Lower respiratory infections are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality around the world. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study 2016, provides an up-to-date analysis of the burden of lower respiratory infections in 195 countries. This study assesses cases, deaths, and aetiologies spanning the past 26 years and shows how the burden of lower respiratory infection has changed in people of all ages. We used three separate modelling strategies for lower respiratory infections in GBD 2016: a Bayesian hierarchical ensemble modelling platform (Cause of Death Ensemble model), which uses vital registration, verbal autopsy data, and surveillance system data to predict mortality due to lower respiratory infections; a compartmental meta-regression tool (DisMod-MR), which uses scientific literature, population representative surveys, and health-care data to predict incidence, prevalence, and mortality; and modelling of counterfactual estimates of the population attributable fraction of lower respiratory infection episodes due to Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae type b, influenza, and respiratory syncytial virus. We calculated each modelled estimate for each age, sex, year, and location. We modelled the exposure level in a population for a given risk factor using DisMod-MR and a spatio-temporal Gaussian process regression, and assessed the effectiveness of targeted interventions for each risk factor in children younger than 5 years. We also did a decomposition analysis of the change in LRI deaths from 2000-16 using the risk factors associated with LRI in GBD 2016. In 2016, lower respiratory infections caused 652 572 deaths (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 586 475-720 612) in children younger than 5 years (under-5s), 1 080 958 deaths (943 749-1 170 638) in adults older than 70 years, and 2 377 697 deaths (2 145 584-2 512 809) in people of all ages, worldwide. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the leading cause of lower respiratory infection morbidity and mortality globally, contributing to more deaths than all other aetiologies combined in 2016 (1 189 937 deaths, 95% UI 690 445-1 770 660). Childhood wasting remains the leading risk factor for lower respiratory infection mortality among children younger than 5 years, responsible for 61·4% of lower respiratory infection deaths in 2016 (95% UI 45·7-69·6). Interventions to improve wasting, household air pollution, ambient particulate matter pollution, and expanded antibiotic use could avert one under-5 death due to lower respiratory infection for every 4000 children treated in the countries with the highest lower respiratory infection burden. Our findings show substantial progress in the reduction of lower respiratory infection burden, but this progress has not been equal across locations, has been driven by decreases in several primary risk factors, and might require more effort among elderly adults. By highlighting regions and populations with the highest burden, and the risk factors that could have the greatest effect, funders, policy makers, and programme implementers can more effectively reduce lower respiratory infections among the world's most susceptible populations. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

A key component of achieving universal health coverage is ensuring that all populations have access to quality health care. Examining where gains have occurred or progress has faltered across and within countries is crucial to guiding decisions and strategies for future improvement. We used the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study 2016 (GBD 2016) to assess personal health-care access and quality with the Healthcare Access and Quality (HAQ) Index for 195 countries and territories, as well as subnational locations in seven countries, from 1990 to 2016. Drawing from established methods and updated estimates from GBD 2016, we used 32 causes from which death should not occur in the presence of effective care to approximate personal health-care access and quality by location and over time. To better isolate potential effects of personal health-care access and quality from underlying risk factor patterns, we risk-standardised cause-specific deaths due to non-cancers by location-year, replacing the local joint exposure of environmental and behavioural risks with the global level of exposure. Supported by the expansion of cancer registry data in GBD 2016, we used mortality-to-incidence ratios for cancers instead of risk-standardised death rates to provide a stronger signal of the effects of personal health care and access on cancer survival. We transformed each cause to a scale of 0-100, with 0 as the first percentile (worst) observed between 1990 and 2016, and 100 as the 99th percentile (best); we set these thresholds at the country level, and then applied them to subnational locations. We applied a principal components analysis to construct the HAQ Index using all scaled cause values, providing an overall score of 0-100 of personal health-care access and quality by location over time. We then compared HAQ Index levels and trends by quintiles on the Socio-demographic Index (SDI), a summary measure of overall development. As derived from the broader GBD study and other data sources, we examined relationships between national HAQ Index scores and potential correlates of performance, such as total health spending per