Assessing the Operative Log Data of Traditional (5+2) vs. Integrated (0+5) Vascular Training Programs

Introduction: In 2006, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) approved an integrated 5 year vascular surgery residency program. Operative experience can be used as a surrogate marker for success in the evolving field of vascular surgery training. Objective: The purpose of this study is to compare the operative experience of those graduating from the traditional (5+2) vascular training program with the integrated (0+5) program. Methods: National operative case log data supplied by the ACGME was gathered and organized for vascular surgery residents graduating between 2013 and 2018. Mean case numbers were compared between integrated vascular residents and traditional vascular fellows (mean case numbers for vascular fellows included cases from their general surgery residencies). Results: The 5+2 trainees performed 36% more overall procedures than the 0+5 trainees (mean, 1650 vs 1050). The greater number of overall procedures performed by the 5+2 trainees was primarily realized by an increased number of abdomen (e.g. biliary, small/large intestine) cases. However, the 5+2 trainees performed 8% less vascular procedures (mean, 786 vs 854). The greater number of vascular procedures performed by the 0+5 trainees was primarily realized by increased numbers of endovascular (e.g. endovascular peripheral obstruction) and venous (e.g. caval filter) cases. Discussion: The integrated 0+5 graduates performed more total vascular procedures than their 5+2 counterparts. The overall total operative experience remains greater for the traditional 5+2 graduates, given their additional two years of training. Further longitudinal studies will be needed to fully assess the effect of the new integrated 0+5 training paradigm

A mixed-methods feasibility study of a new digital health support package for people after stroke : The Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS) intervention

Background Evidence for digital health programmes to support people living with stroke is growing. We assessed the feasibility of a protocol and procedures for the Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS) trial. Methods We conducted a mixed-method feasibility study. Participants with acute stroke were recruited from three hospitals (Melbourne, Australia). Eligibility: Adults with stroke discharged from hospital to home within 10 days, modified Rankin Score 0–4 and prior use of Short Message System (SMS)/email. While in hospital, recruited participants contributed to structured person-centred goal setting and completed baseline surveys including self-management skills and health-related quality of life. Participants were randomised 7–14 days after discharge via REDCap® (1:1 allocation). Following randomisation, the intervention group received a 12-week programme of personalised electronic support messages (average 66 messages sent by SMS or email) aligned with their goals. The control group received six electronic administrative messages. Feasibility outcomes included the following: number of patients screened and recruited, study retainment, completion of outcome measures and acceptability of the ReCAPS intervention and trial procedures (e.g. participant satisfaction survey, clinician interviews). Protocol fidelity outcomes included number of goals developed (and quality), electronic messages delivered, stop messages received and engagement with messages. We undertook inductive thematic analysis of interview/open-text survey data and descriptive analysis of closed survey questions. Results Between November 2018 and October 2019, 312 patients were screened; 37/105 (35%) eligible patients provided consent (mean age 61 years; 32% female); 33 were randomised (17 to intervention). Overall, 29 (88%) participants completed the12-week outcome assessments with 12 (41%) completed assessments in the allocated timeframe and 16 also completing the satisfaction survey (intervention=10). Overall, trial participants felt that the study was worthwhile and most would recommend it to others. Six clinicians participated in one of three focus group interviews; while they reported that the trial and the process of goal setting were acceptable, they raised concerns regarding the additional time required to personalise goals. Conclusion The study protocol and procedures were feasible with acceptable retention of participants. Consent and goal personalisation procedures should be centralised for the phase III trial to reduce the burden on hospital clinicians. Trial registration Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12618001468213 (date 31/08/2018); Universal Trial Number: U1111-1206-723

Protocol of a randomized controlled trial investigating the effectiveness of Recovery-focused Community support to Avoid readmissions and improve Participation after Stroke (ReCAPS)

Rationale: To address unmet needs, electronic messages to support person-centred goal attainment and secondary prevention may avoid hospital presentations/readmissions after stroke, but evidence is limited. Hypothesis: Compared to control participants, there will be a 10% lower proportion of intervention participants who represent to hospital (emergency/admission) within 90 days of randomisation. Methods and design: Multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial with intention-to-treat analysis. The intervention group receives 12 weeks of personalised, goal-centred and administrative electronic messages, while the control group only receives administrative messages. The trial includes a process evaluation, assessment of treatment fidelity and an economic evaluation. Participants: Confirmed stroke (modified Rankin Score: 0-4), aged �18 years with internet/mobile phone access, discharged directly home from hospital. Randomisation: 1:1 computer-generated, stratified by age and baseline disability. Outcomes Assessments: Collected at 90 days and 12 months following randomisation. Outcomes: Primary: Hospital emergency presentations/admissions within 90 days of randomisation. Secondary outcomes include goal attainment, self-efficacy, mood, unmet needs, disability, quality-of-life, recurrent stroke/cardiovascular events/deaths at 90 days and 12 months, and death and cost-effectiveness at 12 months. Sample size: To test our primary hypothesis, we estimated a sample size of 890 participants (445 per group) with 80% power and two-tailed significance threshold of α=0.05. Given uncertainty for the effect size of this novel intervention, the sample size will be adaptively re-estimated when outcomes for n=668 are obtained, with maximum sample capped at 1100. Discussion: We will provide new evidence on the potential effectiveness, implementation and cost-effectiveness of a tailored eHealth intervention for survivors of stroke

Comprehensive transcriptome of the maize stalk borer, Busseola fusca, from multiple tissue types, developmental stages, and parasitoid wasp exposures

International audienc

The psychological science accelerator’s COVID-19 rapid-response dataset

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data

Multiple novel prostate cancer susceptibility signals identified by fine-mapping of known risk loci among Europeans

Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified numerous common prostate cancer (PrCa) susceptibility loci. We have fine-mapped 64 GWAS regions known at the conclusion of the iCOGS study using large-scale genotyping and imputation in 25 723 PrCa cases and 26 274 controls of European ancestry. We detected evidence for multiple independent signals at 16 regions, 12 of which contained additional newly identified significant associations. A single signal comprising a spectrum of correlated variation was observed at 39 regions; 35 of which are now described by a novel more significantly associated lead SNP, while the originally reported variant remained as the lead SNP only in 4 regions. We also confirmed two association signals in Europeans that had been previously reported only in East-Asian GWAS. Based on statistical evidence and linkage disequilibrium (LD) structure, we have curated and narrowed down the list of the most likely candidate causal variants for each region. Functional annotation using data from ENCODE filtered for PrCa cell lines and eQTL analysis demonstrated significant enrichment for overlap with bio-features within this set. By incorporating the novel risk variants identified here alongside the refined data for existing association signals, we estimate that these loci now explain ∼38.9% of the familial relative risk of PrCa, an 8.9% improvement over the previously reported GWAS tag SNPs. This suggests that a significant fraction of the heritability of PrCa may have been hidden during the discovery phase of GWAS, in particular due to the presence of multiple independent signals within the same regio

In COVID-19 Health Messaging, Loss Framing Increases Anxiety with Little-to-No Concomitant Benefits: Experimental Evidence from 84 Countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges