Yemen crisis, which has been going on for more than six years, represents one of the most gruesome human plights in the modern history, especially children.

This research aimed to present a comprehensive view of Yemeni children’s studies during the ongoing war period, to come up with a comprehensive base that concerns humanitarians, researchers, decision-makers, and general public at large about the reality of the predicament of Yemeni child.

We searched databases and identified 373 articles, of which 68 were included in this review. Review of literature between 2014 and 2020 is taken from academic sources, multilateral organizations, donors, and governmental and non-governmental organizations. The data are analyzed by date and governorates.

We chose 68 articles and divided them according to the diseases and health conditions as follows: infectious diseases (15 studies), non-infectious diseases (10 studies), blood-related diseases (7 studies), oral and dental problems (12 studies), accidents and injuries (2 studies), health system (16 studies), family and community (6 studies). Moreover, the studies were divided geographically as follows: 7 studies that were almost comprehensive for all governorates; additional studies were conducted for Amanat Al Asimah (21 studies), Taiz (12 studies), Aden and Al Hudaydah (7 studies for each), Dhamar and Ibb (6 studies for each), Abyan and Lahij (2 study for each). As for Al Bayda, Marib, Sana’a, and Socotra, each of them had one study.

Our assessment revealed that the ongoing Yemen crisis is underrated and largely neglected. The studies conducted so far do match the ground reality both in terms of inclusiveness and numbers.

Despite recent interest in community-based screening programs to detect undiagnosed cognitive disorder, little is known about whether screening leads to further diagnostic evaluation, or the effects of such programs in terms of actual changes in patient or caregiver behavior. This study followed up informants of older adults (i.e. caregivers of patients who completed informant-based screening regarding the patient) following participation in a study screening for undiagnosed memory problems, to explore uptake of further diagnostic evaluation or treatment, advance planning or preparations, lifestyle changes, medication adherence, and use of support services.

A total of 140 informants of older adult patients were surveyed four to fifteen months following participation in a cognitive screening study. The informants were interviewed with a study-specific survey about cognitive assessment, advance planning, lifestyle changes, and use of support services and general medication adherence.

A minority of patients and informants had engaged in advance planning or made relevant lifestyle changes following cognitive screening. Those assessed as being at higher risk of memory problems were more likely to have attended a full diagnostic evaluation, engaged in support services and experienced medication adherence difficulties.

Only a small proportion of patients participating in cognitive screening subsequently engaged in diagnostic evaluation, advance planning, or lifestyle changes. However, those with higher risk of cognitive impairment were generally more likely to take some action following cognitive screening. Those at higher risk were also more vulnerable due to greater difficulties with medication adherence.

The validity and reliability of the informant AD8 in primary healthcare has not been established. Therefore, the present study examined the validity and reliability of the informant AD8 in government subsidized primary healthcare centers in Singapore.

Eligible patients (≥60 years old) were recruited from primary healthcare centers and their informants received the AD8. Patient-informant dyads who agreed for further cognitive assessments received the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR), and a locally validated formal neuropsychological battery at a research center in a tertiary hospital.

1,082 informants completed AD8 assessment at two primary healthcare centers. Of these, 309 patients-informant dyads were further assessed, of whom 243 (78.6%) were CDR = 0; 22 (7.1%) were CDR = 0.5; and 44 (14.2%) were CDR≥1. The mean administration time of the informant AD8 was 2.3 ± 1.0 minutes. The informant AD8 demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.85); inter-rater reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) = 0.85); and test–retest reliability (weighted κ = 0.80). Concurrent validity, as measured by the correlation between total AD8 scores and CDR global (R = 0.65, p < 0.001), CDR sum of boxes (R = 0.60, p < 0.001), MMSE (R = −0.39, p < 0.001), MoCA (R = −0.41, p < 0.001), as well as the formal neuropsychological battery (R = −0.46, p < 0.001), was good and consistent with previous studies. Construct validity, as measured by convergent validity (R ≥ 0.4) between individual items of AD8 with CDR and neuropsychological domains was acceptable.

The informant AD8 demonstrated good concurrent and construct validity and is a reliable measure to detect cognitive dysfunction in primary healthcare.