Linguistics

Contains research objectives and reports on two research projects.National Institutes of Health (Grant MH-13390-01)U.S. Air Force (Electronic Systems Division) under Contract AF 19(628)-248

Does Twitter User Activity Promote Gambling-Related Content?

Social media has provided gambling operators with access to millions of individuals and novel ways to promote gambling. Research has suggested that exposure to gambling advertisements on social media platforms is associated with increased gambling in individuals at-risk for problem gambling. These findings bring into question whether social media platforms are sensitive to differences in user account activity (e.g., tweets, likes, accounts visited) when displaying advertisements and gambling-related content. To assess for these differences, four Twitter accounts were created and assigned to send out tweets containing pro-wagering versus safe-wagering-related messages. Additionally, one of each account was assigned to interact with Twitter profiles associated with gambling operators or responsible gambling. Accounts were assessed daily for advertisement traffic and gambling-related content from January to March 2022. The study included three phases that implemented changes in privacy settings, websites visited, and gambling-related tweets observed. To assess for between-phase differences, Tau-U analyses were performed using R. No gambling advertisements were observed throughout the study. Nongambling advertisements remained constant across all accounts. Gambling-related content observed depended on assigned account activity. Accounts that interacted with gambling operators’ profiles were only displayed pro-wagering-related content. Conversely, accounts that interacted with responsible gambling profiles were only displayed safe-wagering-related content. Findings suggest that Twitter is sensitive to differences in account activity. Social media platforms’ ethical obligations have been a topic of concern. However, it seems that the type of gambling-related content displayed on Twitter largely depends on the user’s activity, thus, placing responsibility for what is displayed on the user

Cross-accent intelligibility of speech in noise: Long-term familiarity and short-term familiarization

Listeners must cope with a great deal of variability in the speech signal, and thus theories of speech perception must also account for variability, which comes from a number of sources, including variation between accents. It is well-known that there is a processing cost when listening to speech in an accent other than one’s own, but recent work has suggested that this cost is reduced when listening to a familiar accent widely represented in the media, and/or when short amounts of exposure to an accent are provided. Little is known, however, about how these factors (long-term familiarity and short-term familiarization with an accent) interact. The current study tested this interaction by playing listeners difficult-to-segment sentences in noise, before and after a familiarization period where the same sentences were heard in the clear, allowing us to manipulate short-term familiarization. Listeners were speakers of either Glasgow English or Standard Southern British English, and they listened to speech in either their own or the other accent, thereby allowing us to manipulate long-term familiarity. Results suggest that both long-term familiarity and short-term familiarization mitigate the perceptual processing costs of listening to an accent that is not one’s own, but seem not to compensate for them entirely, even when the accent is widely heard in the media

Comprehensive, long-term evaluation of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency after pancreatoduodenectomy

AIMS: Treatment of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) improves quality of life, clinical outcomes, and survival. However, diagnosing PEI following PD is challenging owing to the difficulties with current tests and often non-specific symptoms. This work aims to quantify the true rate of long-term PEI in patients following a PD.METHODS: Patients underwent a PEI screen approximately one to two years following PD for oncologic indication, including the 13C Mixed triglyceride breath test (13CMTGT), faecal elastase 1 (FE-1) and the PEI Questionnaire (PEI-Q). Four reviewers with expertise in PEI reviewed the results blinded to other decisions to classify PEI status; disagreements were resolved on consensus.RESULTS: 26 patients were recruited. Of those with valid test results, these were indicative of PEI based on pre-specified thresholds for 60 % (15/25) for the 13CMTGT, 82 % (18/22) for FE-1, and 88 % (22/25) for the PEI-Q. After discussion between reviewers, the consensus PEI prevalence was 81 % (95 % CI: 61-93 %; 21/26), with 50 % (N = 13) classified as having severe, 23 % (N = 6) moderate, and 8 % (N = 2) mild PEI.DISCUSSION: Since no ideal test exists for PEI, this collation of diagnostic modalities and blinded expert review was designed to ascertain the true rate of long-term PEI following PD. This required our cohort to survive a year, travel to hospital, and undergo a period of starvation and PERT hold, and therefore there is likely to be recruitment bias towards fitter, younger patients with less aggressive pathology. Despite this, over 80 % were deemed to have PEI, with over 90 % of these being considered moderate or severe.</p

