50 research outputs found
Determinants of Small Rodent Distribution and Abundance in a Shrub-Steppe Ecosystem: Influences of Seeds, Ants and Shrubs
This study had two major objectives; firstly to test the hypothesis of ongoing competition for seeds between small rodents and harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex occidental is, in a cold desert ecosystem; secondly to elucidate how seed abundance and shrub cover influence the distribution and abundance of deer mice, Peromyscus maniculatus. The study area was a sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) dominated shrubsteppe in southwestern Wyoming. Responses of the small mammal community to ant removal and food addition were assessed on replicated study plots between September 1981 and September 1983. Food addition and shrub removal manipulations were continued from September 1983 to August 1984. Rodent populations were sampled by live-trapping. Movements of 40 deermice were followed by radiotracking during the winter, spring and summer of 1983-84.
Ant removal elicited little response from the rodent community, although seed preference trials with native seeds in the field indicated considerable overlap in seed use. concluded that competition was not a factor affecting small rodents during the period of this study, although the area cleared of ants may not have been sufficiently large to produce a response detectable by trapping.
Seed addition resulted in increased deermouse population size, prolonged breeding, decreased winter (but not summer) home range sizes, and during periods of low density, increased grid fidelity. High fall densities were followed by a classical spring decline with associated female sex ratio skew and severe injuries to both sexes. Concluded that deermice were food limited only to the point where social interactions during the breeding season limited maximum densities.
The absence of shrubs prevented winter use of the 1.25 ha cleared area by deermice. At this time on the non-cleared plots shrubs were used to support nests, as foraging sites and as a means of access to the snow surface. During summer the area cleared of shrubs provided attractive foraging habitat, but most nest sites were still located within shrub cover around the edge.
An important corollary of the radio tracking was the illustration of the large home range sizes of deermice in relation to the size of the 0.7 ha trapping grids. The implications of trapping bias affecting population fluctuations and measurement of other demographic parameters from trapping studies are discussed
Characteristics of age-friendly bus information
Bus information is an important element to consider when developing and implementing age-friendly bus systems. Little is known regarding the bus information needs and preferences of older people. This study aims to illuminate characteristics of age-friendly bus information. Participant observations with stimulated recall interviews (n=40) were used to identify older peoples' (age 60 and over) perspectives on bus information. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. A printed information location checklist also was conducted. Categorical analysis identified that older people used a variety of information sources including printed information, telephone, Internet, bus drivers, word of mouth, and experience. Positive and negative characteristics of each source were identified. Older people also required a range of levels of information complexity. Popular locations for sourcing printed information included post offices, news agents, tourist information centers, and libraries. Transport providers and policy makers should consider the needs and preferences of older people when providing bus information. Effective information provision requires a range of media, covering a broad spectrum of information complexity and through a variety of locations
Dietary analysis of an uncharacteristic population of the Mountain Pygmy-possum (Burramys parvus) in the Kosciuszko National Park, New South Wales, Australia
Background The Mountain Pygmy-possum (Burramys parvus) is a critically endangered marsupial, endemic to alpine regions of southern Australia. We investigated the diet of a recently discovered population of the possum in northern Kosciuszko National Park, NSW, Australia. This new population occurs at elevations well below the once-presumed lower elevation limit of 1,600 m. Goals and Methods Faecal material was analysed to determine if dietary composition differed between individuals in the newly discovered northern population and those in the higher elevation southern population, and to examine how diet was influenced by rainfall in the southern population and seasonal changes in resource availability in the northern population. Results and Discussion The diet of B. parvus in the northern population comprised of arthropods, fruits and seeds. Results indicate the diet of both populations shares most of the same invertebrate orders and plant species. However, in the absence of preferred food types available to the southern population, individuals of the northern population opportunistically consumed different species that were similar to those preferred by individuals in higher