Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has a significant impact on the life of patients undergoing chronic periodic hemodialysis. It negatively affects their social, economic and family status, and particularly their psychological well-being. The aim of this study was to investigate the perception of the quality of life (QoL) and psychological burden of patients undergoing hemodialysis. A cross-sectional study was conducted with 63 patients. Τhe majority were men (63.5%), and the mean age of the patients was 66.7 years (±12.9) with 61.9% aged 65–89 years. Data collection was performed in 2021 using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Kidney Disease and Quality of Life-Short Form (KDQOL-SF™) research tools, and their relationships were assessed using parametric and non-parametric methods. Moderate to mild levels of Anxiety and Depression were found. Physical and Mental Composite Scores were mild to moderate, with the Mental Composite Score being significantly higher (p < 0.05). Anxiety and Depression were significantly correlated with lower QoL (p < 0.05), while a higher educational level was correlated with lower Depression Symptom Levels and higher QoL for Disease Symptoms, Disease Effects, Physical Functioning, Vitality and Overall Health (p < 0.05). A higher number of years of hemodialysis was correlated with lower levels of Anxiety and higher levels of Quality of Sleep (p < 0.05). Ease of Access to the Hemodialysis Unit was correlated with lower levels of Social Support (p < 0.05). The highest Mental Composite Scores were also correlated with a higher level of education, with patients living in urban areas, and with a higher monthly income (p < 0.05). Patients with moderate or severe levels of Anxiety and Depression had a lower QoL in the Physical and Mental Composite Scores, indicating their dependence on the appropriate medical, nursing and social environment in order to attain higher levels of well-being, leading to the improvement of patients’ health. This study was not registered.

The current study aimed to investigate how parents of children, adolescents, and young adults with DM1 perceived quality of life and psychological burden during the lockdown period of COVID-19. A cross-sectional study was carried out on 110 parents in Greece in spring 2021. Perceived quality of life was measured using the Parent Diabetes Distress Scale, and psychological burden was measured using the Spielberger State/Trait Anxiety Inventory, and both were assessed with correlational analysis. Overall, 79.1% of the parents were females ,while the mean age of all was 44.4 years (±5.8). PDDS was found to be moderate (mean 2.42 ± 0.76): 63.6% of respondents had moderate/high distress. The highest mean score was for Teen Management Distress and the lowest for Healthcare Team (3.02 vs. 1.49, p < 0.001). STAI was found to be moderate to high, with a higher mean score for state versus trait anxiety (49.8 vs. 48.0, p = 0.006). Increased distress or poorer parents’ quality of life was related with the highest number of hyperglycemic episodes (β = 0.25, p = 0.002), the fewest hypoglycemic episodes (β = −0.18, p = 0.024), and the highest parental trait anxiety (β = 0.04, p < 0.001). Parents were found with moderate-to-high distress and anxiety, and their correlation also shows that there is an urgent need for suitable education of parents on managing the disease to improve quality of life and eliminate health risks to all involved.

