A review of the impact of shelter design on the health of displaced populations

There are currently millions of displaced people encamped in low-quality shelters that jeopardise the health of these displaced populations. These shelters, which exhibit poor thermal regulation and air quality, are often inhabited by households for several years. Recently, the internal environment of shelters has been recognised as a determinant of the health of the occupants and the indoor air quality (IAQ) and internal temperatures have been identified as critical factors affecting occupants’ health. Attempts by researchers and private companies to develop healthier shelter solutions have mainly prioritised factors such as rapid deployment, transportability and sustainability. Via a systematic bibliometric analysis of the existing literature, this review examines the impact of shelters’ internal environment on occupant health. Self-reports and building simulation are the most common methodologies reported in the literature, but there is a disconnect between the reported shelter issues and their impact on health. This is likely due to the multifaceted and site-specific factors analysed. Indoor air quality, thermal comfort and overcrowding are the most commonly identified shelter issues, which are strongly related to the presence of infectious and airborne diseases. An analysis of the available literature indicates that there is still a lack of clear guidance linking shelter quality to health. Moreover, evidence of the impact of shelters on health is harder to find, and there is a gap regarding the metrics and the methodology used to evaluate shelter quality. Therefore, further research is necessary to provide evidence of the impact of shelter design on health through transdisciplinary approaches

Talk the Talk and Walk the Walk: Are Career Academics Gatekeepers to Students’ Tacit Knowledge?

An opinion piece that argues for a more balanced portfolio of academic staff within faculty, whereby pracademics are ‘pivotal’ academic staff who can ‘talk the talk and walk the walk’ with students who have industrial placement experience

Understanding material and supplier networks in the construction of disaster-relief shelters: the feasibility of using social network analysis as a decision-making tool

Purpose: Understanding the supply network of construction materials used to construct shelters in refugee camps, or during the reconstruction of communities, is important as it can reveal the intricate links between different stakeholders and the volumes and speeds of material flows to the end-user. Using social network analysis (SNA) enables another dimension to be analysed – the role of commonalities. This is likely to be particularly important when attempting to replace vernacular materials with higher-performing alternatives or when encouraging the use of non-vernacular methods. This paper aims to analyse the supply networks of four different disaster-relief situations. Design/methodology/approach: Data were collected from interviews with 272 displaced (or formally displaced) families in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Turkey, often in difficult conditions. Findings: The results show that the form of the supply networks was highly influenced by the nature/cause of the initial displacement, the geographical location, the local availability of materials and the degree of support/advice given by aid agencies and or governments. In addition, it was found that SNA could be used to indicate which strategies might work in a particular context and which might not, thereby potentially speeding up the delivery of novel solutions. Research limitations/implications: This study represents the first attempt in theorising and empirically investigating supply networks using SNA in a post-disaster reconstruction context. It is suggested that future studies might map the up-stream supply chain to include manufacturers and higher-order, out of country, suppliers. This would provide a complete picture of the origins of all materials and components in the supply network. Originality/value: This is original research, and it aims to produce new knowledge

Blood eosinophil-guided oral prednisolone for COPD exacerbations in primary care in the UK (STARR2): A non-inferiority, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trial