altitude populations. Differing rainfall amounts had a significant effect on diet, with years of below average rainfall having a greater percentage composition and diversity of invertebrates. Seasonal variation was also recorded, with the northern population increasing the diversity of invertebrates in their diet during the Autumn months when Bogong Moths (Agrotis infusa) were absent from those sites, raising questions about the possum’s dependence on the species Conclusions Measurable effects of rainfall amount and seasonal variation on the dietary composition suggest that predicted climatic variability will have a significant impact on its diet, potentially impacting its future survival. Findings suggest that it is likely that B. parvus is not restricted by dietary requirements to its current pattern of distribution. This new understanding needs to be considered when formulating future conservation strategies for this critically endangered species
Development and validation of a non-remission risk prediction model in first episode psychosis:An Analysis of 2 Longitudinal Studies
Psychosis is a major mental illness with first onset in young adults. The prognosis is poor in around half of the people affected, and difficult to predict. The few tools available to predict prognosis have major weaknesses which limit their use in clinical practice. We aimed to develop and validate a risk prediction model of symptom nonremission in first-episode psychosis. Our development cohort consisted of 1027 patients with first-episode psychosis recruited between 2005 and 2010 from 14 early intervention services across the National Health Service in England. Our validation cohort consisted of 399 patients with first-episode psychosis recruited between 2006 and 2009 from a further 11 English early intervention services. The one-year nonremission rate was 52% and 54% in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression was used to develop a risk prediction model for nonremission, which was externally validated. The prediction model showed good discrimination C-statistic of 0.73 (0.71, 0.75) and adequate calibration with intercept alpha of 0.12 (0.02, 0.22) and slope beta of 0.98 (0.85, 1.11). Our model improved the net-benefit by 15% at a risk threshold of 50% compared to the strategy of treating all, equivalent to 15 more detected nonremitted first-episode psychosis individuals per 100 without incorrectly classifying remitted cases. Once prospectively validated, our first episode psychosis prediction model could help identify patients at increased risk of nonremission at initial clinical contact.</p
The Burramys Project: a conservationist's reach should exceed history's grasp, or what is the fossil record for?
The fossil record provides important information about changes in species diversity, distribution, habitat and abundance through time. As we understand more about these changes, it becomes possible to envisage a wider range of options for translocations in a world where sustainability of habitats is under increasing threat. The Critically Endangered alpine/subalpine mountain pygmy-possum, Burramys parvus (Marsupialia, Burramyidae), is threatened by global heating. Using conventional strategies, there would be no viable pathway for stopping this iconic marsupial from becoming extinct. The fossil record, however, has inspired an innovative strategy for saving this species. This lineage has been represented over 25 Myr by a series of species always inhabiting lowland, wet forest palaeocommunities. These fossil deposits have been found in what is now the Tirari Desert, South Australia (24 Ma), savannah woodlands of the Riversleigh World Heritage Area, Queensland (approx. 24-15 Ma) and savannah grasslands of Hamilton, Victoria (approx. 4 Ma). This palaeoecological record has led to the proposal overviewed here to construct a lowland breeding facility with the goal of monitoring the outcome of introducing this possum back into the pre-Quaternary core habitat for the lineage. If this project succeeds, similar approaches could be considered for other climate-change-threatened Australian species such as the southern corroboree frog (Pseudophryne corroboree) and the western swamp tortoise (Pseudemydura umbrina)
Antipsychotic medication versus psychological intervention versus a combination of both in adolescents with first-episode psychosis (MAPS): a multicentre, three-arm, randomised controlled pilot and feasibility study
Background
Evidence for the effectiveness of treatments in early-onset psychosis is sparse. Current guidance for the treatment of early-onset psychosis is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. The UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has recommended evaluation of the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotic drugs versus psychological intervention (cognitive behavioural therapy [CBT] and family intervention) versus the combination of these treatments for early-onset psychosis. The aim of this study was to establish the feasibility of a randomised controlled trial of antipsychotic monotherapy, psychological intervention monotherapy, and antipsychotics plus psychological intervention in adolescents with first-episode psychosis.
