Real‐world conservation planning for evolutionary diversity in the Kimberley, Australia, sidesteps uncertain taxonomy

Targeting phylogenetic diversity (PD) in systematic conservation planning is an efficient way to minimize losses across the Tree of Life. Considering representation of genetic diversity below and above species level, also allows robust analyses within systems where taxonomy is in flux. We use dense sampling of phylogeographic diversity for 11 lizard genera, to demonstrate how PD can be applied to a policy‐ready conservation planning problem. Our analysis bypasses named taxa, using genetic data directly to inform conservation decisions. We highlight areas that should be prioritized for ecological management, and also areas that would provide the greatest benefit if added to the multisector conservation estate. We provide a rigorous and effective approach to represent the spectrum of genetic and species diversity in conservation planning.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145539/1/conl12438.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145539/2/conl12438-sup-0001-figureS1-S2.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/145539/3/conl12438_am.pd

Real-world conservation planning for evolutionary diversity in the Kimberley, Australia, sidesteps uncertain taxonomy

Targeting phylogenetic diversity (PD) in systematic conservation planning is an efficient way to minimize losses across the Tree of Life. Considering representation of genetic diversity below and above species level, also allows robust analyses within systems where taxonomy is in flux. We use dense sampling of phylogeographic diversity for 11 lizard genera, to demonstrate how PD can be applied to a policy‐ready conservation planning problem. Our analysis bypasses named taxa, using genetic data directly to inform conservation decisions. We highlight areas that should be prioritized for ecological management, and also areas that would provide the greatest benefit if added to the multisector conservation estate. We provide a rigorous and effective approach to represent the spectrum of genetic and species diversity in conservation planning.This work was supported by the Australian Research Council through several grants and fellowships. Australian Research Council, Grant/Award Numbers: DE160100035, LP12020006

Point of care HIV testing in the dental setting: An acceptability and feasibility study

BACKGROUND: In the UK, upwards of 100,000 people are living with HIV. However, undiagnosed and late diagnosis of HIV remains a public health problem. Around 4,660 (5%) people living with HIV are undiagnosed, and almost half are diagnosed late (CD4+ <350cells/uL). Expanded HIV testing in non-traditional healthcare settings has played an important part in the public health response to eliminating HIV transmission. In the US and Canada, implementing HIV testing interventions into dental settings has shown promise. AIM: The aim of this study was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing HIV point of care testing (HIV POCT) in UK dental settings. The findings aimed to inform parameters for a full-scale trial and determine whether progression to a full-scale trial was appropriate. METHODS: The study comprised two phases. Phase I encompassed a mixed methods systematic review and qualitative research used to explore the attitudes of dental professionals, dental patients and people living with HIV toward HIV POCT in dental settings. In Phase II, HIV POCT intervention was implemented in dental practices in London alongside an embedded process evaluation. RESULTS: Phase I: The systematic review identified multiple approaches to delivering HIV POCT in dental settings. The focus groups indicated that universal HIV POCT integrated into dental settings was appropriate and acceptable for implementation in the UK. Further, training needs around HIV knowledge and communication skills were identified. Phase II: 441 patients were offered HIV testing, 48.1% accepted. Patients found the intervention highly acceptable. However, most perceived themselves at low risk of HIV infection. Recruitment diminished significantly over time and required ongoing research support. Local adaptation of the intervention was common and undermined intervention delivery. CONCLUSIONS: Insurmountable logistical barriers, poor fidelity, persistent recruitment issues, and data collection challenges meant that the intervention was not considered feasible for progression to full-scale trial

