Progress and challenges in glacial lake outburst flood research (2017–2021):a research community perspective

Glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs) are among the most concerning consequences of retreating glaciers in mountain ranges worldwide. GLOFs have attracted significant attention amongst scientists and practitioners in the past 2 decades, with particular interest in the physical drivers and mechanisms of GLOF hazard and in socioeconomic and other human-related developments that affect vulnerabilities to GLOF events. This increased research focus on GLOFs is reflected in the gradually increasing number of papers published annually. This study offers an overview of recent GLOF research by analysing 594 peer-reviewed GLOF studies published between 2017 and 2021 (Web of Science and Scopus databases), reviewing the content and geographical focus as well as other characteristics of GLOF studies. This review is complemented with perspectives from the first GLOF conference (7-9 July 2021, online) where a global GLOF research community of major mountain regions gathered to discuss the current state of the art of integrated GLOF research. Therefore, representatives from 17 countries identified and elaborated trends and challenges and proposed possible ways forward to navigate future GLOF research, in four thematic areas: (i) understanding GLOFs - timing and processes; (ii) modelling GLOFs and GLOF process chains; (iii) GLOF risk management, prevention and warning; and (iv) human dimensions of GLOFs and GLOF attribution to climate change.Fil: Emmer, Adam. University of Graz; AustriaFil: Allen, Simon K.. Universitat Zurich; Suiza. Universidad de Ginebra; SuizaFil: Carey, Mark. University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Frey, Holger. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Huggel, Christian. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Korup, Oliver. Universitat Potsdam; AlemaniaFil: Mergili, Martin. University of Graz; AustriaFil: Sattar, Ashim. Universitat Zurich; SuizaFil: Veh, Georg. Universitat Potsdam; AlemaniaFil: Chen, Thomas Y.. Columbia University; Estados UnidosFil: Cook, Simon J.. University Of Dundee; Reino Unido. Unesco. Centre For Water Law, Policy And Science; Reino UnidoFil: Correas Gonzalez, Mariana. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Nivología, Glaciología y Ciencias Ambientales; ArgentinaFil: Das, Soumik. Jawaharlal Nehru University; IndiaFil: Diaz Moreno, Alejandro. Reynolds International Ltd; Reino UnidoFil: Drenkhan, Fabian. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Perú; PerúFil: Fischer, Melanie. Universitat Potsdam; AlemaniaFil: Immerzeel, Walter W.. Utrecht University; Países BajosFil: Izagirre, Eñaut. Universidad del País Vasco; EspañaFil: Joshi, Ramesh Chandra. Kumaun University India; IndiaFil: Kougkoulos, Ioannis. American College Of Greece; GreciaFil: Kuyakanon Knapp, Riamsara. University of Oslo; Noruega. University of Cambridge; Estados UnidosFil: Li, Dongfeng. National University Of Singapore; SingapurFil: Majeed, Ulfat. University Of Kashmir; IndiaFil: Matti, Stephanie. Haskoli Islands; IslandiaFil: Moulton, Holly. University of Oregon; Estados UnidosFil: Nick, Faezeh. Utrecht University; Países BajosFil: Piroton, Valentine. Université de Liège; BélgicaFil: Rashid, Irfan. University Of Kashmir; IndiaFil: Reza, Masoom. Kumaun University India; IndiaFil: Ribeiro De Figueiredo, Anderson. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Riveros, Christian. Instituto Nacional de Investigación En Glaciares y Ecosistemas de Montaña; PerúFil: Shrestha, Finu. International Centre For Integrated Mountain Development Nepal; NepalFil: Shrestha, Milan. Arizona State University; Estados UnidosFil: Steiner, Jakob. International Centre For Integrated Mountain Development Nepal; NepalFil: Walker-Crawford, Noah. Colegio Universitario de Londres; Reino UnidoFil: Wood, Joanne L.. University of Exeter; Reino UnidoFil: Yde, Jacob C.. Western Norway University Of Applied Sciences; Suiz

Examining the effects of enhanced provider-patient communication on postoperative tonsillectomy pain : Protocol of a randomised controlled trial performed by nurses in daily clinical care