Methods
We did a multicentre pilot and feasibility trial according to a randomised, single-blind, three-arm, controlled design. We recruited participants from seven UK National Health Service Trust sites. Participants were aged 14–18 years; help-seeking; had presented with first-episode psychosis in the past year; were under the care of a psychiatrist; were showing current psychotic symptoms; and met ICD-10 criteria for schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, or delusional disorder, or met the entry criteria for an early intervention for psychosis service. Participants were assigned (1:1:1) to antipsychotics, psychological intervention (CBT with optional family intervention), or antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. Randomisation was via a web-based randomisation system, with permuted blocks of random size, stratified by centre and family contact. CBT incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions, and family intervention incorporated up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. Participants were followed up for a maximum of 12 months. The primary outcome was feasibility (ie, data on trial referral and recruitment, session attendance or medication adherence, retention, and treatment acceptability) and the proposed primary efficacy outcome was total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) at 6 months. Primary outcomes were analysed by intention to treat. Safety outcomes were reported according to as-treated status, for all patients who had received at least one session of CBT or family intervention, or at least one dose of antipsychotics. The study was prospectively registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN80567433.
Findings
Of 101 patients referred to the study, 61 patients (mean age 16·3 years [SD 1·3]) were recruited from April 10, 2017, to Oct 31, 2018, 18 of whom were randomly assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics, and 21 to antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. The trial recruitment rate was 68% of our target sample size of 90 participants. The study had a low referral to recruitment ratio (around 2:1), a high rate of retention (51 [84%] participants retained at the 6-month primary endpoint), a high rate of adherence to psychological intervention (defined as six or more sessions of CBT; in 32 [82%] of 39 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups), and a moderate rate of adherence to antipsychotic medication (defined as at least 6 consecutive weeks of exposure to antipsychotics; in 28 [65%] of 43 participants in the monotherapy and combined groups). Mean scores for PANSS total at the 6-month primary endpoint were 68·6 (SD 17·3) for antipsychotic monotherapy (6·2 points lower than at randomisation), 59·8 (13·7) for psychological intervention (13·1 points lower than at randomisation), and 62·0 (15·9) for antipsychotics plus psychological intervention (13·9 points lower than at randomisation). A good clinical response at 6 months (defined as ≥50% improvement in PANSS total score) was achieved in four (22%) of 18 patients receiving antipsychotic monotherapy, five (31%) of 16 receiving psychological intervention, and five (29%) of 17 receiving antipsychotics plus psychological intervention. In as-treated groups, serious adverse events occurred in eight [35%] of 23 patients in the combined group, two [13%] of 15 in the antipsychotics group, four [24%] of 17 in the psychological intervention group, and four [80%] of five who did not receive any treatment. No serious adverse events were considered to be related to participation in the trial.
Interpretation
This trial is the first to show that a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention, antipsychotics, and their combination is safe in young people with first-episode psychosis. However, the feasibility of a larger trial is unclear because of site-specific recruitment challenges, and amendments to trial design would be needed for an adequately powered clinical and cost-effectiveness trial that provides robust evidence
Psychological intervention, antipsychotic medication or a combined treatment for adolescents with a first episode of psychosis: the MAPS feasibility three-arm RCT
Background
When psychosis emerges in young people there is a risk of poorer outcomes, and access to evidence-based treatments is paramount. The current evidence base is limited. Antipsychotic medications show only a small benefit over placebo, but young people experience more side effects than adults. There is sparse evidence for psychological intervention. Research is needed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychological intervention versus antipsychotic medication versus a combined treatment for adolescents with psychosis.
Objectives
The objective of Managing Adolescent first-episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study (MAPS) was to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to answer the question of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these three treatment options.
Design
This was a prospective, randomised, open-blinded, evaluation feasibility trial with a single blind. Participants were allocated 1 : 1 : 1 to receive antipsychotic medication, psychological intervention or a combination of both. A thematic qualitative study explored the acceptability and feasibility of the trial.
Setting
Early intervention in psychosis services and child and adolescent mental health services in Manchester, Oxford, Lancashire, Sussex, Birmingham, Norfolk and Suffolk, and Northumberland, Tyne and Wear.
Participants
People aged 14–18 years experiencing a first episode of psychosis either with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis or meeting the entry criteria for early intervention in psychosis who had not received antipsychotic medication or psychological intervention within the last 3 months.
