Depression and anxiety are highly prevalent conditions worldwide. This article reviews the extent of depression and anxiety among medical students and elucidates associated potential risk factors. In comparison to other countries, students from Middle East countries have a higher prevalence of depression. Females suffer from these conditions more commonly than males. Factors associated with these morbidities can be divided into academic and non-academic factors. There is an inconclusiveness of whether medical students experience these symptoms more commonly than their counterparts. The present review provided a cross-sectional picture of the students’ psychological well-being, which is crucial to formulate a health policy for preventive and therapeutic purposes.

Silent information Regulators (SIRT1) gene stimulates antioxidants’ expression, repairs cells damaged by oxidative stress (OS), and prevents the cells’ dysfunction. In particular, the role of different Sirtuins, particularly SIRT1 in reproduction, has been widely studied over the past decade. Decreased SIRT 1 causes mitochondrial dysfunction by increasing Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS), lipid peroxidation, and DNA damage in both male and female gametes (Sperms and Oocytes), leading to infertility. In the female reproductive system, SIRT1 regulates proliferation and apoptosis in granulosa cells (GCs), and its down-regulation is associated with a reduced ovarian reserve. SIRT1 also modulates the stress response to OS in GCs by targeting a transcription factor vital for ovarian functions and maintenance.

Medical students have high levels of stress that could be due to the daily life stressors and the extra stress of academic burden. The present study investigated the perceived stress level as well as the reasons and sources of stress among medical students at a comparatively newly established medical college affiliated with King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (SA). The present study was carried out at Rabigh Medical College (RMC), KAU, Jeddah, and completed in 2015. The data was collected by an anonymous self-administered questionnaire that has three components: a list of 33 items of probable stressors, perceived stress scale, and demographic information and academics. The response rate in our study was 86% (152/176), the mean age was 20.35 ± 1.09, 77 (51%) were from preclinical years and 75 (49%) from clinical years. The mean PSS score among our participants was 28.5 ± 3.8 with a median of 28.0 (IQR 26.0–31.0) and 59.2% of participants were stressed. The mean PSS score 30.6 ± 4.4 for students with sibling > 5 was significantly higher as compared to the mean PSS score (27.9 ± 3.3) for students with sibling ≤5. Similarly, the mean PSS score (32.0 ± 3.4) of students with often/always occurrence of psychosocial stressors was higher as compared to the mean PSS score (28.3 ± 3.7) of those students with less than a frequent occurrence of stressors. Moreover, those students that were more stressed had lower marks in the last exam (< 80%) as compared to students with less stress who had higher marks (≥80%) (P < .05). Performance in practicals, examinations frequency, disappointment with the class lectures, lack of personal interest in medicine, lengthy academic curriculum/syllabus, worries about the future and periodic examinations performance were rated as severe. The logistic regression analysis showed that stress cases were linked with last exam marks [OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.64–2.48], number of siblings [OR 2.27, 95% CI 0.97–5.27], and academic stressor [OR 2.02, 95% CI 0.61–6.66] but no significant relationship was found. There were high-stress levels among the participants of this study, and the main stressors were academic-related.

