As stated by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [1] “The experience of care for people who self-harm is often unacceptable.” There is a misconception even amongst some health care providers that individuals who self-harm are choosing their suffering. This creates stigma regarding self-harm, about which individuals with lived experience are often well aware. Similar experiences with respect to stigma have been reported by people diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD [2]). General psychiatric admission (GPA) is of uncertain therapeutic value amongst self-harming and suicidal individuals, and potentially harmful if lengthy and unstructured for those with BPD [3–5]. Specialized evidence-based services developed for these individuals at times they cannot keep themselves safe is often needed, but more often lacking. These services are particularly necessary in situations of unique vulnerability, such as suicidal crises. When suicide and severe self-harm are acute risks it is essential that services are offered in a compassionate manner that honours the human dignity of the person who is suffering [6, 7]. A report commissioned by Sweden’s National Self-harm Project examined the prevalence of self-harm among individuals receiving mental health services across 84 psychiatric settings from 15 cities [8]. The sample was comprised of participants aged 12 years and older. Results indicated that almost half of the participants currently receiving mental health services had self-harmed during the past 6 months, with one in six adults self-harming five or more times the last 6 months. Three out of four young women between the ages of 12 and 18 reported self-harming over the same time period. Of those who had engaged in selfharming behaviour, more than half had attempted suicide at least once during their lifetime [8]. For a sub-group of individuals, often with BPD, self-harming behaviours are frequent and risk for suicide is recurrent [9]. Over the last 20 years several psychotherapeutic interventions have evolved for the treatment of individuals with self-harm as well as BPD [3, 5, 10, 11]. However, during crises and associated increases in self-harm and suicidal ideation, recommendations for clinical care are still conflicting. For individuals with imminent suicidal ideation, without recurrent self-harm, the routine practice is to offer psychiatric admission to an inpatient unit [12]. For individuals with recurrent suicidal ideation and self-harm, often diagnosed with BPD, the risk for iatrogenic effects may be considerable. Lengthy hospital admissions without a clear treatment structure are associated with clinical and functional decompensation amongst this group [3–5]. Consequentially there is a clinical practice of avoiding inpatient admission of individuals with these presenting features. The absence of consensus amongst crisis management recommendations is a regular burden requiring strategic planning at junctures that would be better suited to the provision of seamless clinical care. Ideally, the situation would not require having to re-negotiate the entire process (to admit or not admit) on behalf of every acutely suicidal individual when they themselves feel out of control.

Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder; therefore, measuring the patient’s healthrelated quality of life (HRQoL) to reflect the progression of PD is important. HRQoL refers to the status of one’s health in the physical, emotional, and social well-being [1]. Soh et al. [2] reported that the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) is the most frequently used generic HRQoL instrument, and that the 39-item Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39) is the most frequently used disease-specific HRQoL instrument. Both measures have good internal consistency, stability, and discriminant validity [3, 4], and both are recommended by the Movement Disorder Society [4, 5]. The responsiveness of a measurement instrument is important because it reflects the extent to which the instrument can detect changes in the progression of a disease and whether it can show longitudinal validity [6, 7]. Two major types of responsiveness have been recommended: internal and external [8]. Internal responsiveness refers to the ability of an instrument to detect change at two different time points. External responsiveness refers to the ability of an instrument to change relative to the change of a reference measure. These two types of responsiveness provide different but complementary information: internal responsiveness reflects patient-level changes, and external responsiveness reflects a different view of patient status using another available measure. Although the responsiveness of HRQoL instruments has been examined in several studies [9, 10], few have examined the comparative responsiveness of the SF-36 and the PDQ-39 in patients with PD. Schrag et al. [11] reported that the PDQ-39 was acceptably responsive to small changes in PD progression during a 1-year follow-up, independent of any intervention or external measure. Using self-reported changes in health status as external criteria, Brown et al. [12] reported that the SF-36 was more responsive than was the PDQ-39 in an 18-month follow-up. However, neither study [11, 12] included clinician-judged motor evaluation or psychological measures as external criteria to evaluate the responsiveness of the HRQoL instrument. We assessed and compared the internal and external responsiveness of the SF‐36 and PDQ-39 in patients with PD. Evaluations of motor signs and motor difficulties of daily living and a measure of depressive symptoms were used as external criteria. Many interventions for patients with PD have targeted motor problems and depression [13, 14], but few have examined the comparative responsiveness of the SF-36 and the PDQ-39 against these external criteria to determine which one to use in longitudinal outcome research in patients with PD.