Interventions
Psychological intervention involved up to 26 hours of cognitive–behavioural therapy and six family intervention sessions over 6 months, with up to four booster sessions. Antipsychotic medication was prescribed by the participant’s psychiatrist in line with usual practice. Combined treatment was a combination of psychological intervention and antipsychotic medication.
Main outcome measures
The primary outcome was feasibility (recruitment, treatment adherence and retention). We used a three-stage progression criterion to determine feasibility. Secondary outcomes were psychosis symptoms, recovery, anxiety and depression, social and educational/occupational functioning, drug and alcohol use, health economics, adverse/metabolic side effects and adverse/serious adverse events.
Results
We recruited 61 out of 90 (67.8%; amber zone) potential participants (psychological intervention, n = 18; antipsychotic medication, n = 22; combined treatment, n = 21). Retention to follow-up was 51 out of 61 participants (83.6%; green zone). In the psychological intervention arm and the combined treatment arm, 32 out of 39 (82.1%) participants received six or more sessions of cognitive–behavioural therapy (green zone). In the combined treatment arm and the antipsychotic medication arm, 28 out of 43 (65.1%) participants received antipsychotic medication for 6 consecutive weeks (amber zone). There were no serious adverse events related to the trial and one related adverse event. Overall, the number of completed secondary outcome measures, including health economics, was small.
Limitations
Medication adherence was determined by clinician report, which can be biased. The response to secondary outcomes was low, including health economics. The small sample size obtained means that the study lacked statistical power and there will be considerable uncertainty regarding estimates of treatment effects.
Conclusions
It is feasible to conduct a trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotic medication and a combination treatment in young people with psychosis with some adaptations to the design, including adaptations to collection of health economic data to determine cost-effectiveness.
Future work
An adequately powered definitive trial is required to provide robust evidence
A three-arm feasibility randomised controlled trial comparing antipsychotic medication to psychological intervention to a combined treatment in adolescents with first episode psychosis: The Managing Adolescent first episode Psychosis Study (MAPS)
Background: The evidence base for treatments for early-onset psychosis (EOP) is limited and of low quality. Current guidance for the treatment of EOP is mostly extrapolated from trials in adult populations. NICE, in the United Kingdom (UK), make a specific research recommendation for the evaluation of clinical and cost-effectiveness of antipsychotics (AP), versus psychological intervention (cognitive behaviour therapy [CBT] and family intervention), versus combination treatment for EOP. The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) in the UK commissioned this research to establish feasibility and acceptability of a definitive trial examining these three treatment options.
Methods: We conducted a multi-site, Prospective Randomised Open Blinded Evaluation (PROBE) design, feasibility randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing AP monotherapy with psychological intervention monotherapy (PI) plus a combination of these treatments in 14-18-year olds with a first episode of psychosis. We recruited participants from seven United Kingdom sites. Participants were followed-up at six and 12 months. Cognitive behavioural therapy incorporated up to 26 sessions over 6 months plus up to four booster sessions. Family intervention included up to six sessions over 6 months. Choice and dose of antipsychotic were at the discretion of the treating consultant psychiatrist. The primary outcome was feasibility data (recruitment, retention, acceptability) and the main effectiveness outcome was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 6 months. We conducted a repeated-measures analysis of the proposed primary outcome (PANSS) and the secondary outcome, the Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) using a mixed effects model to account for the discrete timing of the follow-up assessments and adjusted for site. Safety outcomes were reported on the basis of as treated status defined as any one session of CBT or any one dose of APs; descriptive statistics are reported for safety outcomes. The study was prospectively registered on 27th February 2017, http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN80567433.
Findings: 61 patients (aged 14-18 years; mean 16.3, SD 1.3) were recruited from 1st April 2017 to 31st October 2018, 18 were assigned to psychological intervention, 22 to antipsychotics and 21 to the combination. The feasibility of recruitment was unclear, since the trial only recruited 61 of a target of 90 participants. The study had a low referral: randomisation ratio (101:61), high rates of retention (>80%), high rates of adherence for psychological intervention (82.1%) defined as 6 or more sessions of CBT, and moderate rates of adherence for antipsychotic medication (65.1%), defined as 6 or more consecutive weeks of APs. The median number of sessions for CBT for those in the PI arm was 14 (IQR 9, 23) and 15 in the combined arm (IQR 9, 17). Of those in receipt of APs the mean duration that the participant remained on the medication was 31.5 weeks (SD 14.6, minimum 8.7 and maximum 52). There were no serious adverse events considered to be related to the trial.
