Background: People consume nitrates, nitrites, nitrosamines, and NOCs compounds primarily through processed food. Many studies have yielded inconclusive results regarding the association between cancer and dietary intakes of nitrates and nitrites. This study aimed to quantify these associations across the reported literature thus far. Methods: We performed a systematic review following PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. A literature search was performed using Web of Science, Embase, PubMed, the Cochrane library, and google scholar up to January 2020. STATA version 12.0 was used to conduct meta-regression and a two-stage meta-analysis. Results: A total of 41 articles with 13 different cancer sites were used for analysis. Of these 13 cancer types/sites, meta-regression analysis showed that bladder and stomach cancer risk was greater, and that pancreatic cancer risk was lower with increasing nitrite intakes. Kidney and bladder cancer risk were both lower with increasing nitrate intakes. When comparing highest to lowest (reference) categories of intake, meta-analysis of studies showed that high nitrate intake was associated with an increased risk of thyroid cancer (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.77). When pooling all intake categories and comparing against the lowest (reference) category, higher nitrite intake was associated with an increased risk of glioma (OR = 1.12, 95% CI: 1.03, 1.22). No other associations between cancer risk and dietary intakes of nitrates or nitrites were observed. Conclusion: This study showed varied associations between site-specific cancer risks and dietary intakes of nitrate and nitrite. Glioma, bladder, and stomach cancer risks were higher and pancreatic cancer risk was lower with higher nitrite intakes, and thyroid cancer risk was higher and kidney cancer risk lower with higher nitrate intakes. These data suggest type- and site-specific effects of cancer risk, including protective effects, from dietary intakes of nitrate and nitrite.

Background: Patient prioritization is a strategy used to manage access to healthcare services. Patient prioritization tools (PPT) contribute to supporting the prioritization decision process, and to its transparency and fairness. Patient prioritization tools can take various forms and are highly dependent on the particular context of application. Consequently, the sets of criteria change from one context to another, especially when used in non-emergency settings. This paper systematically synthesizes and analyzes the published evidence concerning the development and challenges related to the validation and implementation of PPTs in non-emergency settings. Methods: We conducted a systematic mixed studies review. We searched evidence in five databases to select articles based on eligibility criteria, and information of included articles was extracted using an extraction grid. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The article selection process, data extraction, and quality appraisal were performed by at least two reviewers independently. Results: We included 48 studies listing 34 different patient prioritization tools. Most of them are designed for managing access to elective surgeries in hospital settings. Two-thirds of the tools were investigated based on reliability or validity. Inconclusive results were found regarding the impact of PPTs on patient waiting times. Advantages associated with PPT use were found mostly in relationship to acceptability of the tools by clinicians and increased transparency and equity for patients. Conclusions: This review describes the development and validation processes of PPTs used in non-urgent healthcare settings. Despite the large number of PPTs studied, implementation into clinical practice seems to be an open challenge. Based on the findings of this review, recommendations are proposed to develop, validate, and implement such tools in clinical settings. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42018107205

Waiting lists should be managed as fairly as possible to ensure that patients with greater or more urgent needs receive services first. Patient prioritization refers to the process of ranking referrals in a certain order based on various criteria with the aim of improving fairness and equity in the delivery of care. Despite the widespread use of patient prioritization tools (PPTs) in healthcare services, the existing literature on this subject has mainly focused on emergency settings. Evidence has not been synthesized with respect to all the non-emergency services. This review aims to perform a systematic synthesis of published evidence concerning (1) prioritization tools’ characteristics, (2) their metrological properties, and (3) their effect measures across non-emergency services. Five electronic databases will be searched (Cochrane Library, Ovid/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CINAHL). Eligibility criteria guiding data selection will be (1) qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods empirical studies; (2) patient prioritization in any non-emergency setting; and (3) discussing characteristic, metrological properties, or effect measures. Data will be sought to report tool’s format, description, population, setting, purpose, criteria, developer, metrological properties, and outcome measures. Two reviewers will independently screen, select, and extract data. Data will be synthesized with sequential exploratory design method. We will use the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) to assess the quality of articles included in the review. This systematic review will provide much-needed knowledge regarding patient prioritization tools. The results will benefit clinicians, decision-makers, and researchers by giving them a better understanding of the methods used to prioritize patients in clinical settings. PROSPERO CRD42018107205