This study intends to explore the predictors of misconceptions, knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning the COVID-19 pandemic among a sample of the Saudi population and we also assessed their approaches toward its overall impact. This online cross-sectional survey was conducted at the Faculty of Medicine, Rabigh, King Abdulaziz University (KAU) in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (SA). Participants were approached via social media (SM), and 2006 participants (953 [47.5%] females and 1053 [52.5%] males) were included in this study. SM was the leading source of information for 43.9% of the study participants. Most of the participants had various misconceptions such as “females are more vulnerable to develop this infection, rinsing the nose with saline and sipping water every 15 minutes protects against Coronavirus, flu and pneumonia vaccines protect against this virus.” About one-third of participants (31.7%) had self-reported disturbed social, mental, and psychological wellbeing due to the pandemic. Many participants became more religious during this pandemic. Two-thirds of the study participants (68.1%) had good knowledge scores. Attitudes were highly positive in 93.1%, and practice scores were adequate in 97.7% of the participants. Participants’ educational status was a predictor of high knowledge scores. Male gender and divorced status were predictors of low practice scores, and aged 51–61 years, private-sector jobs, and student status were predictors of high practice scores. Being Saudi was a predictor of a positive attitude, while the male gender and divorced status were predictors of a negative attitude. Higher education was a predictor of good concepts, while the older age and businessmen were predictors of misconceptions. Overall, our study participants had good knowledge, positive attitudes, and good practices, but several myths were also prevalent. Being a PhD and a Saudi national predicted high knowledge scores and positive attitudes, respectively. A higher education level was a predictor of good concepts, and students, private-sector jobs, and aged 51–61 years were predictors of high practice scores. Study participants had good understanding of the effects of this pandemic.

This cross-sectional study is aimed at assessing the quality of life in a cohort of breast cancer patients at the Oncology Department, King Abdulaziz University Hospital (KAUH), King Abdulaziz University (KAU), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (SA), and to differentiate QoL among different groups. Mean time since diagnosis was 3.97±1.90 years. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaires-Core30 and BR23 (EORTC QLQ-C30 & BR23) were used to assess QoL in breast cancer survivors. ANOVA and independent t-test (parametric tests) were used for the categorical variables and Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney tests used for non-parametric tests. Linear regression analysis was done to measure predictors' significance and to calculate the coefficient of determination. Two hundred and eighty-four patients completed the survey. Global health status and functional scales, in most of the domains, were high, while symptom scales were moderate-to-low for most items, showing better QoL. Insomnia and fatigue were the most disturbing symptoms. Patients exhibited higher scores for body image and future perspective, while the least score is for sexual functioning. Global health, physical functioning, and role functioning were better in the age group ≤50 years (p<0.05). Premenopausal and perimenopausal patients showed a better level of functioning as compared to postmenopausal patients (p = 0.001). Premenopausal patients scored higher for sexual enjoyment, as compared to peri- and post-menopausal patients (p = 0.04). Systemic therapy side effects were more evident in the breast conservative surgery group. Predictors explained 8% of the variation in Physical functioning (R-squared = 0.08). A predictor that had a remarkable influence on physical functioning, as compared to the other predictors in the model, was menopausal status (P = 0.02). So, it was concluded that the breast cancer patients visiting our institute had a better quality of life regarding overall global health status as well as functional and symptom scales. Some issues, for instance, fatigue, insomnia, hair loss, and others, warrant good supportive therapy.

Background: In the last two decades the world has experienced many outbreaks of infectious diseases including the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. COVID-19 was first reported in China and spread to more than 200 countries and territories. At present, there are no available treatment and vaccines for COVID-19. This study aimed to evaluate the global research trends in COVID-19 vaccine. Methods: On January 12, 2020, a comprehensive search of documents on COVID-19 was conducted in the Web of Science Core Collection database. HistCite^TM and VOSviewer softwares are used for citations and visualization mapping. Results: A total of 916 documents authored by 4,392 authors and published in 376 journals were included in the final analysis. Majority of the retrieved documents consisted of articles (n = 372, 40.6%). The most prolific authors were Dhama K (n = 10, 1.1%) and Hotez PJ (n = 10, 1.1%). The most active institution was the University of Oxford (n = 24, 2.6%). The leading journal in COVID-19 vaccine was Human Vaccine & Immunotherapeutics (n = 43, 4.7%). The most frequently used keywords were COVID (n = 597, 65.2%), and vaccine (n = 521, 56.9%). Furthermore, visualization mapping shows that COVID-19 was the most co-occurrence author keyword. The United States of America (USA) was the most productive country, 352 (38.4%). Conclusions: This is the first bibliometric study that provides detailed information about published literature on the COVID-19 vaccine. Majority of the publications were published in developed countries. The findings may useful for researchers and policymakers.