With more than 40 million confirmed cases of COVID-19 globally, the pandemic is continuing to severely challenge health systems around the world. Countries with high numbers of refugees face an additional burden on COVID-19 preventive and curative services made available and accessible to refugees. Turkey hosts the largest number of refugees globally, with a total of 4 million in 2020. Over 98% of refugees in Turkey reside in urban areas in large, crowded cities such as Istanbul, Gaziantep, and Hatay posing severe challenges for all health responses, including COVID-19. This study provides insights and analysis on the current situation for refugees, migrants under temporary protection and undocumented migrants in Turkey by focusing on the right to health and access to health care under pandemic conditions. Its main aim is to discuss the challenges and opportunities for COVID-19 responses relating to refugees, migrants under temporary protection and undocumented migrants in Turkey. This is a non- systematic and exploratory literature review from academic and grey sources. We reviewed published documents, meeting summaries, media reports/news and policy briefs in Turkish and English on the COVID-19 response in Turkey. Since the start of the COVID-19 outbreak in Turkey, the Ministry of Health (MoH) has taken various steps to provide health care for all residents. However, several challenges arise when providing health care to refugees, migrants under temporary protection and other undocumented migrants including language barrier in accessing reliable information and access to health services for existing chronic conditions. While refugees, migrants under temporary protection and undocumented migrants have been granted access to services for COVID-19 related health problems, social and cultural barriers remain beyond the current legislation. Solidarity and whole-of-society inclusive approaches should always be the guiding principles in the COVID-19 response.

Background: Due to additional responsibilities and uncertainties during the COVID-19 pandemic, primary healthcare (PHC) workers are at increased risk of burnout. Aim: To determine and compare the burnout levels and related factors in PHC nurses and family physicians (FPs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An online survey was delivered to PHC workers. Non-random sampling method was used. To evaluate burnout, the Maslach Burnout Inventory was used, which investigates burnout in three categories: emotional exhaustion (EE), depersonalization (DP) and reduced personal accomplishment (PA). Multivariate linear regression was used to analyze factors associated with burnout for FPs and nurses separately. Findings: Among the participants, 55.7% were nurses, the mean age was 42.34. FPs and nurses experienced similar levels of burnout in terms of EE. Family physicians had higher levels of low PA and DP. Based on the results of the multivariate analysis, while higher EE levels were significantly associated with unequal distribution of workload and communication problems within the Family Health Center for physicians, the unequal distribution of PPE, lack of appreciation by patients or colleagues and restrictions on work-related rights were relevant factors for nurses. Lack of appreciation and restrictions of the rights were associated with increased DP scores in both groups. Unequal distribution of workload was also associated with reduced PA among FPs. Conclusion: PHC physicians and nurses are affected by burnout in different ways under the conditions of the COVID-19 pandemic based on gender, socioeconomic status and working conditions. To protect the mental health of PHC workers in the next public health emergency, clarification in the organization of services, empowering PHC workers in emergency risk communication and provision of timely, adequate and free PPE is essential. It is also crucial to ensure the rights of health workers through macro policy changes especially during emergencies.

The global impact of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has been profound, affecting billions of lives worldwide. As of June 13, 2024, the virus has infected approximately 704 million people and led to a staggering death toll of 7 million. In the fight against this devastating virus, the development and distribution of COVID-19 vaccines have been identified (...)

Summary: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) implemented to mitigate the COVID-19 pandemic halted everyday life in higher education along with social and psychological impacts. The objective of our study was to explore the factors related to sense of coherence (SoC) from a gender perspective among university students in Turkey. This is a cross-sectional survey conducted online with a convenience sampling method as part of the international COVID-Health Literacy (COVID-HL) Consortium. SoC was measured by a nine-item questionnaire that was adapted to the Turkish language, including socio-demographic information and health status, including psychological well-being, psychosomatic complaints, and future anxiety (FA). 1595 students from four universities, of whom 72% were female, participated in the study. Cronbach’s alpha for the SoC scale was 0.75. Based on the median split of the individual scores, levels of SoC showed no statistically significant difference according to gender. Logistic regression analysis indicated that higher SoC was associated with medium and high subjective social status, studying in private universities, high psychological well-being, low FA, and none/one psychosomatic complaint. While results were similar among female students, type of university and psychological well-being showed no statistically significant association with SoC among males. Our results indicate that structural (subjective social status) and contextual (type of university) factors, along with gender-based variations, are associated with SoC among university students in Turkey.

Cervical cancer is the fourth leading cause of all cancers among women globally, and 90% of all deaths occur in low- and middle-income countries. Sexual intercourse is the main route of transmission for HPV infection. The course of HPV infection differs according to the HPV type, immune status of the women,