IntroductionResilience refers to the ability to adapt to difficult situation or adversity. Resilience is what gives people the psychological strength to cope with stress and hardship. Previous studies have investigated the relationship between resilience and bullying victimization and mental health problems. But whether the moderating effect of resilience against depression varies among victims of different types of bullying victimization remains unknown.MethodsThe study used data from the Taiwan Adolescent to Adult Longitudinal Study (TAALS), which was a school based, nationwide, longitudinal study conducted among adolescents in Taiwan. Between 2015 and 2019, the survey was repeated three times to capture changes in health behaviors. Meanwhile, our study is a cross-sectional study focusing on the 2nd follow-up survey of the TAALS, where we recruited 4,771 Grade 7 (12–13 years) and Grade 10 (15–16 years) students who had experienced bullying at school.ResultsThis study confirms the protective effect of resilience on depression among adolescents who have experienced bullying. The mode resilience score was used as a reference group. Compared to the reference group, victims of verbal bullying from the lowest resilience group were at the greatest risk of depression (OR = 5.91, CI = 4.38–7.99). Compared to the reference group, victims of cyber bullying from the highest resilience group had the lowest risk of depression (OR = 0.72, CI = 0.57–0.90).ConclusionRegardless of the type of bullying victimization, resilience has been shown to offer protection against depression. Specifically, higher resilience levels offer the greatest protection against depression for victims of cyber bullying compared to other three types of bullying victimization. Early interventions to reduce negative effects of bullying victimization may start with increasing an individual's resilience during adolescence.

Secondary hormone therapy, abiraterone and enzalutamide, has improved outcomes for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and prolonged patients’ lives significantly. Various studies have compared the cancer-related outcomes, adverse effects, and drug-induced comorbidities in patients with mCRPC who are treated with abiraterone or enzalutamide. However, few studies have explored associations between survival and comorbidities or comprehensive analyzed newly developed comorbidities during and after secondary hormone therapy. We attempted to clarify whether the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) overall or itemized is predictive for overall survival, and we compared newly developed comorbidities between abiraterone and enzalutamide groups. We extracted data about expenses and comorbidities for patients who have mCRPC, received abiraterone and enzalutamide and met pre-examination operation criteria between September 2016 and December 2017 from the Taiwan National Health Insurance database. A total of 1153 patients with mCRPC who received abiraterone (n = 782) or enzalutamide (n = 371) with or without previous chemotherapy were included. We used the propensity score to match confounding factors, including age, pre-existing comorbidities, and precipitating factors for comorbidity (e.g., hypertension, hyperlipidemia), to eliminate selection bias in the comparison of newly developed comorbidities. Cox regression analysis was used for overall survival. We found that enzalutamide is superior to abiraterone with regard to overall survival. Our study revealed that there is no statistically significant difference in development of new comorbidities between abiraterone and enzalutamide group. Moreover, the CCI score, rather than any single item of the CCI, was a statistically significant predictor for overall survival.

No abstract

Smokers of any age can reap substantial health benefits from quitting or reducing their smoking. E-cigarettes have been promoted as a potentially promising product for tobacco harm reduction because e-cigarettes deliver nicotine vapor without many of the hazardous chemical combustion byproducts produced by combustible cigarette smoking. However, there remains an ongoing debate on whether the use of e-cigarettes is effective in combustible cigarette smoking cessation or reduction in both adolescents and adults. Our study uses data from the 2015 (baseline) and from the 2017 (follow-up) waves of the Taiwan Adolescent to Adult Longitudinal Study (TAALS), which is a large nationwide representative cohort study of health behaviors among adolescents in Taiwan. We analyzed the data using logistic regression and multivariate regression with a post-stratification weighting procedure. Among the 474 adolescent combustible cigarette users at baseline, the use of e-cigarettes had no association with smoking cessation (aRR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.66, 1.50). Furthermore, the use of e-cigarettes was also not associated with change in combustible cigarette consumption among all adolescent combustible cigarette users at follow-up (Coef. = 0.62, 95% CI =  − 36.85, 38.09). In summary, our findings suggest that e-cigarettes may not aid tobacco control among adolescent smokers. Policy makers should be cautious of the potential harms that e-cigarette may bring to young people when they are developing e-cigarette regulations.