Objectives: The study aimed to analyze the core capacities to implement World Health Organization International Health Regulations (IHR) in 6 countries: Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and the Republic of Korea. Methods: Secondary data from relevant databases and reports, including the electronic State Party Self-Assessment Annual Reporting mechanism and global health security index, were used to assess health security in these countries. Descriptive statistics summarized the basic features of the scores, and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis wassubsequently performed to identify factors affecting health security scores while highlighting key similarities and differences between countries. Results: Early warning and event management emerged as the primary strength in most countries.Common opportunities included international commitments and immunization programs.In contrast, many countries shared weaknesses related to the policy, legal, and normative frameworks for IHR implementation, as well as challenges in human resources, chemical event management, and radiation emergency preparedness. Recurring threats involved issues such as biosafety, biosecurity, dual-use research and the culture of responsible science, infection control practices, coordination between public health and security authorities, laboratory supply chain vulnerabilities, and communication with healthcare workers during public health emergencies. Conclusion In order to counter future global health threats, countries should prioritize enhancing surveillance capacity (early warning and event management) as well as the immunization indicator (vaccination rates for human and animal diseases, including the national vaccine delivery system).

Objectives: The study aimed to analyze the core capacities to implement World Health Organization International Health Regulations (IHR) in 6 countries: Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and the Republic of Korea. Methods: Secondary data from relevant databases and reports, including the electronic State Party Self-Assessment Annual Reporting mechanism and global health security index, were used to assess health security in these countries. Descriptive statistics summarized the basic features of the scores, and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis wassubsequently performed to identify factors affecting health security scores while highlighting key similarities and differences between countries. Results: Early warning and event management emerged as the primary strength in most countries.Common opportunities included international commitments and immunization programs.In contrast, many countries shared weaknesses related to the policy, legal, and normative frameworks for IHR implementation, as well as challenges in human resources, chemical event management, and radiation emergency preparedness. Recurring threats involved issues such as biosafety, biosecurity, dual-use research and the culture of responsible science, infection control practices, coordination between public health and security authorities, laboratory supply chain vulnerabilities, and communication with healthcare workers during public health emergencies. Conclusion In order to counter future global health threats, countries should prioritize enhancing surveillance capacity (early warning and event management) as well as the immunization indicator (vaccination rates for human and animal diseases, including the national vaccine delivery system).

Objectives: The study aimed to analyze the core capacities to implement World Health Organization International Health Regulations (IHR) in 6 countries: Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and the Republic of Korea. Methods: Secondary data from relevant databases and reports, including the electronic State Party Self-Assessment Annual Reporting mechanism and global health security index, were used to assess health security in these countries. Descriptive statistics summarized the basic features of the scores, and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis wassubsequently performed to identify factors affecting health security scores while highlighting key similarities and differences between countries. Results: Early warning and event management emerged as the primary strength in most countries.Common opportunities included international commitments and immunization programs.In contrast, many countries shared weaknesses related to the policy, legal, and normative frameworks for IHR implementation, as well as challenges in human resources, chemical event management, and radiation emergency preparedness. Recurring threats involved issues such as biosafety, biosecurity, dual-use research and the culture of responsible science, infection control practices, coordination between public health and security authorities, laboratory supply chain vulnerabilities, and communication with healthcare workers during public health emergencies. Conclusion In order to counter future global health threats, countries should prioritize enhancing surveillance capacity (early warning and event management) as well as the immunization indicator (vaccination rates for human and animal diseases, including the national vaccine delivery system).

Objectives: The study aimed to analyze the core capacities to implement World Health Organization International Health Regulations (IHR) in 6 countries: Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and the Republic of Korea. Methods: Secondary data from relevant databases and reports, including the electronic State Party Self-Assessment Annual Reporting mechanism and global health security index, were used to assess health security in these countries. Descriptive statistics summarized the basic features of the scores, and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis wassubsequently performed to identify factors affecting health security scores while highlighting key similarities and differences between countries. Results: Early warning and event management emerged as the primary strength in most countries.Common opportunities included international commitments and immunization programs.In contrast, many countries shared weaknesses related to the policy, legal, and normative frameworks for IHR implementation, as well as challenges in human resources, chemical event management, and radiation emergency preparedness. Recurring threats involved issues such as biosafety, biosecurity, dual-use research and the culture of responsible science, infection control practices, coordination between public health and security authorities, laboratory supply chain vulnerabilities, and communication with healthcare workers during public health emergencies. Conclusion In order to counter future global health threats, countries should prioritize enhancing surveillance capacity (early warning and event management) as well as the immunization indicator (vaccination rates for human and animal diseases, including the national vaccine delivery system).