capita. In 2016, HAQ Index performance spanned from a high of 97·1 (95% UI 95·8-98·1) in Iceland, followed by 96·6 (94·9-97·9) in Norway and 96·1 (94·5-97·3) in the Netherlands, to values as low as 18·6 (13·1-24·4) in the Central African Republic, 19·0 (14·3-23·7) in Somalia, and 23·4 (20·2-26·8) in Guinea-Bissau. The pace of progress achieved between 1990 and 2016 varied, with markedly faster improvements occurring between 2000 and 2016 for many countries in sub-Saharan Africa and southeast Asia, whereas several countries in Latin America and elsewhere saw progress stagnate after experiencing considerable advances in the HAQ Index between 1990 and 2000. Striking subnational disparities emerged in personal health-care access and quality, with China and India having particularly large gaps between locations with the highest and lowest scores in 2016. In China, performance ranged from 91·5 (89·1-93·6) in Beijing to 48·0 (43·4-53·2) in Tibet (a 43·5-point difference), while India saw a 30·8-point disparity, from 64·8 (59·6-68·8) in Goa to 34·0 (30·3-38·1) in Assam. Japan recorded the smallest range in subnational HAQ performance in 2016 (a 4·8-point difference), whereas differences between subnational locations with the highest and lowest HAQ Index values were more than two times as high for the USA and three times as high for England. State-level gaps in the HAQ Index in Mexico somewhat narrowed from 1990 to 2016 (from a 20·9-point to 17·0-point difference), whereas in Brazil, disparities slightly increased across states during this time (a 17·2-point to 20·4-point difference). Performance on the HAQ Index showed strong linkages to overall development, with high and high-middle SDI countries generally having higher scores and faster gains for non-communicable diseases. Nonetheless, countries across the development spectrum saw substantial gains in some key health service areas from 2000 to 2016, most notably vaccine-preventable diseases. Overall, national performance on the HAQ Index was positively associated with higher levels of total health spending per capita, as well as health systems inputs, but these relationships were quite heterogeneous, particularly among low-to-middle SDI countries. GBD 2016 provides a more detailed understanding of past success and current challenges in improving personal health-care access and quality worldwide. Despite substantial gains since 2000, many low-SDI and middle-SDI countries face considerable challenges unless heightened policy action and investments focus on advancing access to and quality of health care across key health services, especially non-communicable diseases. Stagnating or minimal improvements experienced by several low-middle to high-middle SDI countries could reflect the complexities of re-orienting both primary and secondary health-care services beyond the more limited foci of the Millennium Development Goals. Alongside initiatives to strengthen public health programmes, the pursuit of universal health coverage hinges upon improving both access and quality worldwide, and thus requires adopting a more comprehensive view-and subsequent provision-of quality health care for all populations. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Middle East Respiratory Syndrome Corona Virus (MERS-CoV) outbreak in 2014 was associated with high public anxiety in the affected countries. Media speculations may have increased this psychological distress. The healthcare community was the most distressed because they were at the highest risk of infection. This study is the first to explore MERS-CoV epidemic impact on medical students' perception and determinants of their psychological distress during this outbreak. We randomly selected and surveyed 200 students from the College of Medicine at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. A predesigned questionnaire was answered by participants, and the collected data were statistically analyzed. One hundred and seventy-four (87%) responded. Female students had a significantly higher mean stress level than males (P < 0.001). Participants had a mean GAD score of 2.7 ± 3.1 and a median of 2. Perceived sufficiency of information score was the highest mean and median (17.4 ± 4.2 and 18 respectively). College and hospital announcements were the most common source of information (25.4%). One hundred and thirty-four (77%) reported minimal anxiety, thirty-two (18.4%) reported mild anxiety, 8 (4.6%) reported moderate anxiety, and none of them reported severe anxiety (score >14). The stress level (as reported on 1-10 scale) shows significant correlation with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) score. We found in this study that significant predictors in our model, in terms of more significant to the least, were: an increased self-report on hygienic habits, self-reported social avoidance, the generalized anxiety score and finally being female gander while other variables including numbers of resources access, agreeing with public fear and knowledge score on MERS-CoV all were found to be non-significant. However, the number of accessed resources, as per students, has borderline significant correlation with higher self-reported anxiety from MERS-CoV. Medical students' psychological needs during the MERS-CoV outbreak should be addressed appropriately. Our results highlight the need to establish psychological support programs for medical students during an infectious disease outbreak.

