Plasma metabolomics and clinical predictors of survival differences in COPD patients

Background: Plasma metabolomics profile (PMP) in COPD has been associated with clinical characteristics, but PMP’s relationship to survival has not been reported. We determined PMP differences between patients with COPD who died an average of 2 years after enrollment (Non-survivors, NS) compared to those who survived (S) and also with age matched controls (C). Methods: We studied prospectively 90 patients with severe COPD and 30 controls. NS were divided in discovery and validation cohorts (30 patients each) and the results compared to the PMP of 30 S and C. All participants completed lung function tests, dyspnea scores, quality of life, exercise capacity, BODE index, and plasma metabolomics by liquid and gas chromatography / mass spectometry (LC/MS, LC/MS2 , GC/MS). Statistically, we used Random Forest Analysis (RFA) and Support Vector Machine (SVM) to determine metabolites that differentiated the 3 groups and compared the ability of metabolites vs. clinical characteristics to classify patients into survivors and non-survivors. Results: There were 79 metabolites statistically different between S and NS [p < 0.05 and false discovery rate (q value) < 0.1]. RFA and SVM classification of COPD survivors and non-survivors had a predicted accuracy of 74 and 85% respectively. Elevation of tricyclic acid cycle intermediates branched amino acids depletion and increase in lactate, fructose and xylonate showed the most relevant differences between S vs. NS suggesting alteration in mitochondrial oxidative energy generation. PMP had similar predictive power for risk of death as information provided by clinical characteristics. Conclusions: A plasma metabolomic profile characterized by an oxidative energy production difference between survivors and non-survivors was observed in COPD patients 2 years before death

Ecos de la academia: Revista de la Facultad de Educación, Ciencia y Tecnología - FECYT Nro 6

Ecos de la academia, Revista de la Facultad de Educación Ciencia y Tecnología es una publicación científica de la Universidad Técnica del Norte, con revisión por pares a doble ciego que publica artículos en idioma español, quichua, portugués e inglés. Se edita con una frecuencia semestral con dos números por año.En ella se divulgan trabajos originales e inéditos generados por los investigadores, docentes y estudiantes de la FECYT, y contribuciones de profesionales de instituciones docentes e investigativas dentro y fuera del país, con calidad, originalidad y relevancia en las áreas de ciencias sociales y tecnología aplicada.Modelos multidimensionales del bienestar en contextos de enseñanza- aprendizaje: una revisión sistemática. Nuevas tendencias para el área académica de la Publicidad en la zona 1 del Ecuador. Propuesta de un curso de escritura académica bajo la base de modelos experienciales. Aproximación al estudio de las emociones. Seguimiento a egresados y graduados para actualizar el perfil de egreso y profesional. Impacto de la Gerencia de Calidad en el clima organizacional en Educación Básica. Comunicación efectiva del gerente educativo orientada al manejo de conflictos en el personal docente. Meritocracia: Democratización o exclusión en el acceso a la educación superior en Ecuador. Asertividad y desempeño académico en estudiantes universitarios. La creatividad en la formación profesional. Aspectos metodológicos en el proceso de enseñanza- aprendizaje de la gimnasia en estudiantes de Educación Física. English Language Learning Interaction through Web 2.0 Technologies. La sistematización de la práctica educativa y su relación con la metodología de la investigación. El ozono y la oxigenación hiperbárica: una vía para mejorar la recuperación en lesiones deportivas. La labor tutorial: Independencia del aprendizaje en el contexto universitario. Motivación hacia la profesión docente en la Enseñanza Secundaria. El uso académico de Facebook y WhatsApp en estudiantes universitarios... La educación superior en Ecuador: situación actual y factores de mejora de la calidad. El Proyecto de Investigación “Imbabura Étnica”

Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research-practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among 'on-the-ground' practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42532-022-00132-8

Advancing the scholarship and practice of stakeholder engagement in working landscapes: a co-produced research agenda

