Ризик орієнтований підхід та страхова справа

Аналізуються світові тенденції щодо розвитку ризик орієнтованого підходу в управлінні та господарюванні і розглядаються шляхи його започаткування в Україні, а також запровадження у страховій справі.Проанализированы мировые тенденции развития риск ориентированного похода в управлении и хозяйствовании. Рассматриваются пути его введения в Украине, а также в страховом деле.Global trends of risk oriented approach in the management and economy are analyzed. The ways of its implementation in Ukraine, as well as in insurance are considered

Anxiolytic effects of endocannabinoid enhancing compounds:A systematic review and meta-analysis

The endocannabinoid system is a promising candidate for anxiolytic therapy, but translation to the clinic has been lagging. We meta-analyzed the evidence for anxiety-reduction by compounds that facilitate endocannabinoid signaling in humans and animals. To identify areas of specific potential, effects of moderators were assessed. Literature was searched in Pubmed and Embase up to May 2021. A placebo/vehicle-control group was required and in human studies, randomization. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE's RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. We conducted three-level random effects meta-analyses and explored sources of heterogeneity using Bayesian regularized meta-regression (BRMA). The systematic review yielded 134 studies. We analyzed 120 studies (114 animal, 6 human) that investigated cannabidiol (CBD, 61), URB597 (39), PF-3845 (6) and AM404 (14). Pooled effects on conditioned and unconditioned anxiety in animals (with the exception of URB597 on unconditioned anxiety) and on experimentally induced anxiety in humans favored the investigational drugs over placebo/vehicle. Publication year was negatively associated with effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety. Compared to approach avoidance tests, tests of repetitive-compulsive behavior were associated with larger effects of CBD and URB597, and the social interaction test with smaller effects of URB597. Larger effects of CBD on unconditioned anxiety were observed when anxiety pre-existed. Studies reported few side effects at therapeutic doses. The evidence quality was low with indications of publication bias. More clinical trials are needed to translate the overall positive results to clinical applications.</p

Large-scale remote fear conditioning: demonstration of associations with anxiety using the FLARe smartphone app

Objectives We aimed to examine differences in fear conditioning between anxious and nonanxious participants in a single large sample. Materials and methods We employed a remote fear conditioning task (FLARe) to collect data from participants from the Twins Early Development Study (n = 1,146; 41% anxious vs. 59% nonanxious). Differences between groups were estimated for their expectancy of an aversive outcome towards a reinforced conditional stimulus (CS+) and an unreinforced conditional stimulus (CS−) during acquisition and extinction phases. Results During acquisition, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy towards the CS−. During extinction, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy to both CSs. These comparisons yielded effect size estimates (d = 0.26–0.34) similar to those identified in previous meta‐analyses. Conclusion The current study demonstrates that remote fear conditioning can be used to detect differences between groups of anxious and nonanxious individuals, which appear to be consistent with previous meta‐analyses including in‐person studies

No consistent startle modulation by reward

Previous studies have not clearly demonstrated whether motivational tendencies during reward feedback are mainly characterized by appetitive responses to a gain or mainly by aversive consequences of reward omission. In the current study this issue was addressed employing a passive head or tails game and using the startle reflex as an index of the appetitive-aversive continuum. A second aim of the current study was to use startle-reflex modulation as a means to compare the subjective value of monetary rewards of varying magnitude. Startle responses after receiving feedback that a potential reward was won or not won were compared with a baseline condition without a potential gain. Furthermore, startle responses during anticipation of no versus potential gain were compared. Consistent with previous studies, startle-reflex magnitudes were significantly potentiated when participants anticipated a reward compared to no reward, which may reflect anticipatory arousal. Specifically for the largest reward (20-cents) startle magnitudes were potentiated when a reward was at stake but not won, compared to a neutral baseline without potential gain. In contrast, startle was not inhibited relative to baseline when a reward was won. This suggests that startle modulation during feedback is better characterized in terms of potentiation when missing out on reward rather than in terms of inhibition as a result of winning. However, neither of these effects were replicated in a more targeted second experiment. The discrepancy between these experiments may be due to differences in motivation to obtain rewards or differences in task engagement. From these experiments it may be concluded that the nature of the processing of reward feedback and reward cues is very sensitive to experimental parameters and settings. These studies show how apparently modest changes in these parameters and settings may lead to quite different modulations of appetitive/aversive motivation. A future experiment may shed more light on the question whether startle-reflex modulation after feedback is indeed mainly characterized by the aversive consequences of reward omission for relatively large rewards

