Running In and Out of Pregnancy : Elite Distance Runners\u27 Experiences of Returning to Competition After Pregnancy

Female athletes often feel compelled to make the difficult decision between being mother and pursuing a career as an elite athlete (Allred, 2001). The purpose of this study was to describe the experiences of elite female runners’ return to competition after pregnancy. A review of the current literature in sport and exercise psychology revealed very little information on this topic. The research that has been conducted, however, proposes that pregnancy and motherhood can both constrict and enhance performance in a number of ways. For example, Balague, Shaw, Vernacchia, & Yambor (1995) suggest that elite pregnant athletes may experience anxiety due to lower levels of training and body changes. Other research on the training patterns of non-elite mothering athletes conducted by Beilock, Feltz, and Pivarnik (2001) indicates that female athletes can drastically alter their training during pregnancy with no significant negative effects on post-partum performance. This research also indicates that women with strong efficacy ratings during pregnancy are more likely to regain high performance levels after pregnancy. Eleven elite female distance runners who had returned to competition after pregnancy were interviewed for this study. Interviews followed a semi-structured guide (Patton, 1990) which explored issues related to identity, body image, and quality of life. Interviews were inductively analyzed and revealed the following four major themes: (a) athletic performance, (b) body, (c) self, and (d) social support. These themes describe a negotiation process that occurred for these athletes upon return to competition. This process entailed both resisting and reifying hegemonic notions of the “good” mother and the “good” athlete. Implications from this research can potentially help coaches and sport psychology consultants working with female athletes who are either deciding to have children, who are currently pregnant, or who continue to compete while mothering. Recommendations for such groups are provided. It is also hoped that this research will help unravel some of the ambiguity that female athletes may encounter when choosing to become mothers while remaining high-level performers

The experience of a first race: a phenomenological description

The purpose of this study was to describe the experience of novice runners during their first competitive race

Feeling Elite: The Collective Effervescence of TEAM USA at the 2012 ITU World Triathlon Grand Final

Collective effervescence is an amplified, excited reaction made possible when a group of people experience something emotional together. We used a descriptive mixed methods approach to investigate both the individual and collective emotions of Team USA age group triathletes as they participated in the 2012 International Triathlon Union’s (ITU’s) Grand Final in Auckland, New Zealand. The results of our study suggest that participation in this event evoked emotions consistent with the themes of Intrinsic Arousal, Anxiety, National Pride, and Social Arousal. Further, the results indicated that this group of experienced athletes was less motivated by performance outcome goals (i.e., placing in the top three) and more motivated by the individual and collective emotions associated with being a member of Team USA and representing the USA on a national stage. While some have suggested that the more elite athletes may be more attuned to their emotional states than less accomplished competitors, we found the very nature of the Grand Final as a world championship event, coupled with the symbols and rituals associated with Team USA membership, provided age group athletes a rare chance to experience similar states

Kisses of death in the graduate school application process

A survey of psychology graduate admissions committee chairs revealed 5 categories of mistakes applicants make that diminish their probability of acceptance. We discuss 3 strategies that psychology departments can use to decrease the likelihood that students will commit these mistakes in their graduate school applications and provide suggestions that will help students avoid these mistakes. The ideal student, seen through the eyes of graduate faculty, is gifted and creative, very bright and extremely motivated to learn, perfectly suited to the program, eager to actively pursue the lines of inquiry valued by the faculty, pleasant, responsible, and devoid of serious personal problems

Kisses of death in the graduate school application process

A survey of psychology graduate admissions committee chairs revealed 5 categories of mistakes applicants make that diminish their probability of acceptance. We discuss 3 strategies that psychology departments can use to decrease the likelihood that students will commit these mistakes in their graduate school applications and provide suggestions that will help students avoid these mistakes. The ideal student, seen through the eyes of graduate faculty, is gifted and creative, very bright and extremely motivated to learn, perfectly suited to the program, eager to actively pursue the lines of inquiry valued by the faculty, pleasant, responsible, and devoid of serious personal problems

Measuring psychological pain: psychometric analysis of the Orbach and Mikulincer Mental Pain Scale

Background: Suicide is a public health concern, with an estimated 1 million individuals dying each year worldwide. Individual psychological pain is believed to be a contributing motivating factor. Therefore, establishing a psychometrically sound tool to adequately measure psychological pain is important. The Orbach and Mikulincer Mental Pain Scale (OMMP) has been proposed; however, previous psychometric analysis on the OMMP has not yielded a consistent scale structure, and the internal consistency of the subscales has not met recommended values. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to assess the psychometric properties of the OMMP in a diverse sample. Methods: A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the 9-factor, 44-item OMMP was conducted on the full sample (n = 1151). Because model fit indices were not met, an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted on a random subset of the data (n = 576) to identify a more parsimonious structure. The EFA structure was then tested in a covariance model in the remaining subset of participants (n = 575). Multigroup invariance testing was subsequently performed to examine psychometric properties of the refined scale. Results: The CFA of the original 9-factor, 44-item OMMP did not meet recommended model fit recommendations. The EFA analysis results revealed a 3-factor, 9-item scale (i.e., OMMP-9). The covariance model of the OMMP-9 indicated further refinement was necessary. Multigroup invariance testing conducted on the final 3-factor, 8-item scale (i.e., OMMP-8) across mental health diagnoses, sex, injury status, age, activity level, and athlete classification met all criteria for invariance. Conclusions: The 9-factor, 44-item OMMP does not meet recommended measurement criteria and should not be recommended for use in research and clinical practice in its current form. The refined OMMP-8 may be a more viable option to use; however, more research should be completed prior to adoption

A point mutation in the murine Hem1 gene reveals an essential role for Hematopoietic Protein 1 in lymphopoiesis and innate immunity

Hem1 (Hematopoietic protein 1) is a hematopoietic cell-specific member of the Hem family of cytoplasmic adaptor proteins. Orthologues of Hem1 in Dictyostelium discoideum, Drosophila melanogaster, and Caenorhabditis elegans are essential for cytoskeletal reorganization, embryonic cell migration, and morphogenesis. However, the in vivo functions of mammalian Hem1 are not known. Using a chemical mutagenesis strategy in mice to identify novel genes involved in immune cell functions, we positionally cloned a nonsense mutation in the Hem1 gene. Hem1 deficiency results in defective F-actin polymerization and actin capping in lymphocytes and neutrophils caused by loss of the Rac-controlled actin-regulatory WAVE protein complex. T cell development is disrupted in Hem1-deficient mice at the CD4−CD8− (double negative) to CD4+CD8+ (double positive) cell stages, whereas T cell activation and adhesion are impaired. Hem1-deficient neutrophils fail to migrate in response to chemotactic agents and are deficient in their ability to phagocytose bacteria. Remarkably, some Rac-dependent functions, such as Th1 differentiation and nuclear factor κB (NF-κB)–dependent transcription of proinflammatory cytokines proceed normally in Hem1-deficient mice, whereas the production of Th17 cells are enhanced. These results demonstrate that Hem1 is essential for hematopoietic cell development, function, and homeostasis by controlling a distinct pathway leading to cytoskeletal reorganization, whereas NF-κB–dependent transcription proceeds independently of Hem1 and F-actin polymerization

Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose

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