Involvement of the Gut Microbiome in the Local and Systemic Immune Response to Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Simple Summary: One of the reasons that pancreatic cancer is such a deadly disease is that it is able to evade the body’s usual defence system (the immune system). It has been shown that the population of microorganisms in the human gut (the gut microbiome) plays a role in regulating the human immune system. This article outlines the ways in which the gut microbiome influences the immune system in pancreatic cancer both within the bloodstream (systemic) and around the pancreatic tumour itself (local). These are important mechanisms because greater understanding of these will direct the development of future treatments for pancreatic cancer. It is possible that some of these treatment options will target the gut microbiome in order to boost the immune system’s response to pancreatic cancer. Abstract: The systemic and local immunosuppression exhibited by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) contributes significantly to its aggressive nature. There is a need for a greater understanding of the mechanisms behind this profound immune evasion, which makes it one of the most challenging malignancies to treat and thus one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. The gut microbiome is now thought to be the largest immune organ in the body and has been shown to play an important role in multiple immune-mediated diseases. By summarizing the current literature, this review examines the mechanisms by which the gut microbiome may modulate the immune response to PDAC. Evidence suggests that the gut microbiome can alter immune cell populations both in the peripheral blood and within the tumour itself in PDAC patients. In addition, evidence suggests that the gut microbiome influences the composition of the PDAC tumour microbiome, which exerts a local effect on PDAC tumour immune infiltration. Put together, this promotes the gut microbiome as a promising route for future therapies to improve immune responses in PDAC patients

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon pancreatic cancer treatment (CONTACT Study): a UK national observational cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: CONTACT is a national multidisciplinary study assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic upon diagnostic and treatment pathways among patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: The treatment of consecutive patients with newly diagnosed PDAC from a pre-COVID-19 pandemic cohort (07/01/2019-03/03/2019) were compared to a cohort diagnosed during the first wave of the UK pandemic ('COVID' cohort, 16/03/2020-10/05/2020), with 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: Among 984 patients (pre-COVID: n = 483, COVID: n = 501), the COVID cohort was less likely to receive staging investigations other than CT scanning (29.5% vs. 37.2%, p = 0.010). Among patients treated with curative intent, there was a reduction in the proportion of patients recommended surgery (54.5% vs. 76.6%, p = 0.001) and increase in the proportion recommended upfront chemotherapy (45.5% vs. 23.4%, p = 0.002). Among patients on a non-curative pathway, fewer patients were recommended (47.4% vs. 57.3%, p = 0.004) or received palliative anti-cancer therapy (20.5% vs. 26.5%, p = 0.045). Ultimately, fewer patients in the COVID cohort underwent surgical resection (6.4% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.036), whilst more patients received no anti-cancer treatment (69.3% vs. 59.2% p = 0.009). Despite these differences, there was no difference in median overall survival between the COVID and pre-COVID cohorts, (3.5 (IQR 2.8-4.1) vs. 4.4 (IQR 3.6-5.2) months, p = 0.093). CONCLUSION: Pathways for patients with PDAC were significantly disrupted during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, with fewer patients receiving standard treatments. However, no significant impact on survival was discerned

Patient and public involvement in palliative care research: What works, and why? A qualitative evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Public involvement is increasingly considered a prerequisite for high-quality research. However, involvement in palliative care is impeded by limited evidence on the best approaches for populations affected by life-limiting illness. AIM: To evaluate a strategy for public involvement in palliative care and rehabilitation research, to identify successful approaches and areas for improvement. DESIGN: Co-produced qualitative evaluation using focus groups and interviews. Thematic analysis undertaken by research team comprising public contributors and researchers. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Researchers and public members from a palliative care and rehabilitation research institute, UK. RESULTS: Seven public members and 19 researchers participated. Building and maintaining relationships, taking a flexible approach and finding the 'right' people were important for successful public involvement. Relationship building created a safe environment for discussing sensitive topics, although public members felt greater consideration of emotional support was needed. Flexibility supported involvement alongside unpredictable circumstances of chronic and life-limiting illness, and was facilitated by responsive communication, and opportunities for in-person and virtual involvement at a project- and institution-level. However, more opportunities for two-way feedback throughout projects was suggested. Finding the 'right' people was crucial given the diverse population served by palliative care, and participants suggested more care needed to be taken to identify public members with experience relevant to specific projects. CONCLUSION: Within palliative care research, it is important for involvement to focus on building and maintaining relationships, working flexibly, and identifying those with relevant experience. Taking a strategic approach and developing adequate infrastructure and networks can facilitate public involvement within this field.The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This study was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership and Applied Health Research and Care South London (NIHR CLAHRC South London) Involvement Activity Funding and Research Capability Funding at King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust. Support was also provided by the NIHR Applied Research Collaboration (ARC) South London at King’s College Hospital Foundation Trust. LJB is supported through a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-10-009). CE is funded by HEE/NIHR Senior Clinical Lectureship. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the funders, the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health