OLAC CAPC Video Language Coding Best Practices Task Force Draft Recommentations

The task force was charged with creating a set of best practices for coding MARC 008/lang and 041 language information for videos, especially DVDs, and with using that exercise to examine whether any changes could be made to the MARC format (coding or directions) that would improve access to the multiple types of language information found on videos

Video Language Coding: Best Practices

The 2006-2007 task force was charged with creating a set of best practices for coding MARC 008/lang and 041 language information for videos, especially DVDs, and with using that exercise to examine whether any changes could be made to the MARC21 format (coding or directions) that would improve access to the multiple types of language information found on videos. The work of that task force resulted in a number of changes to the MARC format, which are described in appendix 1. This current document, completed by the 2012 task force, provides guidance for coding video language information using the current MARC documentation

Guide to Cataloging DVD and Blu-ray Discs Using AACR2r and MARC 21 2008 Update

This guide is intended as an update to the 2002 Guide to Cataloging DVDs UsingAACR2r Chapters 7 and 9 created by the DVD Cataloging Task Force of OLAC. The update incorporates rule changes and interpretations that resulted from the 2004 Amendments for Chapters 7 and 9 of Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR2) and expands the discussion of formats to include Blu-ray Discs, DualDiscs, and DVD-Audio Discs. The information and cataloging examples presented should help clarify principles and rules used in cataloging DVD formats and digital video disc formats. There is also information to help the cataloging process for the Blu-ray Discs and DVD-Audio, newer formats that libraries will begin and continue to purchase as producers market and develop them for consumer use

Ethnic Minority Status, Age-at-Immigration and Psychosis Risk in Rural Environments:Evidence From the SEPEA Study

Objective: Several ethnic minority groups experience elevated rates of first-episode psychosis (FEP), but most studies have been conducted in urban settings. We investigated whether incidence varied by ethnicity, generation status, and age-at-immigration in a diverse, mixed rural, and urban setting. Method: We identified 687 people, 16–35 years, with an ICD-10 diagnosis of FEP, presenting to Early Intervention Psychosis services in the East of England over 2 million person-years. We used multilevel Poisson regression to examine incidence variation by ethnicity, rural–urban setting, generation status, and age-at-immigration, adjusting for several confounders including age, sex, socioeconomic status, population density, and deprivation. Results: People of black African (incidence rate ratio: 4.06; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.63–6.25), black Caribbean (4.63; 95% CI: 2.38–8.98) and Pakistani (2.31; 95% CI: 1.35–3.94) origins were at greatest FEP risk relative to the white British population, after multivariable adjustment. Non-British white migrants were not at increased FEP risk (1.00; 95% CI: 0.77–1.32). These patterns were independently present in rural and urban settings. For first-generation migrants, migration during childhood conferred greatest risk of psychotic disorders (2.20; 95% CI: 1.33–3.62). Conclusions: Elevated psychosis risk in several visible minority groups could not be explained by differences in postmigratory socioeconomic disadvantage. These patterns were observed across rural and urban areas of our catchment, suggesting that elevated psychosis risk for some ethnic minority groups is not a result of selection processes influencing rural–urban living. Timing of exposure to migration during childhood, an important social and neurodevelopmental window, may also elevate risk

The Epidemiology of First-Episode Psychosis in Early Intervention in Psychosis Services: Findings From the Social Epidemiology of Psychoses in East Anglia [SEPEA] Study.

OBJECTIVE: Few studies have characterized the epidemiology of first-episode psychoses in rural or urban settings since the introduction of early intervention psychosis services. To address this, the authors conducted a naturalistic cohort study in England, where such services are well established. METHOD: All new first-episode psychosis cases, 16-35 years old, presenting to early intervention psychosis services in the East of England were identified during 2 million person-years follow-up. Presence of ICD-10 F10-33 psychotic disorder was confirmed using OPCRIT [operational criteria for psychotic illness]. Incidence rate ratios were estimated following multivariable Poisson regression, adjusting for age, sex, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, neighborhood-level deprivation, and population density. RESULTS: Of 1,005 referrals, 687 participants (68.4%) fulfilled epidemiological and diagnostic criteria for first-episode psychosis (34.0 new cases per 100,000 person-years; 95% CI=31.5-36.6). Median age at referral was similar for men (22.5 years; interquartile range: 19.5-26.7) and women (23.4 years; interquartile range: 19.5-29.1); incidence rates were highest for men and women before 20 years of age. Rates increased for ethnic minority groups (incidence rate ratio: 1.4; 95% CI=1.1-1.6), as well as with lower socioeconomic status (incidence rate ratio: 1.3; 95% CI=1.2-1.4) and in more urban (incidence rate ratio: 1.4;95%CI=1.0-1.8) and deprived (incidence rate ratio: 2.1; 95% CI=1.3-3.3) neighborhoods, after adjustment for confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Pronounced variation in psychosis incidence, peaking before 20 years old, exists in populations served by early intervention psychosis services. Excess rates were restricted to urban and deprived communities, suggesting that a threshold of socioenvironmental adversity may be necessary to increase incidence. This robust epidemiology can inform service development in various settings about likely population-level need.Wellcome Trust (Sir Henry Wellcome Research Fellowship; Grant ID: WT085540)This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from the American Psychiatric Association via http://dx.doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2016.1601010

Increased Incidence of Vestibular Disorders in Patients With SARS-CoV-2

OBJECTIVE: Determine the incidence of vestibular disorders in patients with SARS-CoV-2 compared to the control population. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective. SETTING: Clinical data in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database (N3C). METHODS: Deidentified patient data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database (N3C) were queried based on variant peak prevalence (untyped, alpha, delta, omicron 21K, and omicron 23A) from covariants.org to retrospectively analyze the incidence of vestibular disorders in patients with SARS-CoV-2 compared to control population, consisting of patients without documented evidence of COVID infection during the same period. RESULTS: Patients testing positive for COVID-19 were significantly more likely to have a vestibular disorder compared to the control population. Compared to control patients, the odds ratio of vestibular disorders was significantly elevated in patients with untyped (odds ratio [OR], 2.39; confidence intervals [CI], 2.29-2.50; CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of vestibular disorders differed between COVID-19 variants and was significantly elevated in COVID-19-positive patients compared to the control population. These findings have implications for patient counseling and further research is needed to discern the long-term effects of these findings

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707