Polycythemia vera (PV) is currently classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system under the major category of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN)1 . Although the WHO MPN category includes seven subcategories, the term “MPN” usually refers to the three JAK2 mutation-enriched clinicopathologic entities: PV, essential thrombocythemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF)1 . PV and its sister diseases constitute stem cell-derived clonal myeloproliferation that is characterized by three mutually-exclusive “driver” mutations: JAK2, CALR, and MPL, with respective distribution frequency of ~99, 0, and 0% for PV, 55, 22, and 3% for ET and 65, 20 and 7% for PMF2 . The most frequent MPN-associated JAK2 mutation is the exon 14 JAK2V617F, which is responsible for almost all the JAK2 mutations in ET and PMF, and 97% of those seen in PV; the remainder 3% of JAK2 mutations in PV are spread across exons 12, 13, and 143,4 . Diagnosis of PV often requires the presence of a JAK2 mutation, in addition to documentation of increased hemoglobin/hematocrit, to a threshold level established by the 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) revised criteria (>16.5 g/dL/49% for males and >16 g/dL/48% for females)1 . In addition, bone marrow morphologic assessment is encouraged, in order to distinguish PV from JAK2-mutated ET5-7 and obtain cytogenetic information, which has recently been shown to be prognostically relevant8–10. Clinical features in PV include mild-tomoderate degree of splenomegaly, mild-to-moderate degree of constitutional symptoms, including fatigue and pruritus, symptoms of hyperviscosity, leukocytosis, thrombocytosis, microvascular symptoms (e.g., headaches, lightheadedness, visual disturbances, atypical chest pain, erythromelalgia, paresthesia), thrombotic and bleeding complications, and risk of leukemic transformation or fibrotic progression11. Current treatment in PV has not affected the natural history of the disease in regards to overall, leukemia-free or myelofibrosis-free survival, but thrombosis-free survival has been positively affected by treatment with phlebotomy12, aspirin13 and cytoreductive drugs11. In the latter regard, the most popular and evidence-supported cytoreductive agent is hydroxyurea, while busulfan has been effectively and safely utilized for an even longer period11,14. More recently, interferon (IFN)-α and ruxolutinib (a JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor) have been introduced to the therapeutic armamentarium, without controlled evidence of superiority over the older drugs and documentation of safety during long-term use. In the current review, we provide a risk-adapted treatment algorithm in PV, including critical assessment of the currently available cytoreductive agents.

The term myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) typically refers to essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF)1 ; in addition, some patients with ET or PV might in time progress into a PMF-like post-ET or post-PV myelofibrosis2 . As a group, ET, PV, and PMF share three mutually exclusive “driver” mutations, including JAK2, CALR, and MPL3 . The most frequent driver mutation is JAK2V617F, found in ~99% of patients with PV, 55% ET, and 65% PMF4 . The driver mutation distributions in ET and PMF are similar with 50–65% of the patients being JAK2V617F mutated, 15–30% being CALR mutated, and 4–8% being MPL mutated4 , while 10–20% of the patients might not express any one of the three mutations (i.e., are triple-negative)4 . World Health Organization (WHO)-consistent diagnosis of ET requires a platelet count of ≥450 × 10(9)/L, presence of one of the three aforementioned driver mutations or in their absence the exclusion of other causes of thrombocytosis (reactive and clonal), and bone marrow morphologic assessment, especially for distinguishing ET from prefibrotic PMF and “masked” PV5,6 . In addition to clonal thrombocytosis, a variable proportion of patients with ET might display mild splenomegaly, leukocytosis, microvascular symptoms, thrombotic and bleeding complications, increased occurrence of first trimester miscarriage, and time-dependent risk of leukemic transformation or fibrotic progression7 . Survival in patients with any one of the three JAK2 mutation-enriched MPN is significantly shorter than that of the sex- and age-adjusted control population, with median estimates of 20 years for ET, 14 years for PV, and 6 years for PMF8 . Causes of death include leukemic transformation, with 15-year estimates of ~2.1–5.3% for ET, 5.5–18.7% for PV, and more than 20% for PMF9 . Fibrotic progression rates in ET and PV, during a similar time interval, are estimated at 4–11% and 6–14%, respectively9 . To date, drug therapy has not been shown to modify the natural history of these diseases, prevent leukemic or fibrotic progression or prolong survival10. Current indication for drug therapy in ET and PV is to prevent thrombotic complications, especially in high-risk patients7 . In the current review, we provide a risk-adapted treatment algorithm in ET that can be used in daily practice.

