HEALTH TRAIN EXPRESS Mission: To promulgate health education across the internet: Follow or subscribe to Health Train Express as well as Digital Health Space for all the updates for health policy, reform, public health issues. Health Train Express is published several times a week.Subscribe and receive an email alert each time it is published. Health Train Express has been published since 2006.
Listen Up
Sunday, December 25, 2022
Illegal Fentanyl is the scourge of overdoses by opioids
Friday, December 23, 2022
A Comparison of Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants, and Primary Care Physicians' Patterns of Practice and Quality of Care in Health Centers - PubMed
Wednesday, December 21, 2022
Nearly 90% of those living with long COVID have not returned to full health
The study of 988 participants conducted by APC Microbiome Ireland, an SFI research center based at University College Cork (UCC), in conjunction with Cork University Hospital (CUH) and long COVID Advocacy Ireland, provides greater insight into impact of long COVID on quality of life, mental health and physical health of people in Ireland. The study is published in HRB Open Research.
More than 2 out of 3 participants continue to experience fatigue, post-exertional malaise, palpitations, chest pain, stomach upset/nausea, memory problems, muscle pain or joint pain. The median number of long COVID symptoms reported was 8 for each person, highlighting the substantial burden of this disease. The median reported time since the initial COVID-19 infection was 12 months
Six out of every ten missed workdays
A high proportion of long COVID patients reported that they still have a moderate to severe limitation in their ability to carry out their usual daily activities. Nearly 4 of 10 people were severely limited in their ability to work and 6 of every 10 have missed workdays (at some stage) due to their long COVID symptoms. 16% of respondents were unable to work at the time of the survey due to long COVID and were receiving social welfare supports.
The survey was produced in a researcher-clinician-patient partnership involving Professor Liam O'Mahony, APC Principal Investigator and UCC Professor of Immunology, Dr. Corinna Sadlier, Consultant in Infectious Diseases at CUH, and Ms. Tanja Buwalda, long COVID sufferer and representative of "Long COVID Advocacy Ireland."
This working group included patient engagement to ensure the survey would impact patients in a targeted and meaningful way, and ultimately help inform care pathways in the treatment of long COVID.
SARS-CoV-2 infection not only impacts the lungs
Professor O'Mahony said, "This survey highlights that SARS-CoV-2 infection not only impacts the lungs but can have significant long-term effects on multiple organ systems following clearance of the acute SARS-CoV-2 infection in many Irish people who were otherwise healthy previously. The reasons why some people develop long COVID, and others do not, are still unclear. While many different biological mechanisms have been proposed, we are focusing on the role of the immune system and the microbiome in these complicated disease processes.
Dr. Corinna Sadlier said, "The study demonstrates the significant and wide-ranging impacts long COVID is having not only on physical health, but also on ability to carry out usual daily activities, return to employment and overall quality of life.Fatigue is the single most frequent symptom reported," Professor O'Mahony continued.
This Couple Died by Suicide After the DEA Shut Down Their Pain Doctor
The Vaccine Confidence Project
Vaccine confidence among the public and healthcare professionals is high across most populations, with some exceptions and caveats. Between 2018 and 2020, there was a large increase in public perception towards vaccines across the EU, particularly towards the seasonal influenza vaccine. Many of these 2020 gains have since been reversed. Perceptions towards the importance, safety, and effectiveness of vaccines have declined across the EU between 2020 and 2022. Across the EU, the view that vaccines are safe remains higher than 2018 levels. Yet, EU-wide changes in public perceptions towards the importance and safety of vaccines shows that strong vaccine-dependence and variability in vaccine confidence exist between countries and within sociodemographic characteristics.
An evaluation into the differences in public confidence between over 65-year-olds and 18-34-year-olds reveals key insights into an increasing ‘vaccine confidence gap’, which needs to be addressed. The difference in vaccine confidence between 65-year-olds and 18-34-year-olds appears to be widening over time across many EU member states, with 18-34-year-olds becoming less confident between 2018 and 2022.
Vaccine confidence among healthcare professionals remains high in 2022 Above 90% of HCPs surveyed in all EU member states agree that vaccines are important.
