The Efficiency of Coercion

Oppgaven tester hvorvidt det eksisterer effektive og ineffektive intervaller av tvangsbruk innad autoritære regimer. Ved bruk av offentlig tilgjengelig data som blir brukt som mål på tvangsbruk, tester vi for om fordelingen av tvangsbruk er multimodal (flertoppet), og forsøker å identifisere effektive og ineffektive intervaller dera

The Efficiency of Coercion

Oppgaven tester hvorvidt det eksisterer effektive og ineffektive intervaller av tvangsbruk innad autoritære regimer. Ved bruk av offentlig tilgjengelig data som blir brukt som mål på tvangsbruk, tester vi for om fordelingen av tvangsbruk er multimodal (flertoppet), og forsøker å identifisere effektive og ineffektive intervaller dera

Safety and efficacy of oral levosimendan in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (the REFALS study) : a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial

Background There is an urgent unmet need for new therapies in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. In a clinical study with healthy volunteers, levosimendan, a calcium sensitiser, was shown to improve neuromechanical efficiency and contractile function of the human diaphragm. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of oral levosimendan in people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, with a focus on respiratory function. Methods The REFALS study is a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial at 99 amyotrophic lateral sclerosis specialist centres in 14 countries worldwide. People with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis were eligible for participation if they were at least 18 years of age and had a sitting slow vital capacity (SVC) of 60-90% predicted. Participants were randomly assigned (2:1) by interactive web-response system to receive either levosimendan or placebo. The capsules for oral administration were identical in appearance to maintain blinding of participants and investigators. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in supine SVC at 12 weeks, assessed as the percentage of predicted normal sitting SVC. The key secondary endpoint was the combined assessment of function and survival (CAFS) up to 48 weeks. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population, comprising all participants who were randomly assigned. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03505021) and has been completed. An extension study (REFALS-ES; NCT03948178) has also been completed, but will be reported separately. Findings Between June 21, 2018, and June 28, 2019, 871 people were screened for the study, of whom 496 were randomly assigned either levosimendan (n=329) or placebo (n=167). Participants were followed up between June 27, 2018 and June 26, 2020, for a median duration of 50.1 (IQR 37.5-51.1) weeks. The median duration of treatment was 47.9 (IQR 26.4-48.1) weeks. Change from baseline in supine SVC at 12 weeks was -6.73% with levosimendan and -6.99% with placebo, with no significant difference between the treatments (estimated treatment difference 0.26%, 95% CI -2.03 to 2.55, p=0.83). Similarly, at week 48, CAFS did not differ between treatment groups (least squares mean change from baseline 10.69, 95% CI -15.74 to 37.12; nominal p value=0.43). The most frequent adverse events were increased heart rate (106 [33%] of 326 receiving levosimendan vs 12 [7%] of 166 receiving placebo), fall (85 [26%] vs 48 [29%]), headache (93 [29%] vs 36 [22%]), and dyspnoea (59 [18%] vs 32 [19%]). 33 (10%) participants allocated levosimendan and 20 (12%) assigned placebo died during the trial, mainly due to respiratory failure or progression of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Interpretation Levosimendan was not superior to placebo in maintaining respiratory function in a broad population with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Although levosimendan was generally well tolerated, increased heart rate and headache occurred more frequently with levosimendan than with placebo. The possibility of a clinically relevant subgroup of responsive individuals requires further evaluation

Genome-wide association identifies nine common variants associated with fasting proinsulin levels and provides new insights into the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE - Proinsulin is a precursor of mature insulin and C-peptide. Higher circulating proinsulin levels are associated with impaired b-cell function, raised glucose levels, insulin resistance, and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Studies of the insulin processing pathway could provide new insights about T2D pathophysiology. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS - We have conducted a meta-analysis of genome-wide association tests of ;2.5 million genotyped or imputed single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and fasting proinsulin levels in 10,701 nondiabetic adults of European ancestry, with follow-up of 23 loci in up to 16,378 individuals, using additive genetic models adjusted for age, sex, fasting insulin, and study-specific covariates. RESULTS - Nine SNPs at eight loci were associated with proinsulin levels (P < 5 × 10-8). Two loci (LARP6 and SGSM2) have not been previously related to metabolic traits, one (MADD) has been associated with fasting glucose, one (PCSK1) has been implicated in obesity, and four (TCF7L2, SLC30A8, VPS13C/ C2CD4A/B, and ARAP1, formerly CENTD2) increase T2D risk. The proinsulin-raising allele of ARAP1 was associated with a lower fasting glucose (P = 1.7 3 10-4), improved b-cell function (P = 1.1 × 10-5), and lower risk of T2D (odds ratio 0.88; P = 7.8 × 10-6). Notably, PCSK1 encodes the protein prohormone convertase 1/3, the first enzyme in the insulin processing pathway. A genotype score composed of the nine proinsulin-raising alleles was not associated with coronary disease in two large case-control datasets. CONCLUSIONS - We have identified nine genetic variants associated with fasting proinsulin. Our findings illuminate the biology underlying glucose homeostasis and T2D development in humans and argue against a direct role of proinsulin in coronary artery disease pathogenesis

Prospective observational cohort study on grading the severity of postoperative complications in global surgery research

Background The Clavien–Dindo classification is perhaps the most widely used approach for reporting postoperative complications in clinical trials. This system classifies complication severity by the treatment provided. However, it is unclear whether the Clavien–Dindo system can be used internationally in studies across differing healthcare systems in high- (HICs) and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods This was a secondary analysis of the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), a prospective observational cohort study of elective surgery in adults. Data collection occurred over a 7-day period. Severity of complications was graded using Clavien–Dindo and the simpler ISOS grading (mild, moderate or severe, based on guided investigator judgement). Severity grading was compared using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Data are presented as frequencies and ICC values (with 95 per cent c.i.). The analysis was stratified by income status of the country, comparing HICs with LMICs. Results A total of 44 814 patients were recruited from 474 hospitals in 27 countries (19 HICs and 8 LMICs). Some 7508 patients (16·8 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication, equivalent to 11 664 complications in total. Using the ISOS classification, 5504 of 11 664 complications (47·2 per cent) were graded as mild, 4244 (36·4 per cent) as moderate and 1916 (16·4 per cent) as severe. Using Clavien–Dindo, 6781 of 11 664 complications (58·1 per cent) were graded as I or II, 1740 (14·9 per cent) as III, 2408 (20·6 per cent) as IV and 735 (6·3 per cent) as V. Agreement between classification systems was poor overall (ICC 0·41, 95 per cent c.i. 0·20 to 0·55), and in LMICs (ICC 0·23, 0·05 to 0·38) and HICs (ICC 0·46, 0·25 to 0·59). Conclusion Caution is recommended when using a treatment approach to grade complications in global surgery studies, as this may introduce bias unintentionally

The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis

© 2017 British Journal of Anaesthesia Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained ≥1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32–0.77); P\u3c0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88–1.19); P=0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62–0.92); P\u3c0.01; I2=87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61–0.88); P\u3c0.01; I2=89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine

Critical care admission following elective surgery was not associated with survival benefit: prospective analysis of data from 27 countries

This was an investigator initiated study funded by Nestle Health Sciences through an unrestricted research grant, and by a National Institute for Health Research (UK) Professorship held by RP. The study was sponsored by Queen Mary University of London