Lasing on a narrow transition in a cold thermal strontium ensemble

Highly stable laser sources based on narrow atomic transitions provide a promising platform for direct generation of stable and accurate optical frequencies. Here we investigate a simple system operating in the high-temperature regime of cold atoms. The interaction between a thermal ensemble of $^{88}$Sr at mK temperatures and a medium-finesse cavity produces strong collective coupling and facilitates high atomic coherence which causes lasing on the dipole forbidden $^1$S$_0 \leftrightarrow ^3$P$_1$ transition. We experimentally and theoretically characterize the lasing threshold and evolution of such a system, and investigate decoherence effects in an unconfined ensemble. We model the system using a Tavis-Cummings model, and characterize velocity-dependent dynamics of the atoms as well as the dependency on the cavity-detuning.Comment: 9 pages, 7 figure

Impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials:meta-epidemiological study

International audienceAbstract Objectives To study the impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects, and their variation between trials; differentiating between blinding of patients, healthcare providers, and observers; detection bias and performance bias; and types of outcome (the MetaBLIND study). Design Meta-epidemiological study. Data source Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2013-14). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Meta-analyses with both blinded and non-blinded trials on any topic. Review methods Blinding status was retrieved from trial publications and authors, and results retrieved automatically from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Bayesian hierarchical models estimated the average ratio of odds ratios (ROR), and estimated the increases in heterogeneity between trials, for non-blinded trials (or of unclear status) versus blinded trials. Secondary analyses adjusted for adequacy of concealment of allocation, attrition, and trial size, and explored the association between outcome subjectivity (high, moderate, low) and average bias. An ROR lower than 1 indicated exaggerated effect estimates in trials without blinding. Results The study included 142 meta-analyses (1153 trials). The ROR for lack of blinding of patients was 0.91 (95% credible interval 0.61 to 1.34) in 18 meta-analyses with patient reported outcomes, and 0.98 (0.69 to 1.39) in 14 meta-analyses with outcomes reported by blinded observers. The ROR for lack of blinding of healthcare providers was 1.01 (0.84 to 1.19) in 29 meta-analyses with healthcare provider decision outcomes (eg, readmissions), and 0.97 (0.64 to 1.45) in 13 meta-analyses with outcomes reported by blinded patients or observers. The ROR for lack of blinding of observers was 1.01 (0.86 to 1.18) in 46 meta-analyses with subjective observer reported outcomes, with no clear impact of degree of subjectivity. Information was insufficient to determine whether lack of blinding was associated with increased heterogeneity between trials. The ROR for trials not reported as double blind versus those that were double blind was 1.02 (0.90 to 1.13) in 74 meta-analyses. Conclusion No evidence was found for an average difference in estimated treatment effect between trials with and without blinded patients, healthcare providers, or outcome assessors. These results could reflect that blinding is less important than often believed or meta-epidemiological study limitations, such as residual confounding or imprecision. At this stage, replication of this study is suggested and blinding should remain a methodological safeguard in trials

Impact of COVID-19 on cardiovascular testing in the United States versus the rest of the world

Objectives: This study sought to quantify and compare the decline in volumes of cardiovascular procedures between the United States and non-US institutions during the early phase of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the care of many non-COVID-19 illnesses. Reductions in diagnostic cardiovascular testing around the world have led to concerns over the implications of reduced testing for cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity and mortality. Methods: Data were submitted to the INCAPS-COVID (International Atomic Energy Agency Non-Invasive Cardiology Protocols Study of COVID-19), a multinational registry comprising 909 institutions in 108 countries (including 155 facilities in 40 U.S. states), assessing the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on volumes of diagnostic cardiovascular procedures. Data were obtained for April 2020 and compared with volumes of baseline procedures from March 2019. We compared laboratory characteristics, practices, and procedure volumes between U.S. and non-U.S. facilities and between U.S. geographic regions and identified factors associated with volume reduction in the United States. Results: Reductions in the volumes of procedures in the United States were similar to those in non-U.S. facilities (68% vs. 63%, respectively; p = 0.237), although U.S. facilities reported greater reductions in invasive coronary angiography (69% vs. 53%, respectively; p < 0.001). Significantly more U.S. facilities reported increased use of telehealth and patient screening measures than non-U.S. facilities, such as temperature checks, symptom screenings, and COVID-19 testing. Reductions in volumes of procedures differed between U.S. regions, with larger declines observed in the Northeast (76%) and Midwest (74%) than in the South (62%) and West (44%). Prevalence of COVID-19, staff redeployments, outpatient centers, and urban centers were associated with greater reductions in volume in U.S. facilities in a multivariable analysis. Conclusions: We observed marked reductions in U.S. cardiovascular testing in the early phase of the pandemic and significant variability between U.S. regions. The association between reductions of volumes and COVID-19 prevalence in the United States highlighted the need for proactive efforts to maintain access to cardiovascular testing in areas most affected by outbreaks of COVID-19 infection

Effects of a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist for the prevention of recurrent acute pancreatitis: study protocol for an investigator-initiated, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial (PAMORA-RAP trial)

Abstract Background Acute and chronic pancreatitis constitute a continuum of inflammatory disease of the pancreas with an increasing incidence in most high-income countries. A subset of patients with a history of pancreatitis suffer from recurrence of acute pancreatitis attacks, which accelerate disease progression towards end-stage chronic pancreatitis with loss of exocrine and endocrine function. There is currently no available prophylactic treatment for recurrent acute pancreatitis apart from removing risk factors, which is not always possible. Pain is the primary symptom of acute pancreatitis, which induces the endogenous release of opioids. This may further be potentiated by opioid administration for pain management. Increased exposure to opioids leads to potentially harmful effects on the gastrointestinal tract, including, e.g. increased sphincter tones and decreased fluid secretion, which may impair pancreatic ductal clearance and elevate the risk for new pancreatitis attacks and accelerate disease progression. Peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonists (PAMORAs) have been developed to counteract the adverse effects of opioids on the gastrointestinal tract. We hypothesize that the PAMORA naldemedine will reduce the risk of new pancreatitis attacks in patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis and hence decelerate disease progression. Methods The study is a double-blind, randomized controlled trial with allocation of patients to either 0.2 mg naldemedine daily or matching placebo for 12 months. A total of 120 outpatients will be enrolled from five specialist centres in Denmark and Sweden. The main inclusion criteria is a history of recurrent acute pancreatitis (minimum of two confirmed pancreatitis attacks). The primary endpoint is time to acute pancreatitis recurrence after randomization. Secondary outcomes include changes in quality of life, gastrointestinal symptom scores, new-onset diabetes, exocrine pancreatic insufficiency, disease severity, health care utilization, adherence to treatment, and frequency of adverse events. Exploratory outcomes are included for mechanistic linkage and include the progression of chronic pancreatitis-related findings on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and changes in circulating blood markers of inflammation and fibrosis. Discussion This study investigates if naldemedine can change the natural course of pancreatitis in patients with recurrent acute pancreatitis and improve patient outcomes. Trial registration EudraCT no. 2021–000069-34. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04966559. Registered on July 8, 2021