Background: Systemic glucocorticoids are recommended for use in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) exacerbations; however, there is increased harm associated with their use. We hypothesised that the use of eosinophil biomarker-directed oral prednisolone therapy at the time of an exacerbation of COPD was effective at reducing prednisolone use without affecting adverse outcomes. Methods: The studying acute exacerbations and response (STARR2) study was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 14 primary care practices in the UK. We included adults (aged ≥ 40 years), who were current or former smokers (with at least a 10 pack year smoking history) with a diagnosis of COPD, defined as a post-bronchodilator FEV1/forced vital capacity ratio of less than 0·7 previously recorded by the primary care physician, and a history of at least one exacerbation in the previous 12 months requiring systemic corticosteroids with or without antibiotics. All study staff and participants were masked to study group allocation and to treatment allocation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to blood eosinophil-directed treatment (BET; to receive oral prednisolone 30 mg once daily if eosinophil count was high [ ≥ 2%] or placebo if eosinophil count was low [ \u3c 2%]) or to standard care treatment (ST; to receive prednisolone 30 mg once daily irrespective of the point-of-care eosinophil result). Treatment was prescribed for 14 days and all patients also received antibiotics. The primary outcome was the rate of treatment failure, defined as any need for re-treatment with antibiotics or steroids, hospitalisation for any cause, or death, assessed at 30 days after exacerbation in the modified intention-to-treat population. Participants were eligible for re-randomisation at further exacerbations (with a maximum of four exacerbations per participant). A safety analysis was conducted on all randomly assigned participants. Although designed as a superiority trial, after identification of an error in the randomisation code before data lock the study converted to show non-inferiority. An upper margin of 1·105 for the 95% CI was defined as the non-inferiority margin. This study was registered with EudraCT, 2017-001586-24, and is complete. Findings: Between Nov 6, 2017, and April 30, 2020, 308 participants were recruited from 14 general practices. 144 exacerbations (73 in the BET group and 71 in the ST group) from 93 participants (mean age 70 years [range 46–84] and mean percent predicted FEV1 60·9% [SD 19·4]; 52 [56%] male and 41 [44%] female; ethnicity data was not collected]) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. There were 14 (19%) treatment failures at 30 days post-exacerbation in the BET group and 23 (32%) in the ST group; we found a large non-significant estimated effect between BET and ST (RR 0·60 [95% CI 0·33–1·04]; p=0·070) in reducing treatment failures after a COPD exacerbation. The non-inferiority analysis supported that BET was non-inferior to ST. Frequency of adverse events were similar between the study groups; glycosuria (2/102 [2%] in BET group and 1/101 [1%] in the ST group) and hospital admission for COPD exacerbation (2/102 [2%] in BET group and 1/101 [1%] in the ST group) were the two most common adverse events in both groups. No deaths occurred in the study. Interpretation: Blood eosinophil-directed prednisolone therapy at the time of an acute exacerbation of COPD is non-inferior to standard care and can be used to safely reduce systemic glucocorticoid use in clinical practice. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research

Improvement in Survival after Paraquat Ingestion Following Introduction of a New Formulation in Sri Lanka

Martin Wilks and colleagues compared the outcome of paraquat self-poisoning with the standard formulation against a new formulation following its introduction into Sri Lanka

To what extent can decommissioning options for marine artificial structures move us toward environmental targets?

Switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy is key to international energy transition efforts and the move toward net zero. For many nations, this requires decommissioning of hundreds of oil and gas infrastructure in the marine environment. Current international, regional and national legislation largely dictates that structures must be completely removed at end-of-life although, increasingly, alternative decommissioning options are being promoted and implemented. Yet, a paucity of real-world case studies describing the impacts of decommissioning on the environment make decision-making with respect to which option(s) might be optimal for meeting international and regional strategic environmental targets challenging. To address this gap, we draw together international expertise and judgment from marine environmental scientists on marine artificial structures as an alternative source of evidence that explores how different decommissioning options might ameliorate pressures that drive environmental status toward (or away) from environmental objectives. Synthesis reveals that for 37 United Nations and Oslo-Paris Commissions (OSPAR) global and regional environmental targets, experts consider repurposing or abandoning individual structures, or abandoning multiple structures across a region, as the options that would most strongly contribute toward targets. This collective view suggests complete removal may not be best for the environment or society. However, different decommissioning options act in different ways and make variable contributions toward environmental targets, such that policy makers and managers would likely need to prioritise some targets over others considering political, social, economic, and ecological contexts. Current policy may not result in optimal outcomes for the environment or society

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

This work was supported by the UK Natural Environment Research Council and the INSITE programme [INSITE SYNTHESIS project, grant number NE/W009889/1].Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

PrtT-Regulated Proteins Secreted by Aspergillus fumigatus Activate MAPK Signaling in Exposed A549 Lung Cells Leading to Necrotic Cell Death