Co-creating strategies and actions to tackle oral health-related stigma

Stigma is the greatest barrier faced by people experiencing social exclusion when accessing healthcare. Recent WHO framework for meaningful engagement of people living with noncommunicable diseases [1] builds on different types of evidence to acknowledge and empower people through participation in related health processes that address the systemic inequalities and inequities experienced around the globe. This framework sets up principles, enablers, and actions for the equitable inclusion of individuals in co-creating healthcare services and policy. Eliminating stigma is one of the core enablers for operationalizing this framework with one of the actions focused on reviewing and monitoring engagement work to prevent stigmatization and discrimination.Oral health-related stigma has been identified and defined as a unique health stigma that harms people and groups with oral health that differs from the prevailing cultural norms [2, 3, 4]. Health-related stigmas affect individuals by discouraging access to services, impairing adherence to treatment, diminishing mental health and social resources, and impacting quality of life. Social signalling through the media, social networks, advertising, and other sources gives rise to Western cultural ideals of straight white teeth as synonymous with health, wealth and social status (5). Even minor irregularities such as mild spacing or normal racial pigmentation were cause for concern in the PPI group who have shared their insights on this topic. However, despite the ubiquity of oral health-related stigma in society, there is a paucity of research in the dental literature that explores the concept of oral health stigma and no published literature that explores attempts to destigmatise differences in oral health [2].An increasing concern is stigma consciously and unconsciously perpetrated by dental health professionals and/or oral health researchers towards patients also highlighted in the paper by Doughty et al [2] and others [5]. This hands-on workshop will further expand on the ideas put forwards in this paper in an opening interactive segment that will use visual images to stimulate discussion and unpack clinicians’ and oral health researchers’ perspectives of oral health-related stigma. It will then use snapshot presentations by expert speakers to share patients’ perceptions of oral health related stigma. This will showcase research that has prioritised listening and learning from patients and people with lived experience of social exclusion across the globe. The group will then work together in the final segment of the session to identify and co-create strategies and actions to reduce professional and oral health perpetuated oral-health stigma. 3. Sponsorship : proposal submitted to Global Oral Health Inequalities Research Network (GOHIRN) and Behavioural, Epidemiologic and Health Services Research Group (BEHSR) 4.Learning Objectives4.1.Increase knowledge on oral health-related stigma. 4.2.Critical understand of the effects and experiences of oral health-related stigma of vulnerable groups.4.3.Critical reflect on strategies to tackle stigma in dental health services that prioritise involvement of patients and people with lived experience.5.ParticipantsCorresponding organizer: Andrea Rodriguez Organisers: Andrea Rodriguez (University of Dundee, UK); Janine Yazdi-Doughty (University of Liverpool, UK); Barry Gibson (University of Sheffield, UK); Vanessa Muirhead (Queen Mary University of London, UK)Chair Moderator : Vanessa Muirhead (VM)6.Speakers: Janine Yazdi-Doughty (JD); Barry Gibson (BG); Andrea Rodriguez (AR)Speaker’s titles for short presentations:-‘Conceptualizing Oral Health-related Stigma’ (JD)-‘Life after tooth loss: efforts to preserve a sense of self’ (BG)-‘Perspectives of vulnerable groups in Scotland and Brazil on the consequences of stigma’ (AR) The Hands on Workshop will involve four moments:Section ComponentsTiming Chair/speaker initialsWelcoming participantsIntroduction/background4 minutesVMBreakout workshop 1Group discussion: Practitioners’ understanding of oral health-related stigma 15 - 20 minutesWhole group Presenting consequences of stigma from the patient’s perspective (PPI members)5 minutesJDWhole group feedback 10 minutesVMPresentations Conceptualizing Oral Health-related Stigma7 minutesJDLife after tooth loss: efforts to preserve a sense of self7 minutesBGPerspectives of vulnerable groups in Scotland and Brazil on the consequences of stigma’7 minutes ARBreakout workshop 2Strategies/actions for engagement work to tackle stigma15 minutes Whole group Feedback from participants 10 minutesVM Opportunity for questions 5 minutesVM, AR, JDi.Welcoming participants (VM)ii.20 min breakout workshop group discussion comprised as follows:o1. ‘Practitioners’ understanding of oral health-related stigma’ and group discussion o2. Presenting the Consequences of stigma from the patient’s perspective followed by group feedback. iii.Speakers’ short presentations + Q&amp;A with participants (JD, BG, and AR)oConceptualizing Oral Health-related Stigma (JD)oLife after tooth loss: efforts to preserve a sense of self (BG)oPerspectives of vulnerable groups in Scotland and Brazil on the consequences of stigma’ (AR)iv.30 min breakout workshop group discussion 3. o20 mins discussion ‘Strategies/actions for engagement work to tackle stigma’ o10 min group feedback. TOTAL Time: 90 minutesKey words : Stigma, Inclusion Oral Health, Empowerment, Patient Engagement. References1.World Health Organization (2023). WHO framework for meaningful engagement of people living with noncommunicable diseases, and mental health and neurological conditions. Global Coordination Mechanism Secretariat for NCDs, 10 May 2023, 73p. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240073074 2.Doughty, J., M. E. Macdonald, V. Muirhead and R. Freeman (2023). "Oral health-related stigma: Describing and defining a ubiquitous phenomenon." Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology n/a(n/a).3.Moore D, Keat R. Does dental appearance impact on employability in adults? A scoping review of quantitative and qualitative evi-dence. Br Dent J. 2020.4.Seehra J, Newton JT, DiBiase AT. Bullying in schoolchildren – its relationship to dental appearance and psychosocial implications: an update for GDPs. Br Dent J. 2011;210:411- 4155.Yuvaraj, A., V. S. Mahendra, V. Chakrapani, E. Yunihastuti, A. J. Santella, A. Ranauta and J. Doughty (2020). "HIV and stigma in the healthcare setting." Oral Diseases 26: 103-111.<br/