The effects of secondary stressors, social identity, and social support on perceived stress and resilience: Findings from the COVID-19 pandemic

Primary stressors are direct outcomes of extreme events (e.g., viruses, floodwater) whereas secondary stressors stem from pre-disaster life circumstances and societal arrangements (e.g., illness, problematic pre-disaster policies) or from inefficient responses to the extreme event. Secondary stressors can cause significant long-term damage to people affected but are also tractable and amenable to change. In this study we explored the association between secondary stressors, social identity processes, social support, and perceived stress and resilience. Pre-registered analyses of data from the COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey Round II (N = 14,600; 43 countries) show that secondary stressors are positively associated with perceived stress and negatively associated with resilience, even when controlling for the effects of primary stressors. Being a woman or having lower socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with higher exposure to secondary stressors, higher perceived stress, and lower resilience. Importantly, social identification is positively associated with expected support and with increased resilience and lower perceived stress. However, neither gender, SES, or social identification moderated the relationship between secondary stressors and perceived stress and resilience. In conclusion, systemic reforms and the availability of social support are paramount to reducing the effects of secondary stressors

Intensive blood pressure control after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke (ENCHANTED2/MT): a multicentre, open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial

Background The optimum systolic blood pressure after endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke is uncertain. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of blood pressure lowering treatment according to more intensive versus less intensive treatment targets in patients with elevated blood pressure after reperfusion with endovascular treatment. Methods We conducted an open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised controlled trial at 44 tertiary-level hospitals in China. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had persistently elevated systolic blood pressure (≥140 mm Hg for >10 min) following successful reperfusion with endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke from any intracranial large-vessel occlusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1, by a central, web-based program with a minimisation algorithm) to more intensive treatment (systolic blood pressure target Findings Between July 20, 2020, and March 7, 2022, 821 patients were randomly assigned. The trial was stopped after review of the outcome data on June 22, 2022, due to persistent efficacy and safety concerns. 407 participants were assigned to the more intensive treatment group and 409 to the less intensive treatment group, of whom 404 patients in the more intensive treatment group and 406 patients in the less intensive treatment group had primary outcome data available. The likelihood of poor functional outcome was greater in the more intensive treatment group than the less intensive treatment group (common OR 1·37 [95% CI 1·07–1·76]). Compared with the less intensive treatment group, the more intensive treatment group had more early neurological deterioration (common OR 1·53 [95% 1·18–1·97]) and major disability at 90 days (OR 2·07 [95% CI 1·47–2·93]) but there were no significant differences in symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage. There were no significant differences in serious adverse events or mortality between groups. Interpretation Intensive control of systolic blood pressure to lower than 120 mm Hg should be avoided to prevent compromising the functional recovery of patients who have received endovascular thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke due to intracranial large-vessel occlusion.</p

Endovascular thrombectomy versus standard bridging thrombolytic with endovascular thrombectomy within 4·5 h of stroke onset: an open-label, blinded-endpoint, randomised non-inferiority trial

Background: The benefit of combined treatment with intravenous thrombolysis before endovascular thrombectomy in patients with acute ischaemic stroke caused by large vessel occlusion remains unclear. We hypothesised that the clinical outcomes of patients with stroke with large vessel occlusion treated with direct endovascular thrombectomy within 4·5 h would be non-inferior compared with the outcomes of those treated with standard bridging therapy (intravenous thrombolysis before endovascular thrombectomy). Methods: DIRECT-SAFE was an international, multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial. Adult patients with stroke and large vessel occlusion in the intracranial internal carotid artery, middle cerebral artery (M1 or M2), or basilar artery, confirmed by non-contrast CT and vascular imaging, and who presented within 4·5 h of stroke onset were recruited from 25 acute-care hospitals in Australia, New Zealand, China, and Vietnam. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web-based, computer-generated randomisation procedure stratified by site of baseline arterial occlusion and by geographic region to direct endovascular thrombectomy or bridging therapy. Patients assigned to bridging therapy received intravenous thrombolytic (alteplase or tenecteplase) as per standard care at each site; endovascular thrombectomy was also per standard of care, using the Trevo device (Stryker Neurovascular, Fremont, CA, USA) as first-line intervention. Personnel assessing outcomes were masked to group allocation; patients and treating physicians were not. The primary efficacy endpoint was functional independence defined as modified Rankin Scale score 0–2 or return to baseline at 90 days, with a non-inferiority margin of –0·1, analysed by intention to treat (including all randomly assigned and consenting patients) and per protocol. The intention-to-treat population was included in the safety analyses. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03494920, and is closed to new participants. Findings: Between June 2, 2018, and July 8, 2021, 295 patients were randomly assigned to direct endovascular thrombectomy (n=148) or bridging therapy (n=147). Functional independence occurred in 80 (55%) of 146 patients in the direct thrombectomy group and 89 (61%) of 147 patients in the bridging therapy group (intention-to-treat risk difference –0·051, two-sided 95% CI –0·160 to 0·059; per-protocol risk difference –0·062, two-sided 95% CI –0·173 to 0·049). Safety outcomes were similar between groups, with symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage occurring in two (1%) of 146 patients in the direct group and one (1%) of 147 patients in the bridging group (adjusted odds ratio 1·70, 95% CI 0·22–13·04) and death in 22 (15%) of 146 patients in the direct group and 24 (16%) of 147 patients in the bridging group (adjusted odds ratio 0·92, 95% CI 0·46–1·84). Interpretation: We did not show non-inferiority of direct endovascular thrombectomy compared with bridging therapy. The additional information from our study should inform guidelines to recommend bridging therapy as standard treatment. Funding: Australian National Health and Medical Research Council and Stryker USA

Global, regional, and national burden of hepatitis B, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