Aspergillus fumigatus is the most commonly encountered mold pathogen of humans, predominantly infecting the respiratory system. Colonization and penetration of the lung alveolar epithelium is a key but poorly understood step in the infection process. This study focused on identifying the transcriptional and cell-signaling responses activated in A549 alveolar carcinoma cells incubated in the presence of A. fumigatus wild-type and ΔPrtT protease-deficient germinating conidia and culture filtrates (CF). Microarray analysis of exposed A549 cells identified distinct classes of genes whose expression is altered in the presence of germinating conidia and CF and suggested the involvement of both NFkB and MAPK signaling pathways in mediating the cellular response. Phosphoprotein analysis of A549 cells confirmed that JNK and ERK1/2 are phosphorylated in response to CF from wild-type A. fumigatus and not phosphorylated in response to CF from the ΔPrtT protease-deficient strain. Inhibition of JNK or ERK1/2 kinase activity substantially decreased CF-induced cell damage, including cell peeling, actin-cytoskeleton damage, and reduction in metabolic activity and necrotic death. These results suggest that inhibition of MAPK-mediated host responses to treatment with A. fumigatus CF decreases cellular damage, a finding with possible clinical implications

A Worldwide Test of the Predictive Validity of Ideal Partner Preference-Matching

©American Psychological Association, [2024]. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the authoritative document published in the APA journal. The final article is available, upon publication, at: [ARTICLE DOI]”Ideal partner preferences (i.e., ratings of the desirability of attributes like attractiveness or intelligence) are the source of numerous foundational findings in the interdisciplinary literature on human mating. Recently, research on the predictive validity of ideal partner preference-matching (i.e., do people positively evaluate partners who match versus mismatch their ideals?) has become mired in several problems. First, articles exhibit discrepant analytic and reporting practices. Second, different findings emerge across laboratories worldwide, perhaps because they sample different relationship contexts and/or populations. This registered report—partnered with the Psychological Science Accelerator—uses a highly powered design (N=10,358) across 43 countries and 22 languages to estimate preference-matching effect sizes. The most rigorous tests revealed significant preference-matching effects in the whole sample and for partnered and single participants separately. The “corrected pattern metric” that collapses across 35 traits revealed a zero-order effect of β=.19 and an effect of β=.11 when included alongside a normative preference-matching metric. Specific traits in the “level metric” (interaction) tests revealed very small (average β=.04) effects. Effect sizes were similar for partnered participants who reported ideals before entering a relationship, and there was no consistent evidence that individual differences moderated any effects. Comparisons between stated and revealed preferences shed light on gender differences and similarities: For attractiveness, men’s and (especially) women’s stated preferences underestimated revealed preferences (i.e., they thought attractiveness was less important than it actually was). For earning potential, men’s stated preferences underestimated—and women’s stated preferences overestimated—revealed preferences. Implications for the literature on human mating are discussed.Unfunde

Developing expert scientific consensus on the environmental and societal effects of marine artificial structures prior to decommissioning

Thousands of artificial (‘human-made’) structures are present in the marine environment, many at or approaching end-of-life and requiring urgent decisions regarding their decommissioning. No consensus has been reached on which decommissioning option(s) result in optimal environmental and societal outcomes, in part, owing to a paucity of evidence from real-world decommissioning case studies. To address this significant challenge, we asked a worldwide panel of scientists to provide their expert opinion. They were asked to identify and characterise the ecosystem effects of artificial structures in the sea, their causes and consequences, and to identify which, if any, should be retained following decommissioning. Experts considered that most of the pressures driving ecological and societal effects from marine artificial structures (MAS) were of medium severity, occur frequently, and are dependent on spatial scale with local-scale effects of greater magnitude than regional effects. The duration of many effects following decommissioning were considered to be relatively short, in the order of days. Overall, environmental effects of structures were considered marginally undesirable, while societal effects marginally desirable. Experts therefore indicated that any decision to leave MAS in place at end-of-life to be more beneficial to society than the natural environment. However, some individual environmental effects were considered desirable and worthy of retention, especially in certain geographic locations, where structures can support improved trophic linkages, increases in tourism, habitat provision, and population size, and provide stability in population dynamics. The expert analysis consensus that the effects of MAS are both negative and positive for the environment and society, gives no strong support for policy change whether removal or retention is favoured until further empirical evidence is available to justify change to the status quo. The combination of desirable and undesirable effects associated with MAS present a significant challenge for policy- and decision-makers in their justification to implement decommissioning options. Decisions may need to be decided on a case-by-case basis accounting for the trade-off in costs and benefits at a local level