Violence against women means “any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life” [1]. It affects 15–75% of women across the globe and is a significant threat to their health, well-being, and rights [2–4]. A multicenter study in 11 countries in the world has found that around 15–71% of women faced physical and sexual violence and 20–75% emotional abuse in their lifetime. In Bangladesh, between 50 and 70% of women face some form of violence, with the prevalence varying across different settings [5, 6]. Violence against women is associated with a number of mental health problems including mood, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and somatoform disorders [7–10]. World Health Organization (WHO), in a mixed method research, reported violence as an important factor of poor mental health in women across countries including Bangladesh [5]. García-Moreno et al. in the multicenter study referred to earlier mostly focused on intimate partner violence and its impact on mental health, reported as emotional distress as a part of different dimension of health. They did not address violence committed by others nor did they specifically look into its relationship with mental disorders. A quantitative study in nine lowand middle-income countries found a link between violence with suicides [9]; up to 90% of people may have some form of mental disorder at the time of suicide. Studies across India and Pakistan found an association between domestic or intimate partner violence, and poor mental health including suicidal ideation [11–13]. Like most others, the studies were quantitative and related the symptoms of poor mental health, rather than examining specific mental disorders. In a quantitative study in Bangladesh, Naved and Akhtar found that suicidal ideation was more common among women facing physical or emotional violence compared to women who were not facing such violence [14]. However, they also did not specifically focus on different types of mental disorders as a consequence of violence against women nor did they explore the experience of women facing such violence and how it was associated with different types of mental disorders. Mental disorders are multi-factorial. Several factors often interact in a complex way to cause and or maintain mental disorders; some related to gene and environments predispose an individual in early childhood while others may occur before the disease to precipitate it. Some factors may maintain it. A number of researchers underscored the importance of understanding how violence against women affects their mental health [2, 15]. The exploration is important because the nature and impact of violence against women vary across cultures. For example, two thirds of women physically abused in Bangladesh did not tell anybody about the violence while about 80% in Brazil and Namibia city did so [5]. The lack of sharing may result in a higher magnitude of mental disorders in women in Bangladesh. In a study carried out in an urban community, around half of adult women reported to have mental disorders [16].

Violence against women (VAW) is a global public health and a human rights issue, and represents a major obstacle in overcoming gender inequalities. 1 in 3 women worldwide experience physical and/or sexual violence by a partner or sexual violence by a non-partner [1]. A policy response to addressing VAW is an important step in showing commitment to the issue by government and policy makers. Policy responses to VAW can include legislation enacted by parliament, regulations, strategic plans, guidelines and handbooks, programmes and services, and funding commitments by governments and donors [2]. Many countries worldwide, including in South and South East-Asia, have primarily responded through the adoption of VAW legislation, or revised existing legislation to address VAW [2]. Model frameworks developed by the United Nations (UN) and the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO) emphasize the importance of designing VAW laws and public policies that are multidisciplinary and include the participation of multiple sectors, including health. However, many countries focus on the role of the police and judicial system. A systematic search for VAW legislation identified 124 countries/territories with some type of VAW legislation, of which only 28 mentioned the health sector [2]. This is concerning as it is evident that women experiencing partner violence are more likely to make extensive use of health care services compared to nonabused women [3, 4]. It is now widely recognised that the health sector can play a key role in addressing VAW through early identification, care and referrals to appropriate support services in the community [5]. Recent discussions have also begun to acknowledge the role of the health sector in preventing VAW [5]. Nevertheless, the importance of the health sector in responding to VAW is often unrecognized in legal documents on VAW [6].