Introduction Placebo effects (true biopsychological effects not attributable to the active ingredients of medical technical interventions) can be attributed to several mechanisms, such as expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation elicited by a provider's communication. So far, effects have primarily been shown in laboratory settings. The aim of this study is to determine the separate and combined effects of expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation during preoperative and postoperative tonsillectomy analgesia care on clinical adult patients' outcomes. Methods and analysis Using a two-by-two randomised controlled trial, 128 adult tonsillectomy patients will be randomly assigned to one out of four conditions differing in the level of expectancy manipulation (standard vs enhanced) and empathy manipulation (standard vs enhanced). Day care ward nurses are trained to deliver the intervention, while patients are treated via the standard analgesia protocol and hospital routines. The primary outcome, perceived pain, is measured via hospital routine by a Numeric Rating Scale, and additional prehospitalisation, perihospitalisation and posthospitalisation questionnaires are completed (until day 3, ie, 2 days after the operation). The manipulation is checked using audio recordings of nurse-patient interactions. Ethics and dissemination Although communication is manipulated, the manipulations do not cross norms or values of acceptable behaviour. Standard medical care is provided. The ethical committee of the UMC Utrecht and the local OLVG hospital committee approved the study. Results will be published via (inter)national peer-reviewed journals and a lay publication. Trial registration number NTR5994; Pre-results

Examining the effects of enhanced provider-patient communication on postoperative tonsillectomy pain: Protocol of a randomised controlled trial performed by nurses in daily clinical care

Introduction Placebo effects (true biopsychological effects not attributable to the active ingredients of medical technical interventions) can be attributed to several mechanisms, such as expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation elicited by a provider's communication. So far, effects have primarily been shown in laboratory settings. The aim of this study is to determine the separate and combined effects of expectancy manipulation and empathy manipulation during preoperative and postoperative tonsillectomy analgesia care on clinical adult patients' outcomes. Methods and analysis Using a two-by-two randomised controlled trial, 128 adult tonsillectomy patients will be randomly assigned to one out of four conditions differing in the level of expectancy manipulation (standard vs enhanced) and empathy manipulation (standard vs enhanced). Day care ward nurses are trained to deliver the intervention, while patients are treated via the standard analgesia protocol and hospital routines. The primary outcome, perceived pain, is measured via hospital routine by a Numeric Rating Scale, and additional prehospitalisation, perihospitalisation and posthospitalisation questionnaires are completed (until day 3, ie, 2 days after the operation). The manipulation is checked using audio recordings of nurse-patient interactions. Ethics and dissemination Although communication is manipulated, the manipulations do not cross norms or values of acceptable behaviour. Standard medical care is provided. The ethical committee of the UMC Utrecht and the local OLVG hospital committee approved the study. Results will be published via (inter)national peer-reviewed journals and a lay publication. Trial registration number NTR5994; Pre-results

The Virtual Care Climate Questionnaire: Development and Validation of a Questionnaire Measuring Perceived Support for Autonomy in a Virtual Care Setting

Background: Web-based health behavior change interventions may be more effective if they offer autonomy-supportive communication facilitating the internalization of motivation for health behavior change. Yet, at this moment no validated tools exist to assess user-perceived autonomy-support of such interventions. Objective: The aim of this study was to develop and validate the virtual climate care questionnaire (VCCQ), a measure of perceived autonomy-support in a virtual care setting. Methods: Items were developed based on existing questionnaires and expert consultation and were pretested among experts and target populations. The virtual climate care questionnaire was administered in relation to Web-based interventions aimed at reducing consumption of alcohol (Study 1; N=230) or cannabis (Study 2; N=228). Item properties, structural validity, and reliability were examined with item-response and classical test theory methods, and convergent and divergent validity via correlations with relevant concepts. Results: In Study 1, 20 of 23 items formed a one-dimensional scale (alpha=.97; omega=.97; H=.66; mean 4.9 [SD 1.0]; range 1-7) that met the assumptions of monotonicity and invariant item ordering. In Study 2, 16 items fitted these criteria (alpha=.92; H=.45; omega=.93; mean 4.2 [SD 1.1]; range 1-7). Only 15 items remained in the questionnaire in both studies, thus we proceeded to the analyses of the questionnaire’s reliability and construct validity with a 15-item version of the virtual climate care questionnaire. Convergent validity of the resulting 15-item virtual climate care questionnaire was confirmed by positive associations with autonomous motivation (Study 1: r=.66, P<.001; Study 2: r=.37, P<.001) and perceived competence for reducing alcohol intake (Study 1: r=.52, P<.001). Divergent validity could only be confirmed by the nonsignificant association with perceived competence for learning (Study 2: r=.05, P=.48). Conclusions: The virtual climate care questionnaire accurately assessed participants’ perceived autonomy-support offered by two Web-based health behavior change interventions. Overall, the scale showed the expected properties and relationships with relevant concepts, and the studies presented suggest this first version of the virtual climate care questionnaire to be reasonably valid and reliable. As a result, the current version may cautiously be used in future research and practice to measure perceived support for autonomy within a virtual care climate. Future research efforts are required that focus on further investigating the virtual climate care questionnaire's divergent validity, on determining the virtual climate care questionnaire’s validity and reliability when used in the context of Web-based interventions aimed at improving nonaddictive or other health behaviors, and on developing and validating a short form virtual climate care questionnaire