No consistent startle modulation by reward

Previous studies have not clearly demonstrated whether motivational tendencies during reward feedback are mainly characterized by appetitive responses to a gain or mainly by aversive consequences of reward omission. In the current study this issue was addressed employing a passive head or tails game and using the startle reflex as an index of the appetitive-aversive continuum. A second aim of the current study was to use startle-reflex modulation as a means to compare the subjective value of monetary rewards of varying magnitude. Startle responses after receiving feedback that a potential reward was won or not won were compared with a baseline condition without a potential gain. Furthermore, startle responses during anticipation of no versus potential gain were compared. Consistent with previous studies, startle-reflex magnitudes were significantly potentiated when participants anticipated a reward compared to no reward, which may reflect anticipatory arousal. Specifically for the largest reward (20-cents) startle magnitudes were potentiated when a reward was at stake but not won, compared to a neutral baseline without potential gain. In contrast, startle was not inhibited relative to baseline when a reward was won. This suggests that startle modulation during feedback is better characterized in terms of potentiation when missing out on reward rather than in terms of inhibition as a result of winning. However, neither of these effects were replicated in a more targeted second experiment. The discrepancy between these experiments may be due to differences in motivation to obtain rewards or differences in task engagement. From these experiments it may be concluded that the nature of the processing of reward feedback and reward cues is very sensitive to experimental parameters and settings. These studies show how apparently modest changes in these parameters and settings may lead to quite different modulations of appetitive/aversive motivation. A future experiment may shed more light on the question whether startle-reflex modulation after feedback is indeed mainly characterized by the aversive consequences of reward omission for relatively large rewards

No consistent startle modulation by reward

Previous studies have not clearly demonstrated whether motivational tendencies during reward feedback are mainly characterized by appetitive responses to a gain or mainly by aversive consequences of reward omission. In the current study this issue was addressed employing a passive head or tails game and using the startle reflex as an index of the appetitive-aversive continuum. A second aim of the current study was to use startle-reflex modulation as a means to compare the subjective value of monetary rewards of varying magnitude. Startle responses after receiving feedback that a potential reward was won or not won were compared with a baseline condition without a potential gain. Furthermore, startle responses during anticipation of no versus potential gain were compared. Consistent with previous studies, startle-reflex magnitudes were significantly potentiated when participants anticipated a reward compared to no reward, which may reflect anticipatory arousal. Specifically for the largest reward (20-cents) startle magnitudes were potentiated when a reward was at stake but not won, compared to a neutral baseline without potential gain. In contrast, startle was not inhibited relative to baseline when a reward was won. This suggests that startle modulation during feedback is better characterized in terms of potentiation when missing out on reward rather than in terms of inhibition as a result of winning. However, neither of these effects were replicated in a more targeted second experiment. The discrepancy between these experiments may be due to differences in motivation to obtain rewards or differences in task engagement. From these experiments it may be concluded that the nature of the processing of reward feedback and reward cues is very sensitive to experimental parameters and settings. These studies show how apparently modest changes in these parameters and settings may lead to quite different modulations of appetitive/aversive motivation. A future experiment may shed more light on the question whether startle-reflex modulation after feedback is indeed mainly characterized by the aversive consequences of reward omission for relatively large rewards

Cannabidiol in clinical and preclinical anxiety research: A systematic review into concentration–effect relations using the IB-de-risk tool