Participatory approaches to science and decision making, including stakeholder engagement, are increasingly common for managing complex socio-ecological challenges in working landscapes. However, critical questions about stakeholder engagement in this space remain. These include normative, political, and ethical questions concerning who participates, who benefits and loses, what good can be accomplished, and for what, whom, and by who. First, opportunities for addressing justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion interests through engagement, while implied in key conceptual frameworks, remain underexplored in scholarly work and collaborative practice alike. A second line of inquiry relates to research–practice gaps. While both the practice of doing engagement work and scholarly research on the efficacy of engagement is on the rise, there is little concerted interplay among ‘on-the-ground’ practitioners and scholarly researchers. This means scientific research often misses or ignores insight grounded in practical and experiential knowledge, while practitioners are disconnected from potentially useful scientific research on stakeholder engagement. A third set of questions concerns gaps in empirical understanding of the efficacy of engagement processes and includes inquiry into how different engagement contexts and process features affect a range of behavioral, cognitive, and decision-making outcomes. Because of these gaps, a cohesive and actionable research agenda for stakeholder engagement research and practice in working landscapes remains elusive. In this review article, we present a co-produced research agenda for stakeholder engagement in working landscapes. The co-production process involved professionally facilitated and iterative dialogue among a diverse and international group of over 160 scholars and practitioners through a yearlong virtual workshop series. The resulting research agenda is organized under six cross-cutting themes: (1) Justice, Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion; (2) Ethics; (3) Research and Practice; (4) Context; (5) Process; and (6) Outcomes and Measurement. This research agenda identifies critical research needs and opportunities relevant for researchers, practitioners, and policymakers alike. We argue that addressing these research opportunities is necessary to advance knowledge and practice of stakeholder engagement and to support more just and effective engagement processes in working landscapes

Las fronteras del istmo

Obra organizada en torno a seis ejes principales que estudian la importancia de comparar las fronteras y los tipos de gestión desde el punto de vista geopolítico, histórico y antropológico; las tramas de la organización del espacio actual; la influencia en la evolución de las sociedades debido a la violencia política y los conflictos armados; los movimientos migratorios internacionales; la integración política y económica y finalmente los lazos comunitarios y de las identidades relacionados con las vivencias fronterizas

Aeroallergen immunotherapy associated with reduced risk of severe COVID-19 in 1095 allergic patients

Introduction: Allergen immunotherapy (AIT) brings along changes in the immune system, restoring dendritic cell function, reducing T2 inflammation and augmenting the regulatory cell activation. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections, interferes with the immune system causing immune suppression during the first phase and over-activation in more advanced disease. We decided to explore the interaction of both in a real-world observational trial. Methods: We registered COVID-19 outcomes in patients with allergic disorders in Latin America, treated with and without AIT. The registry was conducted during the first 1.3 years of the pandemic, with most of the data collected before COVID-19 vaccination was concluded in most countries. Data collection was anonymous via a web-based instrument. Ten countries participated. Results: 630/1095 (57.6%) of the included patients received AIT. Compared to patients without AIT, those treated with AIT had a reduced risk ratio (RR) for COVID-19 lower respiratory symptoms (RR 0.78, 95% CI: 0.6703–0.9024; p = 0.001662) and need for oxygen therapy (RR 0.65, 95% CI: 0.4217–0.9992; p = 0.048). In adherent patients on maintenance sublingual immunotherapy/subcutaneous immunotherapy (SLIT/SCIT) the RR reduction was larger [RR = 0.6136 (95% CI 0.4623–0.8143; p < 0.001) and RR: 0.3495 (95% CI 0.1822–0.6701; p < 0.005), respectively]. SLIT was slightly more effective (NS). We excluded age, comorbidities, level of health care attendance, and type of allergic disorder as confounders, although asthma was related to a higher frequency of severe disease. When analyzing patients with allergic asthma (n = 503) the RR reduction favoring AIT was more pronounced with 30% for lower respiratory symptoms or worse (RR 0.6914, 95% CI 0.5264 to 0.9081, p = 0.0087) and 51% for need of oxygen therapy or worse (RR 0.4868, 95% CI 0.2829–0.8376, p = 0.0082). Among severe allergic patients treated with biologics (n = 24) only 2/24 needed oxygen therapy. There were no critical cases among them. Conclusion: In our registry AIT was associated with reduced COVID-19 severity