Above 90% of HCPs surveyed in all EU member states agree that vaccines are safe, except for France, Greece, and Austria.
Healthcare professionals across the EU are highly likely to recommend the MMR, seasonal
influenza, and COVID-19 vaccines to patients, though likelihood to recommend the HPV vaccine shows high variability between countries.
HCPs likelihood to recommend seasonal influenza and COVID-19 vaccines to pregnant women are generally lower than their likelihood to recommend these vaccines to other patients
Variability in vaccine confidence exists between countries, among vaccination types, and within sociodemographic characteristics.
The age “gap” in confidence is widening between younger and older age groups
Between 2018 and 2022, there is increasing polarisation between older and younger age groups in terms of perceptions of vaccines with over 65s becoming more confident and 18-34- year-olds growing less confident.
The seasonal influenza vaccine is the only vaccination where an inverse of this trend can be seen, where the gap between older and younger age groups is narrowing.
Surprise billing ban implementation
Sunday, December 18, 2022
What Happens When Doctors Can't Tell the Truth?
By Katie Herzog (with insertions by this author Gary M. Levin M.D.)
Whole areas of research are off-limits. Top physicians treat patients based on their race. An ideological 'purge' is underway in American medicine
That’s one of the lessons I have learned over the past few years as the institutions that have upheld the liberal order — our publishing houses, our universities, our schools, our non-profits, our tech companies — have embraced a Manichean ideology that divides people by identity and punishes anyone that doesn’t adhere to every aspect of that orthodoxy. This duality creates bias and inaccuracy in scientific studies.
I always thought that if you lived through a revolution it would be obvious to everyone. As it turns out, that’s not true. Revolutions can be bloodless, incremental and subtle. And they don’t require a strongman. They just require a sufficient number of well-positioned true believers and cowards, like those sitting in the C-suite of nearly every major institution in American life.
You see C-suite members rarely know what is going on in the basements of their corporations, tending to observe from 50,000 feet what is happening at sea level. The higher the level, the less granular is the data. Whether intentional deceitful or accidental the outcome can be misinformation and dangerous.
That’s one of the lessons learned over the past few years as the institutions that have upheld the liberal order — our publishing houses, our universities, our schools, our non-profits, our tech companies — have embraced a Manichean ideology that divides people by identity and punishes anyone that doesn’t adhere to every aspect of that orthodoxy.
This is wrong when it happens at a company Apple or Condé Nast. But there are sectors where the stakes of the ideological takeover are higher. Like K-12 education.The rapid explosion of communication via the internet and the digital age presents certain new challenges.
But if any area is more urgent, it is the world of medicine, where the ability to speak truthfully is quite literally a matter of life and death. Without being able to discuss reality and take intellectual risks, it’s impossible to get to the truth. No truth, no medical progress.
Doctors who are alarmed at what they are witnessing in some of the top medical schools and hospitals in the country. It was clear that this is a story that deserves to be told. In my time (that dates me) scientific research was a secretive secretive industry. There were fewer journals and it was common policy to be secretive about one's research. Believe it or not I was told by a senior scientist to not discuss our work for fear it would give advantage to our 'competitors'.
There is significant competition for grants, awards, the number of articles one had published and the Nobel Prize. It took considerable time to do research, write the results and get it published in a reputable peer reviewed journal. At times this can consume several years and require resubmission. At times the research scientist will not resubmit his article due to the effort. He/She may decide to submit to a lesser known journal as an alternative.
Benefits of Peer-Reviewed Literature
Peer-review process ensures that the quality of the research and validity of the findings are high.
Information on highly-detailed subject matter and complex analyses
Easy to search through millions of articles with online databases.
Limitations of Peer-Reviewed Literature
Highly-detailed and complex analyses may be irrelevant for users who are simply searching for descriptive statistics and basic measures of public health
May require a subscription to journals or databases to access articles (can be costly for individuals, although many universities and other organizations provide access to students and faculty)
In 2022, this literature is easily accessed in Pubmed, Medline, or Google Scholar. Previously, non-scientists were not aware of Pubmed or Medline, both of which are hosted by the National Institute of Health and its subsidiary National Library of Medicine.
