Maysoon Abdelhamid

Dr. Maysoon Abdelhamid


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

2Years (2025-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
17 February 2025 in Microorganisms
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
AAAbdullah Ali Alshehri
Abdullah Ali Alshehri
JAJEHAD A ALDALI
JEHAD A ALDALI
MAMaysoon Abdelhamid
Maysoon Abdelhamid
AAAlaa A. Alanazi
Alaa A. Alanazi
RARatal Bader Alhuraiz
Ratal Bader Alhuraiz
RAReema Fadhel Alharbi
Reema Fadhel Alharbi
Background: Antimicrobial resistance has highlighted the need for effective infectious disease strategies. Antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) may reduce antibiotic resistance, adverse reactions, and treatment failures. This systematic review examines ASPs in Saudi Arabia, assessing their efficacy, challenges, and outcomes to improve antimicrobial use and patient care. Methods: Searches were carried out in the Ovid, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection databases for studies published from 2007 to July 2024, in Saudi Arabia, following the PRISMA guidelines. Studies that assessed ASPs’ implementation, effectiveness, and outcomes in hospital settings were included. Results: Out of the 6080 titles identified, 14 studies met the inclusion criteria, covering different regions of the country, including Riyadh, Jeddah, Dhahran, Makkah, Al-Kharj, and a multi-regional study in Qassim and Riyadh. Various interventions were implemented by the ASPs, such as educational programs, audit and feedback, switching from intravenous to oral administration, and enhanced policies. These interventions collectively led to a decrease in the overall antimicrobial consumption and cost, and a reduction in cases with multidrug-resistant bacteria. Conclusions: The findings of this review highlight the positive impact of ASPs in Saudi Arabia. However, addressing challenges such as data limitations and training gaps is essential to enhance their effectiveness. Expanding education and refining implementation strategies are crucial for ensuring their long-term success.

18 September 2026 in Biosensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RARaghad Suliman Alsharidah
Raghad Suliman Alsharidah
Razique AnwerRazique Anwer
Razique Anwer
MAMaysoon Abdelhamid
Maysoon Abdelhamid
EAEman Amer Alanazi
Eman Amer Alanazi
FAFarah Mfwadh Alanazi
Farah Mfwadh Alanazi
RMRaghad Hassan Majrashi
Raghad Hassan Majrashi
Background: Wearable sweat biosensors have emerged as a promising non-invasive approach for monitoring inflammatory biomarkers, offering an alternative to repeated blood sampling. This systematic review evaluated the current evidence on the detection of C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6 (IL-6), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) in sweat for infection and inflammatory disease monitoring. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD420261371221), PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar were searched through April 2026. Human studies measuring CRP, IL-6, or TNF-α in sweat using wearable or biosensor-based platforms were included. Risk of bias and certainty of evidence were assessed using a modified Newcastle–Ottawa Scale/JBI checklist and GRADE. Results: Thirteen studies (2020–2025, 5–80 participants) were included. CRP showed the most consistent sweat-serum agreement (r = 0.844) and good diagnostic performance in one inflammatory bowel disease cohort (AUC = 0.845). TNF-α demonstrated the highest diagnostic accuracy in a single longitudinal study (AUC = 0.962), whereas IL-6 showed moderate sweat-serum correlations (R2 = 0.60–0.72) but limited diagnostic discrimination. IL-6 and TNF-α were more consistently detected in passively collected eccrine sweat, although IL-6 was also successfully measured following pilocarpine iontophoresis in one study. Most studies had moderate methodological quality. Conclusions: Sweat-based measurement of CRP, IL-6, and TNF-α is analytically feasible for non-invasive inflammatory biomarker monitoring. However, current evidence remains limited by small, heterogeneous studies, underscoring the need for standardized protocols and larger prospective clinical validation.