Background: Preclinical research suggests that cannabidiol (CBD) may have therapeutic potential in pathological anxiety. Dosing guidelines to inform future human studies are however lacking. Aim: We aimed to predict the therapeutic window for anxiety-reducing effects of CBD in humans based on preclinical models. Methods: We conducted two systematic searches in PubMed and Embase up to August 2021, into pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data of systemic CBD exposure in humans and animals, which includes anxiety-reducing and potential side effects. Risk of bias was assessed with SYRCLE’s RoB tool and Cochrane RoB 2.0. A control group was an inclusion criterion in outcome studies. In human outcome studies, randomisation was required. We excluded studies that co-administered other substances. We used the IB-de-risk tool for a translational integration of outcomes. Results: We synthesised data from 87 studies. For most observations (70.3%), CBD had no effect on anxiety outcomes. There was no identifiable relation between anxiety outcomes and drug levels across species. In all species (humans, mice, rats), anxiety-reducing effects seemed to be clustered in certain concentration ranges, which differed between species. Discussion: A straightforward dosing recommendation was not possible, given variable concentration–effect relations across species, and no consistent linear effect of CBD on anxiety reduction. Currently, these results raise questions about the broad use as a drug for anxiety. Meta-analytic studies are needed to quantitatively investigate drug efficacy, including aspects of anxiety symptomatology. Acute and (sub)chronic dosing studies with integrated PK and PD outcomes are required for substantiated dose recommendations

The Effects of β-Adrenergic Blockade on the Degrading Effects of Eye Movements on Negative Autobiographical Memories

Background Eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR) is an effective treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder. During EMDR, patients make horizontal eye movements (EMs) while simultaneously recalling a traumatic memory, which renders the memory less vivid and emotional when it is later recalled again. Recalling highly emotional autobiographical memories enhances noradrenergic neurotransmission. Noradrenaline (NA) strengthens memory (re)consolidation. However, memories become less vivid after recall+EMs. Therefore, NA might either play no significant role or serve to strengthen memories that are degraded by EMs. The present study was designed to test the latter hypothesis. We predicted that blocking NA would abolish the memory degrading effects of EMs. Methods Fifty-six healthy participants selected three negative autobiographical memories. One was then recalled while making EMs, one was recalled without EMs, and one was not recalled. Vividness and emotionality of the memories as well as heart rate and skin conductance level during memory retrieval were measured before, directly after, and 24 hours after the EM task. Before the task, participants received a placebo or the noradrenergic β-receptor blocker propranolol (40 mg). Results There were no effects of EMs on memory emotionality or psychophysiological measures in the propranolol and placebo groups. However, in the placebo group, but not in the propranolol group, memory vividness significantly decreased from pretest to posttest and follow-up after recall+EMs relative to the control conditions. Conclusions Blocking NA abolished the effects of EMs on the vividness of emotional memories, indicating that NA is crucial for EMDR effectiveness and possibly strengthens the reconsolidation of the degraded memory

Large-scale remote fear conditioning: Demonstration of associations with anxiety using the FLARe smartphone app

Objectives: We aimed to examine differences in fear conditioning between anxious and nonanxious participants in a single large sample. Materials and methods: We employed a remote fear conditioning task (FLARe) to collect data from participants from the Twins Early Development Study (n = 1,146; 41% anxious vs. 59% nonanxious). Differences between groups were estimated for their expectancy of an aversive outcome towards a reinforced conditional stimulus (CS+) and an unreinforced conditional stimulus (CS−) during acquisition and extinction phases. Results: During acquisition, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy towards the CS−. During extinction, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy to both CSs. These comparisons yielded effect size estimates (d = 0.26–0.34) similar to those identified in previous meta-analyses. Conclusion: The current study demonstrates that remote fear conditioning can be used to detect differences between groups of anxious and nonanxious individuals, which appear to be consistent with previous meta-analyses including in-person studies

Large-scale remote fear conditioning: Demonstration of associations with anxiety using the FLARe smartphone app

Objectives: We aimed to examine differences in fear conditioning between anxious and nonanxious participants in a single large sample. Materials and methods: We employed a remote fear conditioning task (FLARe) to collect data from participants from the Twins Early Development Study (n = 1,146; 41% anxious vs. 59% nonanxious). Differences between groups were estimated for their expectancy of an aversive outcome towards a reinforced conditional stimulus (CS+) and an unreinforced conditional stimulus (CS−) during acquisition and extinction phases. Results: During acquisition, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy towards the CS−. During extinction, the anxious group (vs. nonanxious group) showed greater expectancy to both CSs. These comparisons yielded effect size estimates (d = 0.26–0.34) similar to those identified in previous meta-analyses. Conclusion: The current study demonstrates that remote fear conditioning can be used to detect differences between groups of anxious and nonanxious individuals, which appear to be consistent with previous meta-analyses including in-person studies