Gender-based violence (GBV), or violence against women (GAW), is the largest problem of public health and of violated human rights all over the world (World Health Organization WHO 2013a). Violence against women is defined as: ‘Any act of gender-based that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life…the unequal condition of women contributes to generate their vulnerability’ (United Nation Office of High Commissioner 2014, p. 73). The European Council (2011) defines domestic violence as ‘any act of physical, sexual, psychological or economical violence occurring in the family or domestic unit, or between regular or occasional partners or cohabitants, regardless of the fact that the authors of these acts shared or still share the residence with his victim’. According the Italian National Institute of Statistics (ISTAT) domestic violence is the most common cause of violent death among women aged between 16–44 years (Council of Europe 2006, ISTAT 2007, ISTAT 2015). In Italy, it is estimated that 31
5% of women aged between 16–70 years have been victims of some forms of violence during their life (Italian National Institute of Statistics ISTAT 2015). Moreover, the data of Italian National Institute of Statistics ISTAT (2015 p.1) underline that ‘20
2% of women has been victim of physical violence; 21% of sexual violence of which 5
4% suffered the most serious forms of sexual violence such as rape and attempted rape’. However, over the past five years, the occurrence of sexual or physical violence among partners has decreased from 13
3–11
3%, compared with the previous five years (Italian National Institute of Statistics ISTAT 2015). Sexual violence is associated with several consequences on women’s health including unwanted pregnancies, gynaecological conditions, such as vaginal bleedings, chronic pelvic pain, infections of the urinary tract, sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, hepatitis B or C, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and suicidal thoughts and feelings (Latthe et al. 2006, Wenzel et al. 2006, Taft & Watson 2008).

In recent years, working conditions have been changing, particularly due to a global shift from a manufacturing economy to a service and knowledge economy with advanced information technology. With these changes, employees are more likely to feel pressure and stress at work [1]. In addition, a manager would no longer be able to design a job for employees considering their needs and skills [1]. Accordingly, an important role of employees is to design their own job or work environment [1–3]. Japanese companies have also adopted this new trend, as many companies in Japan expect their employees to have more responsibility and autonomy for improving their own employability [4, 5]. The field of occupational health has started to pay increased attention to the concept of job crafting, i.e., an idea of employee-initiated job design/redesign. Wrezesniewski and Dutton [6] have defined job crafting as “the physical and cognitive change individuals make in the task or relational boundaries of their work”, which involves changing work task, changing interpersonal relationship at work, and changing cognitions about work. By using job-crafting behaviors, employees design and improve their work and social environment in workplace by themselves [6, 7]. A further classification of job crafting has been made based on dimensions of work and work environment on which job crafting focuses, such as types of job demands and job resources based on the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) model [7–9]. Job demands refer to physical, psychological, social, or organizational aspects of the job that require sustained physical or psychological efforts and skills and are associated with certain physical or psychological costs [8]. Recently, Van den Broeck et al. [10] distinguished between challenging job demands and hindering job demands because they have different associations with outcomes (e.g., work engagement, burnout). Challenging job demands, such as time pressure and workload, stimulate employee motivation because employees feel satisfaction from accomplishing challenging tasks, while hindering job demands, such as resource inadequacy, role ambiguity, and interpersonal conflict, have a negative effect on the mental or physical health employees [10, 11]. Job resources are physical, social, or organizational aspects of the job that help individuals achieve their working goals, stimulate personal growth, learning, and development, or reduce job demands or associated physical or psychological costs [8]. Using this refined classification of job demands and resources at work, Tims et al. [7] empirically categorized job crafting into the following four factors: (1) increasing structural job resources (e.g., autonomy, variety, and opportunity for development), (2) increasing social job resources (e.g., social support, supervisory coaching and feedback), (3) increasing challenging job demands (e.g., new project, learning new things), and (4) decreasing hindering job demands (e.g., fewer cognitive demands or stressful relationships).

