Objective: The clinical presentation of depressive disorders might be influenced by age, and its diagnosis and treatment can be affected by ageism-related bias. A network analysis can reveal symptom patterns unrecognized by the reductionistic approach. Therefore, this study explores the network structure of depression and anxiety symptoms in older Asian patients with depressive disorders and examines age-related differences in the context of ageism. Methods: We used data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3 study and included 2,785 psychiatric patients from 11 Asian countries. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7. Network analyses were conducted to identify symptom interconnections and centrality among older (>65 years), middle-aged (35–64 years), and young (18–34 years) adult groups. The network structures were also compared using a network comparison test. Results: Depressed mood was the most central symptom across all age groups. Network comparisons revealed no significant structural differences among the three age groups, despite several variations in terms of global strength. The network structure of the older group was characterized by strong interconnections between somatic symptoms (insomnia-energy) and core depressive symptoms (little interest or pleasure-feelings of hopelessness). Conclusion This study reveals that the network structures of depression and anxiety symptoms have relatively consistent interconnections across age groups, despite subtle age-based differences. Specifically, older adults tend to present anxiety and depression symptoms as physical complaints. These findings challenge ageist stereotypes and advocate for inclusive, age-neutral approaches to treatment.

Objective: The clinical presentation of depressive disorders might be influenced by age, and its diagnosis and treatment can be affected by ageism-related bias. A network analysis can reveal symptom patterns unrecognized by the reductionistic approach. Therefore, this study explores the network structure of depression and anxiety symptoms in older Asian patients with depressive disorders and examines age-related differences in the context of ageism. Methods: We used data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3 study and included 2,785 psychiatric patients from 11 Asian countries. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7. Network analyses were conducted to identify symptom interconnections and centrality among older (>65 years), middle-aged (35–64 years), and young (18–34 years) adult groups. The network structures were also compared using a network comparison test. Results: Depressed mood was the most central symptom across all age groups. Network comparisons revealed no significant structural differences among the three age groups, despite several variations in terms of global strength. The network structure of the older group was characterized by strong interconnections between somatic symptoms (insomnia-energy) and core depressive symptoms (little interest or pleasure-feelings of hopelessness). Conclusion This study reveals that the network structures of depression and anxiety symptoms have relatively consistent interconnections across age groups, despite subtle age-based differences. Specifically, older adults tend to present anxiety and depression symptoms as physical complaints. These findings challenge ageist stereotypes and advocate for inclusive, age-neutral approaches to treatment.

Objective: The clinical presentation of depressive disorders might be influenced by age, and its diagnosis and treatment can be affected by ageism-related bias. A network analysis can reveal symptom patterns unrecognized by the reductionistic approach. Therefore, this study explores the network structure of depression and anxiety symptoms in older Asian patients with depressive disorders and examines age-related differences in the context of ageism. Methods: We used data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3 study and included 2,785 psychiatric patients from 11 Asian countries. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7. Network analyses were conducted to identify symptom interconnections and centrality among older (>65 years), middle-aged (35–64 years), and young (18–34 years) adult groups. The network structures were also compared using a network comparison test. Results: Depressed mood was the most central symptom across all age groups. Network comparisons revealed no significant structural differences among the three age groups, despite several variations in terms of global strength. The network structure of the older group was characterized by strong interconnections between somatic symptoms (insomnia-energy) and core depressive symptoms (little interest or pleasure-feelings of hopelessness). Conclusion This study reveals that the network structures of depression and anxiety symptoms have relatively consistent interconnections across age groups, despite subtle age-based differences. Specifically, older adults tend to present anxiety and depression symptoms as physical complaints. These findings challenge ageist stereotypes and advocate for inclusive, age-neutral approaches to treatment.

