Social talk in virtual spaces: an observational study of pragmatic communication in children with autism spectrum disorder during avatar-mediated interaction
Strategic Planning for a Digital Health Innovation Hub at a Saudi Academic Medical Center: Qualitative Case Study
Background: Rapid digital transformation is reshaping health care, but many digital initiatives struggle to deliver sustained organizational value when they are introduced as stand-alone technologies rather than as part of an institutional strategy. In Saudi Arabia, Vision 2030 has intensified pressure on academic medical centers to strengthen digital capability, localize innovation, and reduce dependence on externally driven solutions. Objective: This study aimed to examine organizational factors shaping digital health innovation at King Saud University Medical City (KSUMC) and to develop a preliminary strategic planning framework for a digital health innovation hub tailored to that setting. Methods: We conducted a qualitative exploratory case study at KSUMC between April and June 2025. Fourteen stakeholders from clinical, administrative, research, governance, educational, and innovation-related roles were recruited using maximum variation purposive sampling. Semistructured interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Reporting was guided by the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research). Diffusion of innovation theory and systems thinking informed interpretation, while a context-actor-mechanism-outcome lens was used to examine how institutional conditions shaped innovation processes. No patient data were collected. Results: Five interrelated themes were identified. First, leadership support existed at a symbolic level, but middle-management translation and risk tolerance were inconsistent. Second, innovation was constrained by workload, fragmented systems, and weak operational support, which meant that project work was often treated as discretionary rather than embedded. Third, knowledge transfer and commercialization pathways were fragmented; participants repeatedly described unclear routes from idea generation to prototyping, regulatory review, and market engagement. Fourth, incentives and innovation capability were misaligned with institutional expectations, particularly for clinicians and trainees. Fifth, Vision 2030 created strategic legitimacy and momentum, but participants also cautioned that an overreliance on consultant-led or vendor-led approaches could weaken internal capability building. These findings informed a preliminary framework centered on governance, knowledge transfer, partnership structures, workforce development, and phased implementation rather than a validated institutional model. Conclusions: At KSUMC, digital health innovation is shaped not only by technology availability but also by organizational culture, intermediary structures, governance design, and the extent to which innovation work is made operationally feasible. The framework proposed here should therefore be understood as a preliminary planning model derived from one qualitative case study. Its main contribution is to specify how knowledge transfer, commercialization, and institutional capability building can be integrated into a digital health strategy within a Saudi academic medical center.
<img src="https://jmir-production.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/thumbs/85d230b912fdefe6673792b1fe27c5d2" />
A Self-Guided Mobile Mindfulness Intervention Embedded in Daily Routines for Adults With Mild to Moderate Psychological Distress: Randomized Controlled Trial
enDigital Postpartum Support for Early Risk Identification Among Postpartum Women: Formative Randomized Evaluation and Exploratory Predictive Modeling Study
Blood Test Foresees Decline into Alzheimer’s Disease
A blood-based biomarker could predict a person’s risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease years before any symptoms arise, research suggests.
Plasma levels of phosphorylated tau 217 (p‑tau217) may one day help identify at-risk individuals before overt signs of dementia, enabling the pre-emptive use of disease-modifying therapies.
Higher plasma p‑tau217 levels were associated with a greater risk of progressing to cognitive impairment in previously unaffected older adults, and they also predicted faster levels of decline.
The research findings appear in JAMA and were simultaneously presented this week at the annual Alzheimer’s Association International Conference in London.
“In this longitudinal study of several selected cohorts, plasma p-tau217 provided long-term prognostic information for individuals who were cognitively unimpaired at baseline, laying the groundwork for possible future development of individualized risk prediction scores,” proposed Rachel Buckley, PhD, from Mass General Brigham, and co-workers in their published work.
“By providing absolute risk estimates of progression to cognitive impairment, this article moves the field closer to presymptomatic risk stratification with p-tau217, supporting trial design.”
The large, pooled multicohort study included 2684 cognitively unimpaired older adults from six longitudinal studies, who were followed for a median of 5.4 years. Their median age was just short of 70 years, and 63% were women.
Results showed that higher baseline p-tau217 was significantly associated with an increased risk of progression to cognitive impairment during up to 13.5 years of follow up, with a hazard ratio of 1.38 per standard deviation (SD) increase.
This remained significant after accounting for age, sex, education, apolipoprotein E ε4 status, cohort, as well as amyloid positron emission tomography—known to accurately detect Alzheimer’s disease brain pathology.
The researchers report that the absolute risk of cognitive decline at five years was “meaningfully elevated” in the group with very high p-tau217 levels (≥2.5 SD) at 38%, versus just 12% in group with low levels.