Interpretation: This is the first trial to show that it is safe to conduct a head-to-head clinical trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotics and the combination in people in young people with a first-episode psychosis. However, feasibility is unclear due to not meeting the recruitment progression criteria, so amendments to trial design are required in order to conduct an adequately powered clinical and cost effectiveness trial to provide robust evidence
Multiorgan MRI findings after hospitalisation with COVID-19 in the UK (C-MORE): a prospective, multicentre, observational cohort study
Introduction:
The multiorgan impact of moderate to severe coronavirus infections in the post-acute phase is still poorly understood. We aimed to evaluate the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities after hospitalisation with COVID-19, evaluate their determinants, and explore associations with patient-related outcome measures.
Methods:
In a prospective, UK-wide, multicentre MRI follow-up study (C-MORE), adults (aged ≥18 years) discharged from hospital following COVID-19 who were included in Tier 2 of the Post-hospitalisation COVID-19 study (PHOSP-COVID) and contemporary controls with no evidence of previous COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid antibody negative) underwent multiorgan MRI (lungs, heart, brain, liver, and kidneys) with quantitative and qualitative assessment of images and clinical adjudication when relevant. Individuals with end-stage renal failure or contraindications to MRI were excluded. Participants also underwent detailed recording of symptoms, and physiological and biochemical tests. The primary outcome was the excess burden of multiorgan abnormalities (two or more organs) relative to controls, with further adjustments for potential confounders. The C-MORE study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510025.
Findings:
Of 2710 participants in Tier 2 of PHOSP-COVID, 531 were recruited across 13 UK-wide C-MORE sites. After exclusions, 259 C-MORE patients (mean age 57 years [SD 12]; 158 [61%] male and 101 [39%] female) who were discharged from hospital with PCR-confirmed or clinically diagnosed COVID-19 between March 1, 2020, and Nov 1, 2021, and 52 non-COVID-19 controls from the community (mean age 49 years [SD 14]; 30 [58%] male and 22 [42%] female) were included in the analysis. Patients were assessed at a median of 5·0 months (IQR 4·2–6·3) after hospital discharge. Compared with non-COVID-19 controls, patients were older, living with more obesity, and had more comorbidities. Multiorgan abnormalities on MRI were more frequent in patients than in controls (157 [61%] of 259 vs 14 [27%] of 52; p<0·0001) and independently associated with COVID-19 status (odds ratio [OR] 2·9 [95% CI 1·5–5·8]; padjusted=0·0023) after adjusting for relevant confounders. Compared with controls, patients were more likely to have MRI evidence of lung abnormalities (p=0·0001; parenchymal abnormalities), brain abnormalities (p<0·0001; more white matter hyperintensities and regional brain volume reduction), and kidney abnormalities (p=0·014; lower medullary T1 and loss of corticomedullary differentiation), whereas cardiac and liver MRI abnormalities were similar between patients and controls. Patients with multiorgan abnormalities were older (difference in mean age 7 years [95% CI 4–10]; mean age of 59·8 years [SD 11·7] with multiorgan abnormalities vs mean age of 52·8 years [11·9] without multiorgan abnormalities; p<0·0001), more likely to have three or more comorbidities (OR 2·47 [1·32–4·82]; padjusted=0·0059), and more likely to have a more severe acute infection (acute CRP >5mg/L, OR 3·55 [1·23–11·88]; padjusted=0·025) than those without multiorgan abnormalities. Presence of lung MRI abnormalities was associated with a two-fold higher risk of chest tightness, and multiorgan MRI abnormalities were associated with severe and very severe persistent physical and mental health impairment (PHOSP-COVID symptom clusters) after hospitalisation.
Interpretation:
After hospitalisation for COVID-19, people are at risk of multiorgan abnormalities in the medium term. Our findings emphasise the need for proactive multidisciplinary care pathways, with the potential for imaging to guide surveillance frequency and therapeutic stratification