Objective: Hundreds of countries have implemented lockdown policies to slow the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but the impact of these measures on maternal mental health is not well understood. Methods: This study integrated a stress-process model to examine the pathways from lockdown-related stressors to prenatal psychological outcomes, with COVID-19 coping strategies (COP) and self-efficacy in managing negative affect (NEG) as mediators and lockdown duration, hours on pandemic-related information, and number of pregnancies as moderators. Pregnant women in Shanghai completed the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, COVID-19 Coping Scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test and modify the hypothetical model, and moderated mediation and slope analyses were undertaken. Results: In the final SEM demonstrating satisfactory fit, three stressors—decreased household income, insufficient daily supplies, and acquired infections—showed positive direct relationships with NEG and COP. Acquired infections, NEG, and COP were identified as direct predictors of mental health outcomes. The relationship between these three stressors and mental health was mediated by NEG and COP. Additionally, the number of pregnancies moderated the mediating effect of COP; this effect was more pronounced among first-time pregnant women than those with multiple pregnancies. Conclusion This study provides insights into how lockdown measures impact psychological outcomes in pregnant women quarantined at home. Interventions aimed at increasing coping strategies may be more effective for primiparous women during future public health emergencies.

Objective: Hundreds of countries have implemented lockdown policies to slow the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but the impact of these measures on maternal mental health is not well understood. Methods: This study integrated a stress-process model to examine the pathways from lockdown-related stressors to prenatal psychological outcomes, with COVID-19 coping strategies (COP) and self-efficacy in managing negative affect (NEG) as mediators and lockdown duration, hours on pandemic-related information, and number of pregnancies as moderators. Pregnant women in Shanghai completed the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, COVID-19 Coping Scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test and modify the hypothetical model, and moderated mediation and slope analyses were undertaken. Results: In the final SEM demonstrating satisfactory fit, three stressors—decreased household income, insufficient daily supplies, and acquired infections—showed positive direct relationships with NEG and COP. Acquired infections, NEG, and COP were identified as direct predictors of mental health outcomes. The relationship between these three stressors and mental health was mediated by NEG and COP. Additionally, the number of pregnancies moderated the mediating effect of COP; this effect was more pronounced among first-time pregnant women than those with multiple pregnancies. Conclusion This study provides insights into how lockdown measures impact psychological outcomes in pregnant women quarantined at home. Interventions aimed at increasing coping strategies may be more effective for primiparous women during future public health emergencies.

Objective: Hundreds of countries have implemented lockdown policies to slow the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but the impact of these measures on maternal mental health is not well understood. Methods: This study integrated a stress-process model to examine the pathways from lockdown-related stressors to prenatal psychological outcomes, with COVID-19 coping strategies (COP) and self-efficacy in managing negative affect (NEG) as mediators and lockdown duration, hours on pandemic-related information, and number of pregnancies as moderators. Pregnant women in Shanghai completed the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, COVID-19 Coping Scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test and modify the hypothetical model, and moderated mediation and slope analyses were undertaken. Results: In the final SEM demonstrating satisfactory fit, three stressors—decreased household income, insufficient daily supplies, and acquired infections—showed positive direct relationships with NEG and COP. Acquired infections, NEG, and COP were identified as direct predictors of mental health outcomes. The relationship between these three stressors and mental health was mediated by NEG and COP. Additionally, the number of pregnancies moderated the mediating effect of COP; this effect was more pronounced among first-time pregnant women than those with multiple pregnancies. Conclusion This study provides insights into how lockdown measures impact psychological outcomes in pregnant women quarantined at home. Interventions aimed at increasing coping strategies may be more effective for primiparous women during future public health emergencies.

Objective: Hundreds of countries have implemented lockdown policies to slow the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but the impact of these measures on maternal mental health is not well understood. Methods: This study integrated a stress-process model to examine the pathways from lockdown-related stressors to prenatal psychological outcomes, with COVID-19 coping strategies (COP) and self-efficacy in managing negative affect (NEG) as mediators and lockdown duration, hours on pandemic-related information, and number of pregnancies as moderators. Pregnant women in Shanghai completed the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, COVID-19 Coping Scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test and modify the hypothetical model, and moderated mediation and slope analyses were undertaken. Results: In the final SEM demonstrating satisfactory fit, three stressors—decreased household income, insufficient daily supplies, and acquired infections—showed positive direct relationships with NEG and COP. Acquired infections, NEG, and COP were identified as direct predictors of mental health outcomes. The relationship between these three stressors and mental health was mediated by NEG and COP. Additionally, the number of pregnancies moderated the mediating effect of COP; this effect was more pronounced among first-time pregnant women than those with multiple pregnancies. Conclusion This study provides insights into how lockdown measures impact psychological outcomes in pregnant women quarantined at home. Interventions aimed at increasing coping strategies may be more effective for primiparous women during future public health emergencies.

Objective: Hundreds of countries have implemented lockdown policies to slow the spread of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), but the impact of these measures on maternal mental health is not well understood. Methods: This study integrated a stress-process model to examine the pathways from lockdown-related stressors to prenatal psychological outcomes, with COVID-19 coping strategies (COP) and self-efficacy in managing negative affect (NEG) as mediators and lockdown duration, hours on pandemic-related information, and number of pregnancies as moderators. Pregnant women in Shanghai completed the Regulatory Emotional Self-Efficacy Scale, COVID-19 Coping Scale, Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale-21. Structural equation modeling (SEM) was used to test and modify the hypothetical model, and moderated mediation and slope analyses were undertaken. Results: In the final SEM demonstrating satisfactory fit, three stressors—decreased household income, insufficient daily supplies, and acquired infections—showed positive direct relationships with NEG and COP. Acquired infections, NEG, and COP were identified as direct predictors of mental health outcomes. The relationship between these three stressors and mental health was mediated by NEG and COP. Additionally, the number of pregnancies moderated the mediating effect of COP; this effect was more pronounced among first-time pregnant women than those with multiple pregnancies. Conclusion This study provides insights into how lockdown measures impact psychological outcomes in pregnant women quarantined at home. Interventions aimed at increasing coping strategies may be more effective for primiparous women during future public health emergencies.