Young people are among the most intensive users of digital and generative artificial intelligence (GenAI)–enabled mental health tools, yet they remain underrepresented in the research and design processes that shape these technologies. Although participatory approaches such as co-design and patient and public involvement are widely endorsed as best practices, youth involvement in digital youth mental health (DYMH) research is often inconsistent, superficial, or limited to late-stage consultation. This participation gap risks producing interventions that are misaligned with young people’s lived experiences, priorities, and vulnerabilities, particularly in the context of rapidly evolving and scalable GenAI systems. This Viewpoint aims to reexamine the underlying drivers of the participation gap in DYMH research; clarify how participation is conceptualized and implemented across disciplines; and propose concrete, actionable recommendations to support more meaningful and consistent youth involvement across the research life cycle. We draw on interdisciplinary literature from digital mental health, human-computer interaction, child-computer interaction, and health research policy. Our Viewpoint integrates conceptual frameworks (eg, Lundy’s model of participation), existing reviews of co-design practices, and emerging evidence on GenAI in mental health. We adopt a life cycle–oriented perspective to examine how youth participation is distributed across stages of research and development, including problem formulation, design, implementation, and evaluation. We identify 3 interrelated drivers of the participation gap. First, conceptual and linguistic fragmentation obscures what participation entails in practice, with terms such as co-design, participatory design, user-centered design, and patient and public involvement used inconsistently across disciplines. Second, youth involvement is uneven across the research life cycle, with participation often concentrated in early ideation or usability testing but largely absent from upstream decision-making and downstream evaluation. Third, institutional barriers—including ethics review processes, consent requirements, funding constraints, and adult-centric research norms—systematically limit meaningful youth partnership. These challenges are amplified in the context of GenAI, where opaque “black box” systems, simulated therapeutic interactions, and rapid deployment cycles introduce distinct risks if youth perspectives are not integrated. We propose a set of minimum expectations to address these gaps, including explicit specification of participatory models, life cycle mapping of youth involvement, reporting of youth influence on decisions, dedicated funding for participation, proportional ethics frameworks, and mechanisms for youth-informed governance of GenAI systems. Closing the participation gap in DYMH research is both an ethical imperative and a practical necessity. Moving beyond aspirational commitments requires embedding youth participation as a standard, resourced, and accountable component of research, design, and governance. In the context of rapidly evolving digital and GenAI technologies, failure to do so risks producing interventions that are scalable but not safe, credible, or responsive to the needs of young people.

As disorders of the gastrointestinal system are among the most prevalent, had a significant impact on patients’ quality of life (QoL). This study aimed to investigate the QoL of 83 patients treated in the surgical clinic of a regional general hospital in Crete-Greece. They recruited from April-to-June 2021 using the 36-Item Short Form Survey scale (SF-36) and the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the QoL in relation to patients’ characteristics. The 50.6% were men with mean age of all the 55.0 years. Mental Health was found with highest mean score in relation to Role Physical (p < 0.001) and the Mental Component higher than the Physical (p = 0.029) while 68.7% of patients had high State Anxiety score. For each added year of age, the odds ratio of a moderate-to-high Physical Component was significantly decreased (OR = 0.95, p = 0.012) as married/partnered patients had higher odds of a moderate-to-high Mental Component (OR = 6.59, p = 0.006). Those with high state anxiety had lower odds of a moderate-to-high Mental Component (OR = 0.16, p = 0.005). Action is necessary on a clinical or individual level, guided by health professionals, to promote appropriate dietary choices and interventions for the avoidance of behaviors that could harm or endanger patients’ health.

UNSTRUCTURED Young people are among the fastest adopters of digital and AI-enabled mental health tools, yet they remain marginal to the research and design processes that shape these technologies. This Viewpoint examines a persistent participation gap in digital youth mental health research (DYMH): while co-production and patient and public involvement (PPI) are widely invoked as best practice, youth involvement is frequently superficial, inconsistent, or confined to late-stage consultation. As a result, digital mental health innovations risk misalignment with young people’s lived realities, priorities, and vulnerabilities. We identify three interrelated drivers of this gap. First, conceptual and linguistic fragmentation obscures what “participation” entails in practice, with terms such as co-design, co-production, user-centred design, and PPI used interchangeably despite reflecting different assumptions about power, influence, and decision-making. Second, participation is often uneven across the research lifecycle, with young people involved in ideation or usability testing but excluded from problem formulation, theory selection, implementation, and evaluation. Third, institutional barriers - including ethics review processes, consent requirements, funding constraints, and adult-centric research norms - systematically limit meaningful youth partnership. We argue that closing the participation gap is both an ethical imperative and a practical necessity. As digital and generative AI tools increasingly shape how young people understand and manage mental health, youth must be recognised as legitimate co-producers of knowledge rather than passive end users. We call for clearer reporting of participatory models, greater attention to youth influence across the research lifecycle, and structural support to normalise meaningful youth involvement. Without such shifts, DYMH innovation risks being scalable but not safe, credible, or trustworthy.