Estimated 10-years risks were substantially higher at between 40% and 78% for the low and high p-tau217 groups, respectively. However, just 139 participants—or one in every 20—were followed up for at least a decade and the researchers say these risk estimates should be treated with caution.
Elevated p-tau217 was also associated with faster decline on the harmonized latent Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite assessment tool.
In an editorial accompanying the published study, Suzanne Schindler, PhD, from Washington University in St Louis school of medicine, and David Wolk, MD, from the University of Pennsylvania, note that cognitive impairment likely reflected multiple etiologies, not just Alzheimer’s disease.
“Indeed, even the low p-tau217 group, in which Alzheimer disease pathology was minimal or absent, still had a 12% risk of progression to cognitive impairment at five years, suggesting the importance of other drivers of cognitive decline in this population and the likelihood that in the higher p-tau217 groups, some proportion of individuals who declined may have primarily been driven by other processes,” they pointed out.
“Notably, discordance between plasma p-tau217 and amyloid PET (especially at intermediate or low amyloid levels) highlights that biomarkers beyond p-tau217 could further improve risk prediction.”
Nonetheless, overall they summarized: “The study by Buckley et al. represents a significant advance. It demonstrates that plasma p-tau217 can provide a time-specific absolute risk estimate for development of cognitive impairment.”
The post Blood Test Foresees Decline into Alzheimer’s Disease appeared first on Inside Precision Medicine.
BFRBs vs. OCD: Similarities and Differences
This blog was originally posted by the TLC Foundation for BFRBs
Body-focused repetitive behaviors (BFRBs) and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) are two distinct mental health conditions that share some similarities but also have significant differences. BFRBs involve repetitive, self-grooming behaviors that can cause physical damage, such as hair pulling or skin picking. On the other hand, OCD is a condition characterized by intrusive thoughts (obsessions) and repetitive behaviors (compulsions) performed to alleviate anxiety.
While both conditions involve repetitive behaviors and can impact daily life, their underlying mechanisms, triggers, and treatment approaches differ. This article explores the key similarities and differences between BFRBs and OCD to better understand these complex conditions.
Similarities Between BFRBs and OCD
Most professionals view BFRBs and OCD as similar conditions due to the similarity in symptoms, such as compulsivity and repetitive behaviors. These two conditions share several similar systems and are usually a reaction to triggering factors such as stress and anxiety. Below are some of their similarities.
Repetitive Behaviors
Individuals dealing with BFRBs often engage in various repetitive behaviors such as hair pulling, lip biting, or skin picking. These actions are usually challenging to control and are frequently triggered by stress or anxiety. One may indulge in the habit subconsciously to find instant relief from the trigger.
Individuals with OCD often experience intrusive thoughts that result in repetitive behaviors known as compulsions. Some common compulsions include washing hands and repetitively checking or counting to alleviate the stress caused by obsessive thoughts. In both conditions, the repetitive behaviors are often exacerbated by stress and anxiety, and individuals may adapt these behaviors as a coping mechanism.
Impulse Control
Closely related to repetitive behaviors is the concept of impulse control. Both BFRBs and OCD involve challenges in this area, albeit in different ways. Individuals with BFRBs and OCD may find it hard to control the urge to perform repetitive behaviors. This is because these repetitive behaviors often relieve tension. Despite knowing the consequences of these behaviors, the desire to indulge in them is usually irresistible.
For example, individuals with BFRBs understand that hair pulling may affect their appearance, but they cannot refrain from doing it. OCD occurs as a result of intrusive thoughts whereby one believes that if they do not perform a specific action, the stressor won’t go away. These intrusive thoughts often cause anxiety, which can be eased by engaging in the said repetitive behavior.
Onset and Course
Having examined the behavioral aspects, let’s now consider how these conditions develop over time. The onset of these two conditions shares several similarities regarding age, triggers, and psychological mechanisms.
The onset of both conditions is usually during childhood or adolescence and often coincides with various developmental changes and stressors. For individuals with BFRBs, the repetitive behaviors alleviate stress and anxiety instantly. At the same time, for those with OCD, performing the compulsions temporarily relieves them from the stress caused by their intrusive thoughts. The cognitive patterns involve repetitive actions, intrusive thoughts, and a lack of impulse control. In BFRBs, the urge to engage in these repetitive behaviors can be intrusive and persistent, while in OCD, one’s obsessions create a sense of urgency, which leads to the adoption of compulsive actions.