Objectives: The study aimed to analyze the core capacities to implement World Health Organization International Health Regulations (IHR) in 6 countries: Indonesia, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Dominican Republic, Ghana, and the Republic of Korea. Methods: Secondary data from relevant databases and reports, including the electronic State Party Self-Assessment Annual Reporting mechanism and global health security index, were used to assess health security in these countries. Descriptive statistics summarized the basic features of the scores, and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis wassubsequently performed to identify factors affecting health security scores while highlighting key similarities and differences between countries. Results: Early warning and event management emerged as the primary strength in most countries.Common opportunities included international commitments and immunization programs.In contrast, many countries shared weaknesses related to the policy, legal, and normative frameworks for IHR implementation, as well as challenges in human resources, chemical event management, and radiation emergency preparedness. Recurring threats involved issues such as biosafety, biosecurity, dual-use research and the culture of responsible science, infection control practices, coordination between public health and security authorities, laboratory supply chain vulnerabilities, and communication with healthcare workers during public health emergencies. Conclusion In order to counter future global health threats, countries should prioritize enhancing surveillance capacity (early warning and event management) as well as the immunization indicator (vaccination rates for human and animal diseases, including the national vaccine delivery system).

Objective: This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm (ROMA), Copenhagen Index (CPH-I), and Ovarian Adnexal Reporting and Data System (O-RADS) for the preoperative prediction of ovarian cancer (OC). Methods: A prospective cohort study was conducted on 462 patients diagnosed with ovarian tumors admitted to the Departments of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy Hospital, and Hue Central Hospital from May 2020 to December 2022. ROMA and CPH-I were calculated using cancer antigen 125 (CA125), human epididymal protein 4 (HE4) levels, and patient characteristics (age and menopausal status). O-RADS criteria were applied to describe ovarian tumor characteristics from ultrasound findings.Compared with histopathological results, the predictive values of ROMA, CPH-I, and O-RADS alone or in combination with CA125/HE4 for OC were calculated. Results: Among 462 patients, 381 had benign tumors, 11 had borderline tumors, and 50 had OC. At optimal cut-off points, ROMA’s and CPH-I’s areas under the curves (AUCs) were 0.880 (95% confidence interval [CI]=0.846–0.909) and 0.890 (95% CI=0.857–0.918), respectively, and ROMA and CPH-I sensitivities/specificities (Se/Sp) were 68.85%/95.01% and 77.05%/91.08%, respectively. O-RADS ≥3 yielded an AUCs of 0.949 (95% CI=0.924–0.968), with Se/Sp of 88.52%/88.98% (p<0.001). Combining O-RADS with CA125 demonstrated the highest predictive value, with AUCs of 0.969 (95% CI=0.949–0.983) and Se/Sp of 98.36%/86.09% (p<0.001). Conclusion The ROMA, CPH-I, O-RADS, O-RADS + CA125, and O-RADS + HE4 models demonstrated good predictive values for OC; the combination of O-RADS and CA125 yielded the highest values.

Objectives: The prevalence of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) has increased, particularly among individuals who have recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Health literacy is considered a “social vaccine” that helps people respond effectively to the pandemic. We aimed to investigate the association between long COVID-19 and PTSD, and to examine the modifying role of health literacy in this association. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted at 18 hospitals and health centers in Vietnamfrom December 2021 to October 2022. We recruited 4,463 individuals who had recovered from COVID-19 infection for at least 4 weeks. Participants provided information about their sociodemographics, clinical parameters, health-related behaviors, health literacy (usingthe 12-item short-form health literacy scale), long COVID-19 symptoms and PTSD (Impact Event Scale-Revised score of 33 or higher). Logistic regression models were used to examine associations and interactions. Results: Out of the study sample, 55.9% had long COVID-19 symptoms, and 49.6% had PTSD.Individuals with long COVID-19 symptoms had a higher likelihood of PTSD (odds ratio [OR], 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.63–2.12; p < 0.001). Higher health literacy was associated with a lower likelihood of PTSD (OR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97–0.99; p = 0.001). Compared to those without long COVID-19 symptoms and the lowest health literacy score, those with long COVID-19 symptoms and a 1-point health literacy increment had a 3% lower likelihood of PTSD (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.96–0.99; p = 0.001). Conclusion Health literacy was found to be a protective factor against PTSD and modified the negative impact of long COVID-19 symptoms on PTSD.