Violence against children has attracted gradually increasing clinical attention over recent decades. From its frst reporting by the American pediatrician Henry Kempe in the 1960s [1] up to its recognition by the World Health Organization as a major public health issue in the late 1990s [2, 3], perspectives on the subject matter have changed drastically. During the last decades, violence against children has experienced increasingly interdisciplinary attention, frst predominantly in social policy, social work, psychology and clinical practice and more recently also in public health. Reasons and causes of the phenomenon’s increased visibility over the years should be attributed to the literature on the severe implications of early exposure of children to violence or deprivation. Violence exposure in childhood is associated with negative physical and emotional health outcomes [4] which include anxiety and depression [5–7], suicidal ideation [8–10], substance use [11], dissociation and personality disorders, neurobiological implications [12] as well as with wider psychosocial consequences such as adolescent delinquency, educational shortcomings [13, 14], difculties in relationships and family roles in adulthood, criminal activity [15] and reproduction of the “circle of violence” [16]. Tis paper follows the UNICEF defnitions of violence against children and uses this interchangeably with the term children’s exposure to violence. Physical violence against children includes “all corporal punishment and all other forms of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment as well as physical bullying and hazing by adults or other children”. Psychological violence includes all “psychological maltreatment, mental abuse, verbal abuse and emotional abuse or neglect”. Sexual violence includes “any sexual activities imposed by an adult or child against which the child is entitled to protection by criminal law. […] Sexual activities are also considered as abuse when committed against a child by any other child if the ofender is signifcantly older than the victim or uses power, threat or other means of pressure”. Neglect includes the “failure to meet children’s physical and psychological needs, protect them from danger or obtain medical, birth registration or other services when those responsible for their care have the means, knowledge and access to services to do so [17]”. Violence against children is thus more broadly defned than child abuse and neglect or child maltreatment. Violence against children has over the past decade attracted international attention and its prevention and reduction has now been included into the Sustainable Development Goals [18]. Tere is currently a global interest to multiply eforts and join forces to eradicate children’s exposure to all forms of violence and increase awareness of the problem at global and local levels. An increasing number of countries across the globe have prohibited all forms of violence against children [19]. Of the nine countries participating in this study, Greece, Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia had enacted laws prohibiting violence against children in the home and school. Albania and Former Yugoslav Republic Of Macedonia (FYROM) joined them in 2010 and 2013, while Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Turkey have expressed commitment to law reforms banishing violence against children in all settings [19]. A recent systematic review found that attitudes condoning corporal punishment and other forms of violence against children decrease drastically in countries with legislation that bans all forms of violence against children, as do prevalence rates [20].

Food allergy (FA) is a public health issue gaining worldwide attention [1–9]. While the overall prevalence of food allergy has been estimated to be approximately 7%, only 3–4% of adults and 5–6% of children have received a physician-confirmed food allergy diagnosis [10–12]. A metaanalysis published in 2007 suggested that the prevalence of food allergy ranges from 3 to 35%, and one Australian study suggested that more than 10% of 1  year olds had a challenge-proven egg allergy [1, 13]. This wide range is a reflection of the varying definition of food allergy (i.e. self-report versus a requirement for symptoms compatible with an IgE-mediated reaction and confirmatory testing), non-reporting of incidents, and respondent bias [1, 14]. Studies suggest that food allergens are the primary cause of anaphylaxis [15–19]. There are about 7% of Canadians with food allergies—among all Canadian children, 1.7% specifically have peanut allergies [14], of which 90% have experienced a severe reaction [14]. A number of US studies have suggested that the incidence of anaphylaxis is increasing and is perhaps as high as 49.8 per 100,000 person-years [15, 20–24]. Additionally, within the last decade, US hospitalizations secondary to food-induced anaphylaxis increased by 350% [25]. Similarly, a study by Ben-Shoshan et  al. has revealed that in at least one emergency department in Quebec, Canada, the rate of emergency department visits for anaphylaxis doubled over a 4 year period [26]. There is no cure for food allergy and, thus, strict avoidance of allergenic foods is paramount in symptom prevention [7]. Food allergen labeling is an internationally recognized risk management tool and regulatory policies are being developed to lower food allergen exposure risk for individuals with food allergies [7]. In 2008, the Canadian Minister of Health announced new labeling requirements for food allergens and intolerances contained in pre-packaged foods. A regulatory update was released in August 2012 noting the requirement to list all food allergens, gluten sources, and sulphites in the ingredient lists or in a precautionary statement [27]. Despite the increasing public health concern surrounding food allergies and the recent update in Canadian food allergen labeling regulations, there is scarce information regarding the best way to present allergen information to consumers [28]. Knowledge about consumers’ use of allergen labels may inform regulatory agencies about the appropriate packaging of foods and design of food labels to reduce risk of exposure to food allergens [29–33]. The objective of this study was to use a stated choice experiment to evaluate Canadians’ preferences for different types of food allergen-related information on food labels, and to determine if there are differences in preferences across different types of respondents.