Objective: The clinical presentation of depressive disorders might be influenced by age, and its diagnosis and treatment can be affected by ageism-related bias. A network analysis can reveal symptom patterns unrecognized by the reductionistic approach. Therefore, this study explores the network structure of depression and anxiety symptoms in older Asian patients with depressive disorders and examines age-related differences in the context of ageism. Methods: We used data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3 study and included 2,785 psychiatric patients from 11 Asian countries. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7. Network analyses were conducted to identify symptom interconnections and centrality among older (>65 years), middle-aged (35–64 years), and young (18–34 years) adult groups. The network structures were also compared using a network comparison test. Results: Depressed mood was the most central symptom across all age groups. Network comparisons revealed no significant structural differences among the three age groups, despite several variations in terms of global strength. The network structure of the older group was characterized by strong interconnections between somatic symptoms (insomnia-energy) and core depressive symptoms (little interest or pleasure-feelings of hopelessness). Conclusion This study reveals that the network structures of depression and anxiety symptoms have relatively consistent interconnections across age groups, despite subtle age-based differences. Specifically, older adults tend to present anxiety and depression symptoms as physical complaints. These findings challenge ageist stereotypes and advocate for inclusive, age-neutral approaches to treatment.

Objective: The clinical presentation of depressive disorders might be influenced by age, and its diagnosis and treatment can be affected by ageism-related bias. A network analysis can reveal symptom patterns unrecognized by the reductionistic approach. Therefore, this study explores the network structure of depression and anxiety symptoms in older Asian patients with depressive disorders and examines age-related differences in the context of ageism. Methods: We used data from the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Patterns for Antidepressants, Phase 3 study and included 2,785 psychiatric patients from 11 Asian countries. Depression and anxiety symptoms were assessed using the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 and Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7. Network analyses were conducted to identify symptom interconnections and centrality among older (>65 years), middle-aged (35–64 years), and young (18–34 years) adult groups. The network structures were also compared using a network comparison test. Results: Depressed mood was the most central symptom across all age groups. Network comparisons revealed no significant structural differences among the three age groups, despite several variations in terms of global strength. The network structure of the older group was characterized by strong interconnections between somatic symptoms (insomnia-energy) and core depressive symptoms (little interest or pleasure-feelings of hopelessness). Conclusion This study reveals that the network structures of depression and anxiety symptoms have relatively consistent interconnections across age groups, despite subtle age-based differences. Specifically, older adults tend to present anxiety and depression symptoms as physical complaints. These findings challenge ageist stereotypes and advocate for inclusive, age-neutral approaches to treatment.

Upper limb amputation leads to significant physical and psychosocial burden; however, it remains underrepresented in global epidemiological and rehabilitation studies. This study aimed to systematically review the global epidemiological data on upper limb amputation, focusing on its prevalence, incidence, anatomical levels, and etiology. According to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Regional Information Sharing Systems (up to May 2023). Two authors independently selected the studies, assessed their methodological quality, and summarized the evidence. Nineteen studies were finally included in this study. The prevalence of major upper limb amputation was higher in individuals with disabilities than in the general population. The prevalence in general population was 11.6 per 100,000 adults between 2006 and 2008 in Norway, whereas the prevalence in individuals with disabilities was 6.9 per 1,000 individuals in 2011 and increased to 11.3 per 1,000 individuals in 2020 in South Korea. The incidence rates were generally higher in the occupational population than in the general population. Below-elbow amputation was consistently the most common major amputation level reported. Although traumatic causes were predominant, medical conditions substantially contributed to upper limb impairment among individuals with disabilities. Upper limb amputation presents significant global variations in prevalence, incidence, anatomical level, and cause. The scarcity of standardized, disaggregated data limits effective planning for prosthetic services and rehabilitation. Future studies should prioritize comprehensive data collection to support equitable healthcare delivery and inform prosthetic innovation.

Objectives: ：This study aimed to investigate the effects of anxiety sensitivity and distress overtolerance onposttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS), and examined the role of brooding and reflection as a mediator. Methods: ：A self-reported data of 216 psychiatric outpatients was analyzed using structural equation modeling. The questionnaires included are Korean Anxiety Sensitivity Index-3, Korean version of the Distress Overtolerance Scale, Korean-Ruminative Response Scale, and Impact of Event Scale-Revised Korean Version. Results: ：Anxiety sensitivity and distress overtolerance positively predicted PTSS. Also, the mediating effects of brooding in the relationship between anxiety sensitivity and PTSS, and distress overtolerance and PTSSwere significant. Conversely, reflection did not significantly mediate the relationships between anxiety sensitivi-ty or distress overtolerance, and PTSS. Conclusions ：The results drawn from this study highlighted the differential roles of brooding and reflectionin the mediating role. Findings suggest the important role of brooding as a mechanism mediating the relationship between anxiety sensitivity and PTSS, as well as distress overtolerance and PTSS.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.