Effectiveness of peers in delivering programs or motivating older people to increase their participation in physical activity: Systematic review and meta-analysis

The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of peers to deliver programs or encourage older people to be physically active and improve physical outcomes. Peer reviewed articles published in English between January 1976 and June 2016, retrieved from six databases according to the predefined inclusion criteria were included. Where possible results were pooled and meta-analyses conducted. Eighteen articles were included in the review, a total of 3,492 intervention participants, average age 66.5 years and 67.1% were female. Overall, study quality was medium to high. Interventions mainly included resistance, flexibility and cardiovascular training, however there was one aquatic exercise group. Eight studies were delivered by peers and five utilised peer support, which included advice and being positive but was not directly linked to an exercise intervention. While 16 of the 18 studies reported improvement in levels of physical activity and/or noted physical benefits by peer involvement, the meta-analyses findings supported the control groups for the six minute walk test (favoured intervention) and the timed-up-and-go (favoured controls) tests. Meta-analyses data were limited due to studies using a variety of measurement tools and included predominantly small sample size studies. Findings from this review suggest exercise programs involving peers can promote and maintain adherence to exercise programs. However, results are inconclusive as to whether peers have a positive effect on improving physical function for older people

CARE Data Principles Data Curation Primer

The CARE data principles (Collective benefit, Authority to control, Responsibility, and Ethics) are a conceptual framework meant to ensure ethical collection, sharing, and stewardship of Indigenous data. As part of a workshop hosted by the Data Curation Network in 2022, librarians created a foundational data curation primer on the CARE data principles and how they apply to data management, curation, and sharing. The primer touches on the cultural context regarding the CARE data principles, the historical misuse of Indigenous data, tribal sovereignty, and Indigenous Peoples\u27 right to governance of their data. This session will discuss how CARE principles can be applied and give specific use examples. Librarians can use the primer and CURATE(D) checklist, to consider the ethical use, sharing and preservation of Indigenous data within their institutional repositories

A Policy Maker’s Guide to Designing Payments for Ecosystem Services

Over the past five years, there has been increasing interest around the globe in payment schemes for the provision of ecosystem services, such as water purification, carbon sequestration, flood control, etc. Written for an Asian Development Bank project in China, this report provides a user-friendly guide to designing payments for the provision of ecosystem services. Part I explains the different types of ecosystem services, different ways of assessing their value, and why they are traditionally under-protected by law and policy. This is followed by an analysis of when payments for services are a preferable approach to other policy instruments. Part II explains the design issues underlying payments for services. These include identification of the service as well as potential buyers and sellers, the level of service needed, payment timing, payment type, and risk allocation. Part II contains a detailed analysis of the different types of payment mechanisms, ranging from general subsidy and certification to mitigation and offset payments. Part III explores the challenges to designing a payment scheme. These include the ability to monitor service provision, secure property rights, perverse incentives, supporting institutions, and poverty alleviation

Strategies for the construction of cassava brown streak disease viral infectious clones

Cassava brown streak disease (CBSD) has major impacts on yield and quality of the tuberous roots of cassava in Eastern and Central Arica. At least two Potyviridae species cause the disease: Cassava brown streak virus (CBSV) and Ugandan cassava brown streak virus (UCBSV). Cloned viral genome sequences known as infectious clones (ICs) have been important in the study of other viruses, both as a means of standardising infectious material and characterising viral gene function. IC construction is often technically challenging for Potyviridae due to sequence instability in E. coli. Here, we evaluate three methods for the construction of infectious clones for CBSD. Whilst a simple IC for in vitro transcription was made for UCBSV isolate ‘Kikombe’, such an approach failed to deliver full-length clones for CBSV isolates ‘Nampula’ or ‘Tanza’, necessitating more complex approaches for their construction. The ICs successfully generated symptomatic infection in the model host N. benthamiana and in the natural host cassava. This shows that whilst generating ICs for CBSV is still a technical challenge, a structured approach, evaluating both in vitro and in planta transcription systems should successfully deliver ICs, allowing further study into the symptomology and virulence factors in this important disease complex

Safety, immunogenicity, and reactogenicity of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccines given as fourth-dose boosters following two doses of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or BNT162b2 and a third dose of BNT162b2 (COV-BOOST): a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised trial

Background Some high-income countries have deployed fourth doses of COVID-19 vaccines, but the clinical need, effectiveness, timing, and dose of a fourth dose remain uncertain. We aimed to investigate the safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of fourth-dose boosters against COVID-19.Methods The COV-BOOST trial is a multicentre, blinded, phase 2, randomised controlled trial of seven COVID-19 vaccines given as third-dose boosters at 18 sites in the UK. This sub-study enrolled participants who had received BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) as their third dose in COV-BOOST and randomly assigned them (1:1) to receive a fourth dose of either BNT162b2 (30 µg in 0·30 mL; full dose) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna; 50 µg in 0·25 mL; half dose) via intramuscular injection into the upper arm. The computer-generated randomisation list was created by the study statisticians with random block sizes of two or four. Participants and all study staff not delivering the vaccines were masked to treatment allocation. The coprimary outcomes were safety and reactogenicity, and immunogenicity (antispike protein IgG titres by ELISA and cellular immune response by ELISpot). We compared immunogenicity at 28 days after the third dose versus 14 days after the fourth dose and at day 0 versus day 14 relative to the fourth dose. Safety and reactogenicity were assessed in the per-protocol population, which comprised all participants who received a fourth-dose booster regardless of their SARS-CoV-2 serostatus. Immunogenicity was primarily analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population comprising seronegative participants who had received a fourth-dose booster and had available endpoint data. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 73765130, and is ongoing.Findings Between Jan 11 and Jan 25, 2022, 166 participants were screened, randomly assigned, and received either full-dose BNT162b2 (n=83) or half-dose mRNA-1273 (n=83) as a fourth dose. The median age of these participants was 70·1 years (IQR 51·6–77·5) and 86 (52%) of 166 participants were female and 80 (48%) were male. The median interval between the third and fourth doses was 208·5 days (IQR 203·3–214·8). Pain was the most common local solicited adverse event and fatigue was the most common systemic solicited adverse event after BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 booster doses. None of three serious adverse events reported after a fourth dose with BNT162b2 were related to the study vaccine. In the BNT162b2 group, geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration at day 28 after the third dose was 23 325 ELISA laboratory units (ELU)/mL (95% CI 20 030–27 162), which increased to 37 460 ELU/mL (31 996–43 857) at day 14 after the fourth dose, representing a significant fold change (geometric mean 1·59, 95% CI 1·41–1·78). There was a significant increase in geometric mean anti-spike protein IgG concentration from 28 days after the third dose (25 317 ELU/mL, 95% CI 20 996–30 528) to 14 days after a fourth dose of mRNA-1273 (54 936 ELU/mL, 46 826–64 452), with a geometric mean fold change of 2·19 (1·90–2·52). The fold changes in anti-spike protein IgG titres from before (day 0) to after (day 14) the fourth dose were 12·19 (95% CI 10·37–14·32) and 15·90 (12·92–19·58) in the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 groups, respectively. T-cell responses were also boosted after the fourth dose (eg, the fold changes for the wild-type variant from before to after the fourth dose were 7·32 [95% CI 3·24–16·54] in the BNT162b2 group and 6·22 [3·90–9·92] in the mRNA-1273 group).Interpretation Fourth-dose COVID-19 mRNA booster vaccines are well tolerated and boost cellular and humoral immunity. Peak responses after the fourth dose were similar to, and possibly better than, peak responses after the third dose