Chemical weapons are among the most inhumane forms of warfare owing to their severe acute and chronic complications in survivors of these attacks.^1,2 The most well-known chemical weapons include nerve agents and sulfur mustard (SM).³ The first use of such weapons after World War II dates back to the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s. The years 1984, 1986, and 1987 were the pinnacle of the use of such weapons as confirmed by United Nations experts through field investigations, clinical examination of the exposed persons, and examination of Iraq’s munitions and ammunitions.⁴

Background: Several studies on various bariatric surgeries involving patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) showed an overall rate of remission of hyperglycemia. However, there is little known about predictive factors on remission after different types of surgeries. The aim of this study was to identify the T2DM remission rate and to determine the effects of preoperative factors characteristics of remission of type 2 diabetes in Iran. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 1351 patients with T2DM operated by three different types of surgeries (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), and One Anastomosis Gastric Bypass (OAGB)). Diabetes remission was defined according to the American Diabetes Association (ADA) criteria. Binary logistic regression analyses were employed. Results: A total of 1351 patients, 675 patients (50.0%) undergoing OAGB, 475 (35.2%) RYGB, and 201 (14.9%) SG. 80.6%, 84.2% of OAGB, 81.7%, 82.6% of RYGB, and 77.1%, 81.5% of SG participants were in T2DM remission after 1 and 3 years, respectively. 1- and 3-year remission were associated with preoperative age, duration of T2DM, FBS and HbA1c, BMI, insulin therapy, and a family history of obesity (p < 0.05). Conclusion: The remission of T2DM after RYGB, SG, and OAGB surgery is dependent on various preoperative factors. Patients with younger age, shorter duration of T2DM, lower preoperative HbA1c and FBS, higher BMI, who were not on insulin therapy, and not having a family history of obesity were the best candidates to achieve a prolonged diabetes remission.

Background: Identifying breast cancer risk factors is a critical component of preventative strategies for this disease. This study aims to identify modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors of breast cancer in Iranian women. Methods: We used international databases (PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, and Embase) and national databases (SID, Magiran, and ISC) to retrieve relevant studies until November 13, 2022. The odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval using the random-effect model was used to estimate the pooled effect. The publication bias was assessed by the Egger and Begg test. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of each included study on the final measurement. Results: Of the 30,351 retrieved articles, 24 matched case–control records were included with 12,460 participants (5675 newly diagnosed cases of breast cancer and 6785 control). This meta-analysis showed that of the known modifiable risk factors for breast cancer, obesity (vs normal weight) had the highest risk (OR = 2.17, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.21; I² = 85.7) followed by age at marriage (25–29 vs < 18 years old) (OR = 2.00, 95% CI 1.53 to 2.61; I² = 0), second-hand smoking (OR = 1.86, 95% CI 1.58 to 2.19; I² = 0), smoking (OR = 1.83, 95% CI 1.41 to 2.38; I² = 18.9), abortion history (OR = 1.44, 95% CI 1.02 to 2.05; I² = 66.3), oral contraceptive use (OR = 1.35, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.63; I² = 74.1), age at marriage (18–24 vs < 18 years old) (OR: 1.22, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.47; I² = 0). Of non-modifiable risk factors, history of radiation exposure (OR = 3.48, 95% CI 2.17 to 5.59; I² = 0), family history of breast cancer (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.83 to 3.33; I² = 73), and age at menarche (12–13 vs ≥ 14 years old) (OR = 1.67, 95% CI 1.31–2.13; I² = 25.4) significantly increased the risk of breast cancer. Conclusions: Since most risk factors related to breast cancer incidence are modifiable, promoting healthy lifestyles can play an influential role in preventing breast cancer. In women with younger menarche age, a family history of breast cancer, or a history of radiation exposure, screening at short intervals is recommended.

Background: Dysfunction in the kinetic chain caused by poor scapula stabilization can contribute to shoulder injuries and Shoulder Impingement Syndrome (SIS). The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two treatment approaches scapular stabilization based exercise therapy and physical therapy in patients with SIS.

Introduction: Hearing loss is the fourth most common chronic disease, but studies on the relationship between hearing loss and socioeconomic factors are limited. We aimed to examine the association between hearing loss and socioeconomic factors among 35–70 year adults in southwest Iran.Materials and methods: This population-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the baseline of Hoveyzeh cohort study in adults aged 35–70 in southwest Iran between 2017 and 2021. Information on socioeconomic factors, demographic characteristics, comorbidities, family history of hearing loss, and noise exposure was collected. We assessed the relationship between three levels of socioeconomic factors (individual, household, and area level) with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL). Multiple logistic regression was used to adjust the potential confounders.Results: Among a total of 1,365 assessed participants, 485 patients were diagnosed as having hearing loss, and the other 880 individuals were diagnosed without hearing loss, which is considered the case and the control group, respectively. At the individual level of socioeconomic, the odds of having hearing loss in the participants with high school education and diploma, [OR = 0.51 (95%CI:0.28–0.92)], and the individuals with university education [OR = 0.44 (95%CI:0.22–0.87)] were significantly lower than the illiterate participants. At the household socioeconomic level, the odds of having hearing loss were lower for those with poor [OR = 0.63 (95%CI:0.41–0.97)] and moderate [OR = 0.62 (95%CI:0.41–0.94)] wealth status vs. those with the poorest wealth status. In the area level socioeconomic, although the odds of hearing loss in the residents of affluent areas were slightly lower than the residents of deprived areas, there was no significant difference among the groups.Conclusion: The individuals with hearing loss may have insufficient education and income.