The global pandemic of coronavirus disease of 2019 (COVID-19) has led to unprecedented psychological stress on health workers (HCWs). We aimed to assess the psychological impact of COVID-19 on HCWs in comparison to the stress brought on by the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) epidemic in Saudi Arabia. Between February 5th and 16th, 2020, 811 health-care workers (HCWs) of a tertiary care teaching hospital were invited to fill a questionnaire regarding concerns and worries about the novel coronavirus pandemic, along with Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) Anxiety Severity screening tool. Out of 582 HCWs who completed the survey questionnaire (response rate of 71.8%), about 40% were exposed previously to MERS-CoV infected or suspected patients during a previous hospital outbreak. While there were no COVID-19 cases reported yet in Saudi Arabia at the time of data collection, still, the anxiety level from COVID-19 was significantly higher than that from MERS-CoV or seasonal influenza: 41.1% were more worried about COVID-19, 41.4% were similarly worried about both MERS-CoV and COVID-19, and 17.5% were more stressed by the previous MERS-CoV hospital outbreak. The most frequent concern was transmitting the infection to family and friends (2.71/5) than to themselves only (2.57/5). Pandemic and epidemic infectious diseases such as COVID-19 or MERS-CoV impose a significant level of anxiety and stress on healthcare workers who are caring of infected patients, with their main concern being the risk of transmitting the infection to their families or to acquire it themselves. Therefore, optimizing the compliance of healthcare workers with the proper infection prevention and control measures is paramount during the infectious disease outbreak, to ensure their safety, to decrease the likelihood of getting infected or transmitting the infection to others, and consequently to alleviate their psychological stress and anxiety.

This study aimed to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and intended practices of healthcare workers (HCWs) in Saudi Arabia towards ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) Chatbot, within the first three months after its launch. We also aimed to identify potential barriers to AI Chatbot adoption among healthcare professionals. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among 1057 HCWs in Saudi Arabia, distributed electronically via social media channels from 21 February to 6 March 2023. The survey evaluated HCWs’ familiarity with ChatGPT-3.5, their satisfaction, intended future use, and perceived usefulness in healthcare practice. Of the respondents, 18.4% had used ChatGPT for healthcare purposes, while 84.1% of non-users expressed interest in utilizing AI Chatbots in the future. Most participants (75.1%) were comfortable with incorporating ChatGPT into their healthcare practice. HCWs perceived the Chatbot to be useful in various aspects of healthcare, such as medical decision-making (39.5%), patient and family support (44.7%), medical literature appraisal (48.5%), and medical research assistance (65.9%). A majority (76.7%) believed ChatGPT could positively impact the future of healthcare systems. Nevertheless, concerns about credibility and the source of information provided by AI Chatbots (46.9%) were identified as the main barriers. Although HCWs recognize ChatGPT as a valuable addition to digital health in the early stages of adoption, addressing concerns regarding accuracy, reliability, and medicolegal implications is crucial. Therefore, due to their unreliability, the current forms of ChatGPT and other Chatbots should not be used for diagnostic or treatment purposes without human expert oversight. Ensuring the trustworthiness and dependability of AI Chatbots is essential for successful implementation in healthcare settings. Future research should focus on evaluating the clinical outcomes of ChatGPT and benchmarking its performance against other AI Chatbots.

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) chatbots have recently gained use in medical practice by health care practitioners. Interestingly, the output of these AI chatbots was found to have varying degrees of hallucination in content and references. Such hallucinations generate doubts about their output and their implementation. Objective: The aim of our study was to propose a reference hallucination score (RHS) to evaluate the authenticity of AI chatbots’ citations. Methods: Six AI chatbots were challenged with the same 10 medical prompts, requesting 10 references per prompt. The RHS is composed of 6 bibliographic items and the reference’s relevance to prompts’ keywords. RHS was calculated for each reference, prompt, and type of prompt (basic vs complex). The average RHS was calculated for each AI chatbot and compared across the different types of prompts and AI chatbots. Results: Bard failed to generate any references. ChatGPT 3.5 and Bing generated the highest RHS (score=11), while Elicit and SciSpace generated the lowest RHS (score=1), and Perplexity generated a middle RHS (score=7). The highest degree of hallucination was observed for reference relevancy to the prompt keywords (308/500, 61.6%), while the lowest was for reference titles (169/500, 33.8%). ChatGPT and Bing had comparable RHS (β coefficient=–0.069; P=.32), while Perplexity had significantly lower RHS than ChatGPT (β coefficient=–0.345; P<.001). AI chatbots generally had significantly higher RHS when prompted with scenarios or complex format prompts (β coefficient=0.486; P<.001). Conclusions: The variation in RHS underscores the necessity for a robust reference evaluation tool to improve the authenticity of AI chatbots. Further, the variations highlight the importance of verifying their output and citations. Elicit and SciSpace had negligible hallucination, while ChatGPT and Bing had critical hallucination levels. The proposed AI chatbots’ RHS could contribute to ongoing efforts to enhance AI’s general reliability in medical research.