Objectives. To assess adherence to long-term medications among patients in family medicine clinics and to evaluate relationship between adherence, beliefs about medications, medication information adequacy, and other factors. Methods. Interviewer assisted survey was conducted to assess adherence using the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8), beliefs about medications using beliefs about medicine questionnaire (BMQ), and the patients’ perception of medication information adequacy. Results. Of the 408 participants, 56.9% reported low adherence. Pearson’s bivariate correlation showed positive association between MMAS-8 score and BMQ-specific necessity (r=0.526 P<0.001) and the perceived information adequacy (r=0.568 P<0.001), and there was negative association between adherence score and BMQ specific concerns, general overuse, and harm (r=-0.647, -0.466, and -0.663, resp.) (P<0.001). Multivariable analysis revealed that age, number of medications, number of medical conditions, specific necessity and concerns beliefs, general harm beliefs, and perceived adequacy of medication information were independent predictor of adherence. Furthermore, specific beliefs explain 27.7% of the variance in adherence, while medication information adequacy explains 32.3% of the variance in adherence. Conclusion. The prevalence of low adherence among patients on long-term medications is high and it is related to negative beliefs about medications and to inadequate information given to patients about their medications.

Introduction: The spread of health-related information across the internet necessitates an evaluation of public eHealth literacy, trust in different health information sources, including healthcare providers, and how eHealth literacy is related to trust in different sources. Methods: 407 individuals participated in a web-based survey in the Tabuk region of Saudi Arabia. Univariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationships between eHealth literacy and demographic variables, and multiple linear regression was used to measure the relationship between eHealth literacy and trust in health information sources after adjustment for demographic factors. Results: The average eHealth literacy of the respondents was 27.17 out of 40. eHealth literacy levels were higher among females, younger age groups, those in the higher-education category, and those with a chronic disease or currently on medication. For 51.9% of participants, physicians and healthcare workers were their main source of health information, while 40% considered the internet their main source. None of the study participants perceived physicians and healthcare workers as untrustworthy, and social media was the least trusted source. eHealth literacy was not related to trust in physicians and health workers but was positively associated with trust in specialized health websites and negatively associated with trust in social media. Conclusions: The findings suggest that the public tends to prefer and trust physicians and other healthcare workers as a primary source of health information, regardless of their eHealth literacy levels. A higher eHealth literacy level was associated with trust in specialized health websites and distrust in social media.

Background: Smoking during pregnancy is a significant issue because of its impact on maternal and fetal health. This study aimed to ascertain the effects of smoking cessation programs on the smoking abstinence rate and pregnancy outcomes. Methods: A meta-analysis of twenty-one RCTs was carried out in accordance with PRISMA standards. The meta-analysis comprised 8149 pregnant smokers. With RevMan (version 5.4), the pooled effect of RR for different smoking cessation interventions was determined. Using the GRADE approach, the certainty was evaluated. I² statistics and sensitivity analysis were utilized to measure heterogeneity. Egger’s test and funnel plot analysis were used to assess publication bias. Results: The pregnant women who received cognitive-behavioral counseling and financial incentives recognized a significant rise in their smoking abstinence rate (RR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02–1.28, p = 0.03 and RR: 2.37, 95% CI: 1.92–2.93, p < 0.001), but there was no significant difference observed among other behavioral approaches or pharmaceutical therapy. Fetuses born to women in the intervention group had significantly larger birth weights (MD = 94.73, 95% CI = (41.18–58.27), p < 0.001. Conclusions: Pregnant women respond well to cognitive-behavioral counseling and financial incentives for quitting smoking, which improve pregnancy outcomes like birth weight.

Purpose: This study assessed public perceptions of medical errors in the Tabuk region, Saudi Arabia, and explored how misconceptions about medical complications influence their views on medical errors. Methods: A cross-sectional study surveyed 432 participants via an online questionnaire. The collected data included demographics, participants’ knowledge, experiences, and perceptions of medical errors, and the accuracy in distinguishing errors from complications. Descriptive and inferential statistics were used for analysis. Results: Overall, 37.5% of participants reported having knowledge of medical errors, and 31.5% had directly or indirectly experienced them. 62.4% believed that medical errors are common or very common, and 84% viewed medical errors as a real problem in the healthcare sector. Misdiagnosis (55.6%) was perceived as the most common type of error. While participants demonstrated 71.1% overall accuracy in differentiating medical errors from complications, 62% erroneously classified severe complications (internal bleeding due to blood thinner treatment) as errors. After controlling for confounders, regression analysis demonstrated that greater accuracy in differentiation error from complications was negatively associated with negative views on medical errors (β = − 0.373, p < 0.001), though misconceptions alone explained only 16.4% of the variance in these views. Physicians were deemed most responsible for errors, while inadequate preventive measures, low competency, negligence, and lack of medical staff monitoring were identified as key contributors by the participants. Conclusion: Negative views on medical errors stemmed in part from misconceptions about medical complications. Targeted educational initiatives clarifying the nature of medical errors and the error-complication distinctions are needed. These measures are essential to fostering trust, improving the accuracy of errors reporting and advancing collaborative safety efforts. The findings from this research advocate for public engagement in healthcare safety initiatives, bridging the divide between patient expectations and healthcare realities.

Background/Objectives: Central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO) is a vision-threatening condition with limited evidence-based treatment options. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) has emerged as a potential intervention, but its efficacy remains debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the therapeutic efficacy and safety of HBOT in CRAO. Methods: Relevant studies were identified across seven databases using optimized Boolean and MeSH-based strategies. Eligible studies evaluated HBOT in CRAO and reported visual or safety outcomes. Extracted data included demographics, intervention details, treatment timing, visual acuity outcomes, and adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I. Visual acuity outcomes were standardized to logMAR whenever directly reported or convertible, and subgroup analyses were stratified by HBOT initiation time (12 h), study type, and baseline visual severity when reported. A random-effects model was used, and pooled estimates were expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Twelve studies were included. The pooled efficacy analysis favored HBOT (OR = 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26–0.87; p = 0.02), although heterogeneity was substantial (Tau² = 0.64; I² = 78%). Stratified synthesis showed that studies in which HBOT was initiated within 12 h consistently reported greater visual improvement, whereas delayed or variably timed treatment showed attenuated and inconsistent benefits. After outcome harmonization, studies reporting logMAR-compatible data generally demonstrated clinically relevant visual improvement, while adverse-event rates did not differ significantly between HBOT and non-HBOT groups (OR = 0.70; 95% CI: 0.43–1.16; p = 0.17; I² = 0%). Conclusions: HBOT appears most beneficial when initiated early, particularly within the first 12 h. However, heterogeneity in treatment timing, study design, and baseline severity reporting limits the certainty of these results and supports the need for standardized outcome reporting and protocol-driven prospective studies.