Objective:To investigate the pathways involved in bisphenol S(BPS)and bisphenol F(BPF)induced male reproductive injury by bioinformatics methods and experimental verification.Methods:Bioinformatics analysis was conducted to screen the genes related to male reproductive system diseases associated with BPF and BPS from the Comparative Toxicogenomics Database(CTD).Functional enrichment using Gene Ontology(GO)and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes(KEGG)pathway enrichment analysis were performed to predict potential signaling pathways and key genes.Cell counting kit-8(CCK-8)method was used to assess the cell viability in various groups treated with different concentrations of BPS and BPF(1×10-3,1×10-2,1×10-1,1×100,1×101,and 1×102 μmol·L-1).TM3 cells were divided into control group(0.1％DMSO),different doses of BPS groups,and different doses of BPF groups.The cells were treated with 20,40,and 80 μmol·L-1 of BPS and BPF for 72 h,respectively.Real-time fluorescence quantitative PCR(RT-qPCR)and Western blotting method were used to detect the expression levels of key genes mRNA and proteins in various groups.Results:The bioinformatics analysis results revealed that 507 and 447 male systemic disease genes related to BPS and BPF were screened by CTD,respectively.The GO enrichment analysis results showed that the selected genes were primarily enriched in biological processes(BP)such as reproductive system development and reproductive structure development.The KEGG pathway analysis results indicated that these genes were significantly enriched in signaling pathways such as phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/protein kinase B(PI3K/AKT),hypoxia-inducible factor-1(HIF-1),and cellular senescence(P＜0.001).The CCK-8 method results showed that compared with control group,the cell viabilities in 1× 102 μmol·L-1 BPF and BPS groups were significantly decreased(P＜0.05),while the viabilities of TM3 cells in other groups had no significant changes(P＞0.05).After BPS treatment,compared with control group,the expression levels of PI3K,AKT,hypoxia-inducible factor-1α(HIF-1α),and CREB-binding protein(CBP)mRNA in low,medium,and high doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.05),the expression levels of PI3K protein were decreased(P＜0.05),the expression levels of B-cell lymphoma-2-associated X protein(Bax)protein were increased(P＜0.05),and the expression levels of serine protease inhibitor clade B,member 10(SERPINB10)mRNA were increased(P＜0.01);the expression levels of Bax and intraflagellar transport 80 homolog(IFT80)mRNA in the cells in medium and high doses of BPS groups were increased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of B-cell lymphoma-2(Bcl-2)mRNA and protein in low and high doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of additional sex combs like 2(ASXL2)mRNA in low and medium doses of BPS groups were decreased(P＜0.01).After BPF treatment,compared with control group,the expression levels of Bcl-2,HIF-1α,and structural maintenance of chromosomes protein 1B(SMC1B)mRNA in low,medium,and high doses of BPF groups were decreased(P＜0.05),and the expression levels of IFT80 mRNA(P＜0.01)and Bax protein(P＜0.01)were increased;the expression levels of PI3K,AKT,and ring finger protein 130(RNF130)mRNA in low and high doses of BPF groups were decreased(P＜0.05);the expression level of CBP mRNA in medium dose of BPF group was decreased(P＜0.05),while the expression level of RNF130 mRNA was increased(P＜0.05);the expression levels of PI3K and Bcl-2 proteins in high dose of BPF group were decreased(P＜0.05).Conclusion:BPF and BPS may cause cell cytotoxicity and impair male reproductive health through PI3K/AKT and HIF-1 signaling pathways.RNF130 and SMC1B may be important targets for their induction of male reproductive toxicity.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.

Objective It conducted a rapid health technology assessment to evaluate the comparative safety,efficacy and economy of tumor treating fields(TTFields)combined with temozolomide treatment versus temozolomide(TMZ)alone for patients with glioblastoma(GBM).Methods It provided an extensive electronic search of databases,including PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI,and WanFang Data,to collect clinical evidence and health economic evaluations related to the,safety,efficacy,and economy of TTFields for Glioblastoma patients.The search covered literature from inception to July,2023,and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies.Descriptive analyses and data summaries were performed.Results A total of 19 references were included,comprising 5 randomized controlled trials,3 retrospective studies,8 systematic reviews or meta-analyses,and 3 cost-effectiveness analysis(CEA)studies.The quality of the literature evidence was heterogeneous.Recent meta-analyses mostly support the conclusion that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment provides a survival benefit compared to standard TMZ alone.However,the cost-effectiveness analysis literature from 2 countries showed different results,likely due to differences in socioeconomic levels,health systems,and heterogeneity in sources,model selection,and parameter selection.The majority of evidence supports the benefits of TTFields combined with TMZ for the treatment of GBM patients,but the results of CEAs tend to favor the view that this therapy is not cost-effective.Conclusion Current evidence indicates that TTFields combined with TMZ treatment have better safety and efficacy.However,there is still no consensus on whether it is cost-effective.