Periods in the Public Eye: Investigating Risk Perceptions of Data Sharing in Reproductive Health Applications

Period tracking apps allow for tracking and monito-ring various aspects of reproductive health, making them a convenient and popular choice for personal tracking. However, concerns have been raised regarding the data-sharing practices of such apps. Against this background, the study at hand investigated the perceived privacy risks of period trackers and connection to knowledge about data sharing practices among German users. Exploratory analyses reveal that users who actively use period trackers have a lower risk perception than those who have discontinued the use. Additionally, perceived knowledge of data sharing practices of period trackers shows a negative relation with risk perception.Perioden-Tracking-Apps sind für viele Menschen ein beliebtes Mittel für die Überwachung verschiedener Aspekte der reproduktiven Gesundheit. Gleichzeitig gibt es jedoch zahlreiche Bedenken hinsichtlich der Datenweitergabepraktiken solcher Apps. Die vorliegende Studie untersucht die wahrgenommenen Datenschutzrisiken von Perioden-Trackern sowie die Rolle von Wissen über Datenweitergabepraktiken unter deutschen Nutzenden. Die explorativen Ana-lysen zeigen, dass Nutzende, die Perioden-Tracker aktiv verwenden, eine geringere Risikowahrnehmung haben als solche, die die Verwendung eingestellt haben. Darüber hinaus steht das wahrgenommene domänenspezifische Wissen über den Umgang mit Daten von Perioden-Trackern in einem negativen Zusammenhang mit der Risikowahrnehmung

Making Sense of the Big Data Mess: Why Interdisciplinarity Matters in Smart Cities

Smart cities use vast amounts of (big) data, often creating what we call an urban "data mess". In this article, we show the diversity and complexity of data that make up this mess and outline examples of urban data processing. Furthermore, we point out problems with the sector-specific perspective that is usually taken when dealing with smart cities. We argue that a collective way of dealing with data across sectors and disciplines needs to be found. To achieve that, we advocate for more interdisciplinary cooperation between different disciplines and stakeholder groups. The Pandemic Recovery Dashboard of the City of Los Angeles gives a first impression of how this could work. We aim to show that approaching data in smart cities from an interdisciplinary angle may help deal with the data mess in smart cities - both for researchers and city developers."Smart Cities" stützen sich auf große Datenmengen ("Big Data") - wobei die unterschiedlichen Daten häufig in ungeordneter Form vorliegen (engl.: "data mess"). Im Beitrag widmen wir uns dieser Diversität im städtischen Datenbestand und skizzieren Beispiele urbaner Datenverarbeitung. Dabei verweisen wir auf Probleme und Herausforderungen einer engen, an einzelne Bereiche gebundenen Datennutzung: Aus unserer Sicht fehlt bislang ein gemeinschaftlicher, sektorübergreifender Ansatz zum Umgang mit Smart-City-Daten. Aus diesem Grund sind mehr interdisziplinäre Kooperationen erforderlich, d.h. die Zusammenarbeit unterschiedlicher Disziplinen und Stakeholder-Gruppen. Das Pandemic Recovery Dashboard der Stadt Los Angeles gibt einen ersten Eindruck davon, wie urbane Daten erfolgreich genutzt werden können. Wir argumentieren dafür, dass Daten in Smart Cities am besten in ganzheitlicher Perspektive bearbeitet und der städtische Datendschungel so übersichtlicher gestaltet werden kann - für Wissenschaft und Praxis

The light chain IgLV3-21 defines a new poor prognostic subgroup in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: results of a multicenter study.

Unmutated (UM) immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV) status or IgHV3-21 gene usage is associated with poor prognosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. Interestingly, IgHV3-21 is often co-expressed with light chain IgLV3-21, which is potentially able to trigger cell-autonomous BCR-mediated signaling. However, this light chain has never been characterized independently of the heavy chain IgHV3-21.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Effect of Tocilizumab vs Usual Care in Adults Hospitalized With COVID-19 and Moderate or Severe Pneumonia

International audienceImportance Severe pneumonia with hyperinflammation and elevated interleukin-6 is a common presentation of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19).Objective To determine whether tocilizumab (TCZ) improves outcomes of patients hospitalized with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia.Design, Setting, and Particpants This cohort-embedded, investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, bayesian randomized clinical trial investigating patients with COVID-19 and moderate or severe pneumonia requiring at least 3 L/min of oxygen but without ventilation or admission to the intensive care unit was conducted between March 31, 2020, to April 18, 2020, with follow-up through 28 days. Patients were recruited from 9 university hospitals in France. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis with no correction for multiplicity for secondary outcomes.Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to receive TCZ, 8 mg/kg, intravenously plus usual care on day 1 and on day 3 if clinically indicated (TCZ group) or to receive usual care alone (UC group). Usual care included antibiotic agents, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, vasopressor support, and anticoagulants.Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcomes were scores higher than 5 on the World Health Organization 10-point Clinical Progression Scale (WHO-CPS) on day 4 and survival without need of ventilation (including noninvasive ventilation) at day 14. Secondary outcomes were clinical status assessed with the WHO-CPS scores at day 7 and day 14, overall survival, time to discharge, time to oxygen supply independency, biological factors such as C-reactive protein level, and adverse events.Results Of 131 patients, 64 patients were randomly assigned to the TCZ group and 67 to UC group; 1 patient in the TCZ group withdrew consent and was not included in the analysis. Of the 130 patients, 42 were women (32%), and median (interquartile range) age was 64 (57.1-74.3) years. In the TCZ group, 12 patients had a WHO-CPS score greater than 5 at day 4 vs 19 in the UC group (median posterior absolute risk difference [ARD] −9.0%; 90% credible interval [CrI], −21.0 to 3.1), with a posterior probability of negative ARD of 89.0% not achieving the 95% predefined efficacy threshold. At day 14, 12% (95% CI −28% to 4%) fewer patients needed noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or mechanical ventilation (MV) or died in the TCZ group than in the UC group (24% vs 36%, median posterior hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 90% CrI, 0.33-1.00), with a posterior probability of HR less than 1 of 95.0%, achieving the predefined efficacy threshold. The HR for MV or death was 0.58 (90% CrI, 0.30 to 1.09). At day 28, 7 patients had died in the TCZ group and 8 in the UC group (adjusted HR, 0.92; 95% CI 0.33-2.53). Serious adverse events occurred in 20 (32%) patients in the TCZ group and 29 (43%) in the UC group (P = .21).Conclusions and Relevance In this randomized clinical trial of patients with COVID-19 and pneumonia requiring oxygen support but not admitted to the intensive care unit, TCZ did not reduce WHO-CPS scores lower than 5 at day 4 but might have reduced the risk of NIV, MV, or death by day 14. No difference on day 28 mortality was found. Further studies are necessary for confirming these preliminary results.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0433180

Effect of anakinra versus usual care in adults in hospital with COVID-19 and mild-to-moderate pneumonia (CORIMUNO-ANA-1): a randomised controlled trial

International audienc

Sarilumab in adults hospitalised with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 pneumonia (CORIMUNO-SARI-1): An open-label randomised controlled trial

International audienc