same percentage used non-probability sampling. Thirty percentage made some type of sampling correction to reduce coverage or non-response biases, but not selection biases. Sixty seven percentage did not state the availability of their data.
Consistent with the extensive use of non-probability sampling without any bias correction in the extraordinary setting created by COVID-19, quality population frameworks are required so that probability and representative samples can be extracted quickly to promptly address other health crises, as well as to reduce potential coverage, non-response and particularly selection biases by utilizing reweighting techniques. The low data accessibility despite the huge opportunity that COVID-19 provided for Open Science-based research is striking.

The objective of this review protocol is to map the available evidence regarding all the oral health surveys of Traditional Peoples and Communities (TPCs) in Brazil.
The review question of the protocol is: \'What evidence is available on the oral health surveys of Traditional Peoples and Communities in Brazil?\'. Observational studies that report oral health surveys of TPC in Brazil will be included. The protocol considered the Problem, Concept and Context strategy to guide data collection, as established by the Joanna Briggs Institute. The search strategy will consider Medical Subject Headings terms, synonyms and relevant free terms about epidemiological surveys in oral health and TPC in Brazil, with no limits to data, language, subject or search type, in the databases Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE/PubMed), Literatura Latino-americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde (LILACS), Scopus, Web of Science and Embase. Bibliographic searches will be updated until June 2023. The selection will be carried out by two independent, blinded reviewers, following the eligibility criteria, based on the title and abstract identified in the initial search. Potentially eligible studies will be fully read to confirm eligibility and collect relevant information. The categorisation of the studies will consider the author and year of publication, the traditional group studied, the study design, geographic location, age group, sample size, data collection method and the main oral health problem evaluated and its outcome. The data obtained and extracted will be presented in table format and text and presented using the visualisation of similarities method.
The present study does not need ethical approval. The protocol title was registered in the Open Science Framework (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/BQ5J3). A final article will be prepared presenting the results of the scoping review, and will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. The findings of this review will be presented at national conferences and scientific meetings.

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are valuable for shared decision making and research. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are questionnaires used to measure PROs, such as health-related quality of life (HRQL). Although core outcome sets for trials and clinical practice have been developed separately, they, as well as other initiatives, recommend different PROs and PROMs. In research and clinical practice, different PROMs are used (some generic, some disease-specific), which measure many different things. This is a threat to the validity of research and clinical findings in the field of diabetes. In this narrative review, we aim to provide recommendations for the selection of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs for people with diabetes for use in clinical practice and research. Based on a general conceptual framework of PROs, we suggest that relevant PROs to measure in people with diabetes are: disease-specific symptoms (e.g. worries about hypoglycaemia and diabetes distress), general symptoms (e.g. fatigue and depression), functional status, general health perceptions and overall quality of life. Generic PROMs such as the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS 2.0), or Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures could be considered to measure commonly relevant PROs, supplemented with disease-specific PROMs where needed. However, none of the existing diabetes-specific PROM scales has been sufficiently validated, although the Diabetes Symptom Self-Care Inventory (DSSCI) for measuring diabetes-specific symptoms and the Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS) and Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) for measuring distress showed sufficient content validity. Standardisation and use of relevant PROs and psychometrically sound PROMs can help inform people with diabetes about the expected course of disease and treatment, for shared decision making, to monitor outcomes and to improve healthcare. We recommend further validation studies of diabetes-specific PROMs that have sufficient content validity for measuring disease-specific symptoms and consider generic item banks developed based on item response theory for measuring commonly relevant PROs.

National mental health surveys play a critical role in determining the prevalence of mental disorders in a population and informing service planning. However, current surveys have important limitations, including the exclusion of key vulnerable groups and increasing rates of non-response. This review aims to synthesise information on excluded and undersampled groups in national mental health surveys. We conducted a targeted review of nationally representative adult mental health surveys performed between 2005 and 2019 in high-income OECD countries. Sixteen surveys met our inclusion criteria. The response rate for included surveys ranged between 36.3% and 80.0%. The most frequently excluded groups included people who were homeless, people in hospitals or health facilities and people in correctional facilities. Males and young people were the most commonly underrepresented groups among respondents. Attempts to collect data from non-responders and excluded populations were limited, but suggest that mental health status differs among some of these cohorts. The exclusion of key vulnerable groups and high rates of non-response have important implications for interpreting and using the results of national mental health surveys. Targeted supplementary surveys of excluded or hard-to-reach populations, more inclusive sampling methodologies, and strategies aimed at improving response rates should be considered to strengthen the accuracy and usefulness of survey findings.

BACKGROUND: Seroprevalence studies about chikungunya infection are usually conducted after epidemics to estimate the magnitude of the attack. This study aimed to estimate the seroprevalence of CHIKV by WHO region, considering the periods of introduction of the virus in these regions and its potential to lead to epidemics.
METHODS: We systematically reviewed Medline/Pubmed, Embase, Lilacs, Scopus and Web of Science for original articles published up to 2020. Cohort, case-control and cross-sectional studies were eligible for inclusion, based on the results of laboratory diagnosis of previous or previous and recent infection. Those conducted with symptomatic individuals were excluded.
RESULTS: 596 articles were identified, 197 full-text were reviewed and 64 were included, resulting in 71 seroprevalences. Most were cross-sectional studies (92%), between 2001 and 2020 (92%), with population of all ages (55%), conducted in Kenya (10.9%), Brazil (9.4%) and French Polynesia (7.8%). The pooled estimates were 24% (95%CI 19-29; I2 = 99.7%; p < 0.00), being 21% (95%CI 13-30; I2 = 99.5%; p < 0.00) for adults, 7% (95%CI 0-23; I2 = 99.7%; p < 0.00) for children and 30% (95%CI 23-38; I2 = 99.7%; p < 0.00) for all ages. The higher seroprevalences were found in African, the Americas and South-East Asian Regions.
CONCLUSIONS: The great heterogeneity of seroprevalences points to the persistence of viral circulation. Even where the seroprevalence is high, the population replacement and the absence of vaccines mean that the risk of virus spread and epidemics remains.
BACKGROUND: PROSPERO CRD42020166227.