Background: Combating viral hepatitis is part of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and WHO has put forth hepatitis B elimination targets in its Global Health Sector Strategy on Viral Hepatitis (WHO-GHSS) and Interim Guidance for Country Validation of Viral Hepatitis Elimination (WHO Interim Guidance). We estimated the global, regional, and national prevalence of hepatitis B virus (HBV), as well as mortality and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) due to HBV, as part of the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019. This included estimates for 194 WHO member states, for which we compared our estimates to WHO elimination targets.  Methods: The primary data sources were population-based serosurveys, claims and hospital discharges, cancer registries, vital registration systems, and published case series. We estimated chronic HBV infection and the burden of HBV-related diseases, defined as an aggregate of cirrhosis due to hepatitis B, liver cancer due to hepatitis B, and acute hepatitis B. We used DisMod-MR 2.1, a Bayesian mixed-effects meta-regression tool, to estimate the prevalence of chronic HBV infection, cirrhosis, and aetiological proportions of cirrhosis. We used mortality-to-incidence ratios modelled with spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression to estimate the incidence of liver cancer. We used the Cause of Death Ensemble modelling (CODEm) model, a tool that selects models and covariates on the basis of out-of-sample performance, to estimate mortality due to cirrhosis, liver cancer, and acute hepatitis B.  Findings: In 2019, the estimated global, all-age prevalence of chronic HBV infection was 4·1% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 3·7 to 4·5), corresponding to 316 million (284 to 351) infected people. There was a 31·3% (29·0 to 33·9) decline in all-age prevalence between 1990 and 2019, with a more marked decline of 76·8% (76·2 to 77·5) in prevalence in children younger than 5 years. HBV-related diseases resulted in 555 000 global deaths (487 000 to 630 000) in 2019. The number of HBV-related deaths increased between 1990 and 2019 (by 5·9% [–5·6 to 19·2]) and between 2015 and 2019 (by 2·9% [–5·9 to 11·3]). By contrast, all-age and age-standardised death rates due to HBV-related diseases decreased during these periods. We compared estimates for 2019 in 194 WHO locations to WHO-GHSS 2020 targets, and found that four countries achieved a 10% reduction in deaths, 15 countries achieved a 30% reduction in new cases, and 147 countries achieved a 1% prevalence in children younger than 5 years. As of 2019, 68 of 194 countries had already achieved the 2030 target proposed in WHO Interim Guidance of an all-age HBV-related death rate of four per 100 000.  Interpretation: The prevalence of chronic HBV infection declined over time, particularly in children younger than 5 years, since the introduction of hepatitis B vaccination. HBV-related death rates also decreased, but HBV-related death counts increased as a result of population growth, ageing, and cohort effects. By 2019, many countries had met the interim seroprevalence target for children younger than 5 years, but few countries had met the WHO-GHSS interim targets for deaths and new cases. Progress according to all indicators must be accelerated to meet 2030 targets, and there are marked disparities in burden and progress across the world. HBV interventions, such as vaccination, testing, and treatment, must be strategically supported and scaled up to achieve elimination. </p

COVIDiSTRESS diverse dataset on psychological and behavioural outcomes one year into the COVID-19 pandemic

During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the COVIDiSTRESS Consortium launched an open-access global survey to understand and improve individuals’ experiences related to the crisis. A year later, we extended this line of research by launching a new survey to address the dynamic landscape of the pandemic. This survey was released with the goal of addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion by working with over 150 researchers across the globe who collected data in 48 languages and dialects across 137 countries. The resulting cleaned dataset described here includes 15,740 of over 20,000 responses. The dataset allows cross-cultural study of psychological wellbeing and behaviours a year into the pandemic. It includes measures of stress, resilience, vaccine attitudes, trust in government and scientists, compliance, and information acquisition and misperceptions regarding COVID-19. Open-access raw and cleaned datasets with computed scores are available. Just as our initial COVIDiSTRESS dataset has facilitated government policy decisions regarding health crises, this dataset can be used by researchers and policy makers to inform research, decisions, and policy

Author Correction: COVIDiSTRESS diverse dataset on psychological and behavioural outcomes one year into the COVID-19 pandemic (Scientific Data, (2022), 9, 1, (331), 10.1038/s41597-022-01383-6)

The original version of this Article contained an error in the spelling of the author Krzysztof Hanusz, which was incorrectly given as Hanusz Krzysztof. This has now been corrected in both the PDF and HTML versions of the Article

Creative destruction in science

Drawing on the concept of a gale of creative destruction in a capitalistic economy, we argue that initiatives to assess the robustness of findings in the organizational literature should aim to simultaneously test competing ideas operating in the same theoretical space. In other words, replication efforts should seek not just to support or question the original findings, but also to replace them with revised, stronger theories with greater explanatory power. Achieving this will typically require adding new measures, conditions, and subject populations to research designs, in order to carry out conceptual tests of multiple theories in addition to directly replicating the original findings. To illustrate the value of the creative destruction approach for theory pruning in organizational scholarship, we describe recent replication initiatives re-examining culture and work morality, working parents’ reasoning about day care options, and gender discrimination in hiring decisions. Significance statement: It is becoming increasingly clear that many, if not most, published research findings across scientific fields are not readily replicable when the same method is repeated. Although extremely valuable, failed replications risk leaving a theoretical void— reducing confidence the original theoretical prediction is true, but not replacing it with positive evidence in favor of an alternative theory. We introduce the creative destruction approach to replication, which combines theory pruning methods from the field of management with emerging best practices from the open science movement, with the aim of making replications as generative as possible. In effect, we advocate for a Replication 2.0 movement in which the goal shifts from checking on the reliability of past findings to actively engaging in competitive theory testing and theory building. Scientific transparency statement: The materials, code, and data for this article are posted publicly on the Open Science Framework, with links provided in the article