There is ongoing scientific evidence pointing out the adverse effects of conflict on population health and development. Union of Comoros has experienced nearly two decades of political instability and military rule. This comprehensive review was carried out to ask whether the health crisis in Comoros is attributable to the consequences of the chronic political instability. This study involved a series of semi-structured interviews with key informants complemented by a comprehensive literature search of electronic databases and grey literature. A literature search was performed using all identified keywords associated with health indicators in Comoros to identify potential eligible publications in both English and French from 1975 to July 2020. The analysis demonstrated that political instability and lack of proper leadership from the Government undermine the establishment of health policies which contributed dramatically to the decline in health performance. Additionally, the resurgence and emergence of old and new diseases such as cholera, chikungunya, malaria, HIV/AIDS as indicators of inadequate health services were most likely during political turmoil. Data also showed an out-migration of the health workforce and an increased overseas medical treatment demand, which indicate less attractive working conditions and weak health systems in the country. Meanwhile, an increasing performance of health status indicators was observed after the comprehensive peace process of the 2000-Fomboni Declaration. The chronic political instability in Comoros has contributed to the health crisis facing the Union of Comoros. It has hampered the implementation of proper institutions, which might guarantee the socio-economic development and prosperity of the population. Further studies were needed to evaluate the health burden associated with the two decades of political instability and military rule.

Aim: This study evaluated the underlying factors associated with poor tuberculosis (TB) treatment outcomes among patients attending health care facilities in Galkayo, Puntland, Somalia. Methods: An institution-based cross-sectional study was conducted between 2016 and 2017 in three selected TB clinics. Data were collected from 400 TB patients, through medical record review and structured questionnaire. Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: Of the 400 TB respondents, 57.3% were new cases, 12.3% had smear-negative TB and 12.5% had extrapulmonary TB. The median age was (35.66 ± 13.16) with majority being male (65.5%). Overall, 85% of patients were successfully treated, 9.7% failed and 5.3% defaulted. Multivariate analysis revealed that patient’s body weight (odds ratio [OR]: 1.078); diabetes (OR: 8.022); family size (OR: 3.851); patients’ delay in diagnosis (OR: 11.946); frequency of receiving anti-TB medication (OR: 9.068); smoker (OR: 5.723); category of patients (retreatment versus new, OR: 5.504; retreatment versus transfer in, OR: 4.957); health facilities (OR: 6.716) and treatment duration (OR: 132.091) were independent factors associated with poor TB outcomes. Conclusions: Our findings highlight the need to improve TB services for vulnerable groups. They also emphasize the need for health system strengthening, public awareness and risk of treatment interruption. This may reduce both patients’ delay in seeking care and TB treatment failure in Galkayo district.

Introduction The adoption of business process model notation (BPMN) in modelling healthcare trajectory can enhance the efficiency and efficacy of healthcare organisations, improve patient outcomes while restraining costs. Existing systematic reviews have been inconclusive regarding the effectiveness of BPMN in modelling healthcare trajectory. The aims of this scoping review are to map and aggregate existing evidence on the benefits and limitations associated with BPMN in healthcare trajectory, highlighting areas of improvement on BPMN and its extensions in healthcare. We will assess BPMN’s ability to model key dimensions or concepts of the healthcare process and to meet the needs of stakeholders. The review will highlight the advantages of this approach to support clinical activities and decision-making processes associated with the healthcare trajectory, proposing a conceptual framework for improving the use of BPMN in healthcare. Methods and analysis This study will be performed in accordance with the methodological framework suggested by Arksey and O’Malley. A wide range of electronic databases and grey literature sources will be systematically searched using predefined keywords. The review will include any study design focusing on the application of the BPMN approach for optimising healthcare trajectories, published in either English or French from 1 January 2004 to 9 December 2021. Two reviewers will independently screen titles, abstracts and full-text articles and select articles meeting the inclusion criteria. A customised data extraction form will be used to extract data. The results will be presented using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis on qualitative data. Ethics and dissemination Research ethics approval is not required. Review findings will be used to advance understanding about BPMN, its extensions and application in healthcare trajectory optimisation. The review will develop recommendations on tailoring BPMN strategies for optimising care pathways and decision-making processes. Findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, conferences and discussions with relevant organisations and stakeholders.