Outcomes in patients with gunshot wounds to the brain.

Introduction:Gunshot wounds to the brain (GSWB) confer high lethality and uncertain recovery. It is unclear which patients benefit from aggressive resuscitation, and furthermore whether patients with GSWB undergoing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) have potential for survival or organ donation. Therefore, we sought to determine the rates of survival and organ donation, as well as identify factors associated with both outcomes in patients with GSWB undergoing CPR. Methods:We performed a retrospective, multicenter study at 25 US trauma centers including dates between June 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017. Patients were included if they suffered isolated GSWB and required CPR at a referring hospital, in the field, or in the trauma resuscitation room. Patients were excluded for significant torso or extremity injuries, or if pregnant. Binomial regression models were used to determine predictors of survival/organ donation. Results:825 patients met study criteria; the majority were male (87.6%) with a mean age of 36.5 years. Most (67%) underwent CPR in the field and 2.1% (n=17) survived to discharge. Of the non-survivors, 17.5% (n=141) were considered eligible donors, with a donation rate of 58.9% (n=83) in this group. Regression models found several predictors of survival. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. Conclusion:We found that GSWB requiring CPR during trauma resuscitation was associated with a 2.1% survival rate and overall organ donation rate of 10.3%. Several factors appear to be favorably associated with survival, although predictions are uncertain due to the low number of survivors in this patient population. Hormone replacement was predictive of both survival and organ donation. These results are a starting point for determining appropriate treatment algorithms for this devastating clinical condition. Level of evidence:Level II

Euro+Med-Checklist Notulae, 14

Abstract: This is the fourteenth of a series of miscellaneous contributions, by various authors, where hitherto unpublished data relevant to both the Med-Checklist and the Euro+Med (or Sisyphus) projects are presented. This instalment deals with the families Apocynaceae, Compositae, Crassulaceae, Cyperaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Gramineae, Leguminosae, Nyctaginaceae, Onagraceae, Orobanchaceae, Rubiaceae, Solanaceae and Umbelliferae. It includes new country and area records and taxonomic and distributional considerations for taxa in Acalypha, Bupleurum, Carex, Datura, Epilobium, Eragrostis, Galium, Leontodon, Mirabilis, Nerium, Orobanche, Phelipanche, Rhinanthus, Saccharum, Sedum, Trifolium, Tripleurospermum and Willemetia. Citation For the whole article: Raab-Straube E. von & Raus Th. (ed.) 2021: Euro+Med-Checklist Notulae, 14.-Willdenowia 51: 355-369. For a single contribution (example): Bergmeier E. 2021: Leontodon longirostris (Finch & P. D. Sell) Talavera-Pp. 356-357 in: Raab-Straube E. von & Raus Th. (ed.), Euro+Med-Checklist Notulae, 14.-Willdenowia 51: 355-369. https://doi.org/10.3372/wi.51.51304 Version of record first published online on 30 November 2021 ahead of inclusion in December 2021 issue

Euro+Med-Checklist Notulae, 13

This is the thirteenth of a series of miscellaneous contributions, by various authors, where hitherto unpublished data relevant to both the Med-Checklist and the Euro+Med (or Sisyphus) projects are presented. This instalment deals with the families Amaryllidaceae (incl. Alliaceae), Apocynaceae, Caryophyllaceae, Chenopodiaceae, Compositae, Crassulaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Gramineae, Hydrocharitaceae, Iridaceae, Labiatae, Liliaceae, Malvaceae, Meliaceae, Myrtaceae, Orobanchaceae, Oxalidaceae, Papaveraceae, Pittosporaceae, Primulaceae (incl. Myrsinaceae), Ranunculaceae, Rhamnaceae, Rubiaceae, Solanaceae and Umbelliferae. It includes new country and area records and taxonomic and distributional considerations for taxa in Allium, Anthemis, Atriplex, Centaurea, Chasmanthe, Chenopodium, Delphinium, Digitaria, Elodea, Erigeron, Eucalyptus, Hypecoum, Leptorhabdos, Luffa, Malvaviscus, Melia, Melica, Momordica, Nerium, Oxalis, Pastinaca, Phelipanche, Physalis, Pittosporum, Salvia, Scorzoneroides, Sedum, Sesleria, Silene, Spartina, Stipa, Tulipa and Ziziphus, new combinations in Cyanus, Lysimachia, Rhaponticoides and Thliphthisa, and the reassessment of a replacement name in Sempervivum

