32 research outputs found
Reconciling the professional and student identities of clinical psychology trainees
The study explored the ways in which qualified and trainee clinical psychologists perceived professional behaviour, as illustrated in a series of short vignettes, in student and clinical practice contexts. Comparisons were made to identify the extent to which ideas of professionalism differed across different learning contexts and between qualified and unqualified staff, with the aim of adding to the literature on which factors influence the development of professional identity in health professionals. An online questionnaire depicting a range of potentially unprofessional behaviours was completed by 265 clinical psychology trainees and 106 qualified clinical psychologists. The data were analysed using a general linear model with simultaneous entry in which rater (trainee vs qualified clinical psychologist), setting (student vs placement) and their interaction predicted acceptability ratings. We found that, in general, trainees and qualified staff agreed on those behaviours that were potentially unprofessional, although where significant differences were found, these were due to trainees rating the same behaviours as more professionally acceptable than qualified clinical psychologists. Despite trainees identifying a range of behaviours as professionally unacceptable, some percentage reported having engaged in a similar behaviour in the past. Irrespective of the status of the rater, the same behaviours tended to be viewed as more professionally unacceptable when in a placement (clinical) setting than in a student (university) setting. Generally, no support was found for a rater by setting interaction. The study suggests that trainee clinical psychologists are generally successful at identifying professional norms, although they do not always act in accordance with these. Conflicting student and professional norms may result in trainees viewing some potentially unprofessional behaviour as less severe than qualified staff. Health professional educators should be aware of this fact and take steps to shape trainee norms to be consistent with that of the professional group
Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK
Background
A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials.
Methods
This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674.
Findings
Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation.
Interpretation
ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials
Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.
BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca
ELASTIC-PLASTIC FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES OF CRACKED NOTCHES IN PLATES UNDER MIXED-MODE LOADING
Avaliação do desenvolvimento afetivo-social do adolescente na faixa etária dos 15 aos 18 anos. Estudo com adolescentes do município de Botucatu, SP - Aspectos da sexualidade
The authors present data obtained from the analysis of a questionnaire regarding sexuality among 1,437 adolescent students in the Botucatu municipal district. The student's age varied from 15 to 19 years. The results demonstrate the evolving characteristics of the student's sexuality and suggest that sexual orientation and guidance should be part of the child and adolescent educational process. The authors pointed out that the members of Health care team should stimulate the discussion of sexuality while providing medical advice
A pilot study to evaluate the safety, tolerance, and efficacy of a novel stationary antral balloon (SAB) for obesity
Background: A 150 cm(3) pear-shaped gastric balloon with a 30 cm-long duodenal stem and a 7 g metallic weight at its distal end was designed and developed to facilitate weight loss by (a) delaying gastric emptying thus enhancing interprandial satiety, and (b) stimulating antral and duodenal receptors of satiation. Methods: Twenty-six patients (body mass index of 29 to 40 kg/m(2)) who failed to lose weight despite dietary intervention underwent endoscopic implantation of the balloon device. Patients were monitored for tolerance to the balloon, complications, weight loss, and compliance with a restricted caloric intake. Results: Six men and 20 women with a median body weight of 93.0kg (range, 73.5 to 119.9), median body mass index 34.3 kg/m(2) (range, 28.8 to 39.5) underwent balloon implantation for a median period of 4.0 months (range, 0.75 to 6.0). Twenty-two patients successfully complied with a 1250 to 1500 kcal daily diet restriction during the study period. Median weight reduction was 6.5 kg (range, 3.7 to 19.9). Patients with initial body weight of > 90 kg tended to loose more weight (8.1 kg) than patients weighing < 90 kg (4.5 kg) (P = 0.14). Nine patients with dwell times of 6 months lost 11.5 +/- 4.6 kg. The balloon malfunctioned in 4 patients (in I patient, the balloon leaked spontaneously but remained in the stomach and in 3 patients, the balloon migrated distally). Conclusions: Our novel balloon device may be effective in inducing weight loss by promoting compliance with a restricted caloric intake and is well tolerated due to its small size. Complications resulted from balloon rupture, which can be easily prevented by enhancements in design and use of alternative materials