The categories of literature range from basic sciences (such as chemistry, physics, organic chemistry to clinical articles organized by medical or organ specificity. There are also review articles which summarize advances in each category. These articles are not about original articles and are written by experts in each category.
Articles published in media such as news sites, new media and social media are often not researched adequately.
The review committee for each journal is the GATEKEEPER. (According to Urban Dictionary, gatekeeping is defined as, "when someone takes it upon themselves to decide who does or does not have access or rights to a community or identity". Essentially, gatekeeping is an ongoing practice that a hierarchy of power within the community and further excludes others.One cannot overemphasize the importance of the editorial advisory board.) (more about this later)
In this age of accelerated knowledge gain, communication and a control mechanisms which were overloaded by the COVID pandemic an atmosphere of anxiety and fear was rampant among the public. Social media added to the chaos because anyone can publish fake news or misinformation. Most posts do not include references.
It is the social media author's responsibility to provide this in their post. A failure to do so is akin to. yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theater.
Transparency and informed patient consent have become a foundational part of healthcare.
Some journals publish article on the internet, which are open access.
PLOS Medicine is a nonprofit, Open Access publisher empowering researchers to accelerate progress in science and medicine by leading a transformation in research communication.
https://www.thefp.com/p/what-happens-when-doctors-cant-speak
Friday, December 16, 2022
California has plenty of anti-COVID drugs, but few prescriptions -
Monday, December 12, 2022
Hope In The Post-Pandemic World. Part III
“Success in creating AI would be the biggest event in human history. Unfortunately, it might also be the last, unless we learn how to avoid the risks.”
Stephen Hawking, British theoretical physicist
Andrew Chang MD completes his synopsis of AI in the Era of Covid 19
The most obvious effects of the pandemic was the huge growth of telemedicine for clinicians. AI will be much more difficult with many more failures than success, much like the beginning of Space-X and the Falcon rockets. Nevertheless iterative engineering will ultimately succeed.
We conclude this series on the future of artificial intelligence in healthcare with a discussion on the more distant future of artificial intelligence. In our struggle against this menacing pandemic, we can look at the future with optimism and idealism, and with artificial intelligence as one of our essential resources in our portfolio.
Significant needs and advances for AI in medicine in the coming decades will mandate us to understand the potential, limitations, and perhaps dangers of this resource.
First, means of decreasing the human burden of labeling medical images will be in the form of innovations in artificial intelligence such as few shots learning and generative adversarial networks that can enable more automated interpretation in the future.
Second, there need to be AI systems that can perform real-time AI. For this to occur, AI architectures will need to be even more robust and will need to include AI tools such as anytime algorithms, decision-theoretic meta-reasoning, and reflective architecture. These new AI tools will also need to incorporate the nuances of complexity and chaos theory as biomedical phenomena often have complex rather than complicated elements.
The entire learning portfolio will need to be explored and orchestrated for biomedical work: transfer learning, unsupervised and self-supervised learning, predictive learning, apprenticeship learning, reinforcement learning, and other types of learning to come in the future.
Digital twins at the individual and population levels and federated learning of all health systems at the international scale are now part of healthcare.
Cognitive elements of artificial intelligence such as 1) Joseph Voss’ cognitive architecture (declarative and procedure learning and memory, perception, action selection, etc), 2) Geoff Hinton’s “capsule networks”, or 3) Jeff Hawkins’ “reference frames” described in his book A Thousand Brains: A New Theory of Intelligence, will need to be increasingly a broad motif in artificial intelligence in medicine and healthcare that will incorporate the insights, intuition, and intelligence of our clinicians. The phrase “artificial intelligence in medicine or healthcare” will no longer be used as it was decades before.
The future of artificial intelligence in healthcare and many other topics will be discussed at our in-person AIMed Global Summit, currently being rescheduled to a later date this year to navigate around the pandemic. An exciting final session will be on the future of artificial intelligence in healthcare including its role in digital twins, extended reality, and federated learning. We will see each other in the near future. Find more information here.