Neurobiological Factors
To fully understand the similarities between BFRBs and OCD, we must delve deeper into their biological underpinnings. Both conditions have a genetic origin and are associated with neurobiological factors. Neurobiological studies indicate that the impulse control and emotional regulation difficulties for people with BFRBs and OCD are often caused by abnormalities in brain regions that are responsible for impulse control and habit formation. Therefore, the underlying brain mechanism may result in the onset and development of both conditions. It is not uncommon for individuals to have both BFRBs and OCD or for both conditions to coincide with other mental health conditions, usually depression and anxiety. The overlap is generally because they typically share common underlying factors that play a part in their severity and development.
Differences Between OCD and BFRBs
While BFRBs and OCD share several commonalities, it’s equally important to understand their distinct characteristics, from the symptoms to the underlying mechanisms. Let’s explore the key differences that distinguish these two conditions.
Nature of the Behavior
First and foremost, let’s examine how the behaviors associated with each condition differ in their fundamental nature. Individuals dealing with these two conditions adopt diverse behaviors as coping mechanisms for their triggers. In BFRBs, the behaviors adopted, such as trichotillomania (hair-pulling) or cheek-biting, usually result in physical harm. However, regardless of the consequences, one always feels relieved when picking their skin or pulling their hair.
OCD, on the other hand, involves a wide range of compulsions, from washing to organizing, checking, and counting. Compulsive behaviors are performed due to intrusive thoughts that make one think that if they fail to indulge in a specific behavior, they might get hurt, or there might be other negative consequences.
Presence of Obsessions
Another crucial distinction lies in the cognitive processes behind these behaviors. Generally, BFRBs do not involve obsessive thoughts. The primary focus on BFRBs is usually more on the physical behavior and not the fear of specific consequences.
However, the major characteristic of OCD is intrusive thoughts, which increase the urge to indulge in particular behaviors for relief. The thoughts are usually persistent with unwanted images that result in distress.
People with BFRBs DO NOT report that if they do not pick on their skin, something terrible will happen. Instead, they report that picking or pulling their hair helps relieve them from intense and negative emotions. These behaviors, therefore, serve a self-regulatory function, unlike in OCD, where the repetitive behavior calms them from their intrusive thoughts.
Triggers
The nature of triggers for each condition is closely related to the presence or absence of obsessions. The primary trigger in BFRBs is stress and anxiety, but for OCD, the main trigger is intrusive thoughts, which then result in anxiety. OCD and BFRBs triggers differ in several ways, often resulting in different outcomes. OCD triggers often result in one taking measures to prevent harm, while for BFRBs, one uses the adopted behaviors to regulate and manage intense emotions. The nature of thoughts is an essential distinguishing factor, seeing as OCD involves intrusive and obsessive thoughts that trigger specific behaviors adopted to prevent harm. The purpose of compulsions in OCD is to reduce the anxiety caused by the obsessive thoughts, while in BFRBs, the behaviors are for emotional relief.
Awareness
Beyond triggers, the level of conscious awareness also differentiates these two conditions. Those dealing with BFRBs usually find themselves biting their nails or even pulling their hair subconsciously. Individuals with OCD are generally aware of their intrusive thoughts and are compelled to adopt specific behaviors as a response to these thoughts. Individuals with OCD are often aware of their compulsions and understand when they are being irrational, but they are unable to control themselves. Compared to people with OCD, those with BFRBs often find their behaviors more rewarding than distressing.
Treatment
Finally, while both conditions may benefit from cognitive behavioral therapy, the specific approach to treatment varies significantly. For individuals with BFRBs, the focus is on behavior modification and awareness, achieved through habit reversal training. For OCD, the emphasis is often placed on exposure to anxiety-provoking thoughts to help an individual tolerate anxiety, which prevents compulsive behavior.
Bottom Line
While BFRBs and OCD can coexist, they are distinct disorders with unique manifestations despite sharing some similarities. The key distinctions between these conditions are evident in their underlying mechanisms and treatment approaches.
Both involve compulsive behaviors, but their purposes differ. BFRBs primarily serve as subconscious tools for emotional regulation. OCD compulsions are conscious attempts to alleviate anxiety and prevent perceived harmful consequences. BFRB behaviors often occur with limited conscious awareness, while OCD sufferers are typically more aware of their compulsive actions.
Both conditions can significantly affect daily functioning and social interactions.BFRBs may lead to physical injuries and lowered self-esteem due to visible effects. OCD can cause severe anxiety and time-consuming rituals that interfere with daily activities.BFRB treatment emphasizes behavior modification and awareness techniques, while OCD treatment often involves exposure therapy to reduce anxiety responses.
Understanding these distinctions is crucial for accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. While both conditions present challenges, with proper support and intervention, individuals with BFRBs or OCD can learn to manage their symptoms and improve their overall quality of life.
The post BFRBs vs. OCD: Similarities and Differences appeared first on International OCD Foundation.