Synaesthesia: The prevalence of atypical cross-modal experiences

Sensory and cognitive mechanisms allow stimuli to be perceived with properties relating to sight, sound, touch, etc, and ensure, for example, that visual properties are perceived as visual experiences, rather than sounds, tastes, smells, etc. Theories of normal development can be informed by cases where this modularity breaks down, in a condition known as synaesthesia. Conventional wisdom has held that this occurs extremely rarely (0.05% of births) and affects women more than men. Here we present the first test of synaesthesia prevalence with sampling that does not rely on self-referral, and which uses objective tests to establish genuineness. We show that (a) the prevalence of synaesthesia is 88 times higher than previously assumed, (b) the most common variant is coloured days, (c) the most studied variant (grapheme-colour synaesthesia)-previously believed most common-is prevalent at 1%, and (d) there is no strong asymmetry in the distribution of synaesthesia across the sexes. Hence, we suggest that female biases reported earlier likely arose from (or were exaggerated by) sex differences in self-disclosure

Sexual health and COVID-19: protocol for a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Global responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have exposed and exacerbated existing socioeconomic and health inequities that disproportionately affect the sexual health and well-being of many populations, including people of color, ethnic minority groups, women, and sexual and gender minority populations. Although there have been several reviews published on COVID-19 and health disparities across various populations, none has focused on sexual health. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill several of the gaps in the current knowledge of sexual health in the COVID-19 era. METHODS: A scoping review focusing on sexual health and COVID-19 will be conducted. We will search (from January 2020 onwards) CINAHL, Africa-Wide Information, Web of Science Core Collection, Embase, Gender Studies Database, Gender Watch, Global Health, WHO Global Literature on Coronavirus Disease Database, WHO Global Index Medicus, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Sociological Abstracts. Grey literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, governmental websites, and clinical trials registries (e.g., ClinicalTrial.gov , World Health Organization, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry). Study selection will conform to the Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2015 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. DISCUSSION: Original research is urgently needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 on sexual health. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATIONS: Systematic Review Registration: Open Science Framework osf/io/PRX8E

Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19 Restrictions: A Study of 30 Countries From the I-SHARE Consortium

Intimate partner violence (IPV) causes substantial physical and psychological trauma. Restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including lockdowns and movement restrictions, may exacerbate IPV risk and reduce access to IPV support services. This cross-sectional study examines IPV during COVID-19 restrictions in 30 countries from the International Sexual HeAlth and REproductive Health (I-SHARE) study conducted from July 20th, 2020, to February, 15th, 2021. IPV was a primary outcome measure adapted from a World Health Organization multicountry survey. Mixed-effects modeling was used to determine IPV correlates among participants stratified by cohabitation status. The sample included 23,067 participants from 30 countries. A total of 1,070/15,336 (7.0%) participants stated that they experienced IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. A total of 1,486/15,336 (9.2%) participants stated that they had experienced either physical or sexual partner violence before the restrictions, which then decreased to 1,070 (7.0%) after the restrictions. In general, identifying as a sexual minority and experiencing greater economic vulnerability were associated with higher odds of experiencing IPV during COVID-19 restrictions, which were accentuated among participants who were living with their partners. Greater stringency of COVID-19 restrictions and living in urban or semi-urban areas were associated with lower odds of experiencing IPV in some settings. The I-SHARE data suggest a substantial burden of IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. However, the restrictions were correlated with reduced IPV in some settings. There is a need for investing in specific support systems for survivors of IPV during the implementation of restrictions designed to contain infectious disease outbreaks

