Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has affected millions of people across the globe. Previous coronavirus outbreaks led to worsened symptoms amongst pregnant women, suggesting that pregnant women are at greater risk. Objectives: Our aim is to investigate the differences in clinical presentation, management, and prognosis of COVID-19 infection in pregnant and non-pregnant women. Methods: We ran a search on electronic databases and analysis of the relevant articles was done using Revie Manager 5.4. Results: The review consists of nine studies comprising 591,058 women (28,797 pregnant and 562,261 non-pregnant), with most of the data derived from two large studies. The risk of experiencing fever (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.64–0.85), headache (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.74–0.79), myalgia (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.89–0.95), diarrhea (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.39–0.43), chest tightness (RR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77–0.95), and expectoration (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.21–0.97) were greater amongst non-pregnant COVID-19-infected women. Pregnant women with COVID-19 were less likely to be obese (RR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.63–0.73) or have a smoking history (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.26–0.39). COVID-19-infected non-pregnant women had a higher frequency of comorbidity such as chronic cardiac disease (RR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.44–0.77), renal disease (RR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.29–0.71), and malignancy (RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.68–0.98), compared to COVID-19-infected pregnant women. The risk of ICU admission (RR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.68–3.05) and requirement of invasive mechanical ventilation (RR: 2.68; 95% CI: 2.07–3.47) were significantly higher amongst pregnant women. Conclusions: Although the frequency of risk factors and the risk of experiencing clinical symptoms of COVID-19 were higher among non-pregnant women, COVID-19-infected pregnant women had a higher requirement of ICU admission and invasive mechanical ventilation compared to non-pregnant COVID-19-infected women. More well-conducted studies from varying contexts are needed to draw conclusions. Prospero registration: CRD42020204638.

Background: There is dearth of information on COVID-19’s impact on pregnant women. However, literature reported trends of COVID-19 differ, depending on the presence of clinical features upon presentation. Objective: This systematic review aimed to assess differences in risk factors, management, complications, and pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic pregnant women with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: A search was run on electronic databases to identify studies reporting COVID-19 in pregnancy. Meta-analysis was performed and odds ratios and mean difference with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using Review Manager 5.4. Review Prospero registration number CRD42020204662. Results: We included ten articles reporting data from 3158 pregnancies; with 1900 symptomatic and 1258 asymptomatic pregnant women. There was no significant difference in the mean age, gestational age, and body mass index between the two groups. The meta-analysis suggested that pregnant women who were obese (OR:1.37;95%CI:1.15 to 1.62), hypertensive (OR:2.07;95%CI:1.38 to 3.10) or had a respiratory disorder (OR:1.64;95%CI:1.25 to 2.16), were more likely to be symptomatic when infected with SARS-CoV-2. Pregnant women with Black (OR:1.48;95%CI:1.19 to 1.85) or Asian (OR:1.64;95%CI:1.23 to 2.18) ethnicity were more likely to be symptomatic while those with White ethnicity (OR:0.63;95%CI:0.52 to 0.76) were more likely to be asymptomatic. Cesarean-section delivery (OR:1.40;95%CI:1.17 to 1.67) was more likely amongst symptomatic pregnant women. The mean birthweight(g) (MD:240.51;95%CI:188.42 to 293.51), was significantly lower, while the odds of low birthweight (OR:1.85;95%CI:1.06 to 3.24) and preterm birth (< 37 weeks) (OR:2.10;95%CI:1.04 to 4.23) was higher amongst symptomatic pregnant women. Symptomatic pregnant women had a greater requirement for maternal ICU admission (OR:13.25;95%CI:5.60 to 31.34) and mechanical ventilation (OR:15.56;95%CI:2.96 to 81.70) while their neonates had a higher likelihood for Neonatal Intensive Care Unit admission (OR:1.96;95%CI:1.59 to 2.43). The management strategies in the included studies were poorly discussed, hence could not be analyzed. Conclusion: The evidence suggests that the presence of risk factors (co-morbidities and ethnicity) increased the likelihood of pregnant women being symptomatic. Higher odds of complications were also observed amongst symptomatic pregnant women. However, more adequately conducted studies with adjusted analysis and parallel comparison groups are required to reach conclusive findings.

To assess the epidemiology of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in Arab countries, and identify gaps for future research. We searched PubMed from July 1978 to July 2014 and reviewed local journals with cross-referencing. The keywords we used were ADHD, diagnosis, prevalence, incidence, factor, diagnosis, rate, risk, and each of the names of the 22 Arab countries (Jordan, Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and so on). Studies were eligible for inclusion if they investigated the epidemiology of ADHD in any Arab country, and were published in English. The search was conducted from 2nd to 5th August 2014 in King Saud Bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A total of 22 articles were included in the review. Twenty studies were cross-sectional and found the prevalence of ADHD ranged between 1.3-16%, prevalence of hyperactive type ADHD between 1.4-7.8%, and the prevalence of inattention type between 2.1-2.7%. Only 2 case-control studies investigated potential risk factors. Evidence extracted from these studies shows a significant association between ADHD and male gender, previous psychiatric illness in the family, vitamin D deficiency, poor school performance, sleep problems, and nocturnal enuresis. The prevalence of ADHD in Arab countries is comparable to reports in North America, Africa, and other countries of the Middle East. Longitudinal studies are needed to investigate the prognosis and determinants of this condition in the Arab world.

In Saudi Arabia there is an estimated need of more than 100,000 pharmacy graduates to cover all present sectors. The shortage of pharmacists has affected many of these sectors especially the pharmaceutical industry. The contribution of Saudi pharmacists to local pharmaceuticals industry would be extremely beneficial and important for shaping the future of the drug industry within the Kingdom. It is not clear whether future Saudi pharmacists are willing to contribute to local pharmaco-industrial fields. A cross-sectional, questionnaire-based survey was conducted on all final-year pharmacy students in King Saud University (KSU), Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Out of a total of 130 students registered in the final-year of the pharmacy program in KSU, 122 (93.8%) were able to complete the questionnaire. The results showed that the majority (83%) of Saudi pharmacy students indicated that they had not received practical training in the pharmaceutical companies, while only 17.2% of the students felt that they had the knowledge and the skills to work in the pharmaceutical industry after graduation. The majority of the students (66.7%) chose clinical pharmacy as their future career field while only 10.9% indicated willingness to work in a pharmaceutical industry career. Only 8.2% selected working in the pharmaceutical industry. The significant predictor of possibly choosing a career in the local drug industry is a student with a bachelor's degree (compared to Pharm D degree) in pharmacy (OR = 2.7 [95% CI 1.1-6.3]). Pharmacy students who are enrolled in the capital city of Riyadh are not properly trained to play an influential role in local drug companies. As a result, their level of willingness to have a career in such important business is not promising (more among Pharm D program). Future research in other pharmacy colleges within Saudi Arabia is needed to confirm such results.