The International Sexual Health And Reproductive Health Survey (I-SHARE-1): A Multi-Country Analysis of Adults from 30 Countries Prior to and During the Initial COVID-19 Wave

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic forced billions of people to shelter in place, altering social and sexual relationships worldwide. In many settings, COVID-19 threatened already precarious health services. However, there is limited evidence to date about changes to sexual and reproductive health (SRH) during the initial wave of COVID-19 disease. To address this gap, our team organized a multi-country, cross-sectional online survey as part of a global consortium. Methods: Consortium research teams conducted online surveys in 30 countries. Sampling methods included convenience, online panels, and population-representative. Primary outcomes included sexual behaviors, partner violence, and SRH service utilization, and we compared three months prior to and three months after policy measures to mitigate COVID-19. We used established indicators and analyses pre-specified in our protocol. We conducted meta-analyses for primary outcomes and graded the certainty of the evidence using Cochrane methods. Descriptive analyses included 22,724 individuals in 25 countries. Five additional countries with sample sizes <200 were included in descriptive meta-analyses. Results: Respondents were mean age 34 years; most identified as women (15160; 66.7%), cis-gender (19432; 86.6%) and heterosexual (16592; 77.9%). Among 4546 respondents with casual partners, condom use stayed the same for 3374 (74.4%) people and 640 (14.1%) people reported a decline. Fewer respondents reported physical or sexual partner violence during COVID-19 measures (1063/15144, 7.0%) compared to the period before COVID-19 measures (1469/15887, 9.3%). COVID-19 measures impeded access to condoms (933/10790, 8.7%), contraceptives (610/8175, 7.5%), and HIV/STI testing (750/1965, 30.7%). Pooled estimates from meta-analysis indicate during COVID-19 measures, 32.3% (95% CI 23.9-42.1) of people needing HIV/STI testing had hindered access, 4.4% (95% CI 3.4-5.4) experienced partner violence, and 5.8% (95% CI 5.4-8.2) decreased casual partner condom use (moderate certainty of evidence for each outcome). Meta-analysis findings were robust in sensitivity analyses that examined country income level, sample size, and sampling strategy. Conclusion: Open science methods are feasible to organize research studies as part of emergency responses. The initial COVID-19 wave impacted SRH behaviors and access to services across diverse global settings

Intimate Partner Violence During COVID-19 Restrictions: A Study of 30 Countries From the I-SHARE Consortium.

Intimate partner violence (IPV) causes substantial physical and psychological trauma. Restrictions introduced in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, including lockdowns and movement restrictions, may exacerbate IPV risk and reduce access to IPV support services. This cross-sectional study examines IPV during COVID-19 restrictions in 30 countries from the International Sexual HeAlth and REproductive Health (I-SHARE) study conducted from July 20th, 2020, to February, 15th, 2021. IPV was a primary outcome measure adapted from a World Health Organization multicountry survey. Mixed-effects modeling was used to determine IPV correlates among participants stratified by cohabitation status. The sample included 23,067 participants from 30 countries. A total of 1,070/15,336 (7.0%) participants stated that they experienced IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. A total of 1,486/15,336 (9.2%) participants stated that they had experienced either physical or sexual partner violence before the restrictions, which then decreased to 1,070 (7.0%) after the restrictions. In general, identifying as a sexual minority and experiencing greater economic vulnerability were associated with higher odds of experiencing IPV during COVID-19 restrictions, which were accentuated among participants who were living with their partners. Greater stringency of COVID-19 restrictions and living in urban or semi-urban areas were associated with lower odds of experiencing IPV in some settings. The I-SHARE data suggest a substantial burden of IPV during COVID-19 restrictions. However, the restrictions were correlated with reduced IPV in some settings. There is a need for investing in specific support systems for survivors of IPV during the implementation of restrictions designed to contain infectious disease outbreaks