History and Theory: An English Story

no abstrac

History and Theory: An English Story

no abstrac

De l’histoire sociale au tournant linguistique et au-delà. Où va l’historiographie britannique ?

Cet article examine en premier lieu l’émergence et le triomphe d’un ensemble d’opinions et d’hypothèses déjà importantes dans la façon d’écrire l’histoire britannique depuis le xixe siècle, mais qui devinrent prépondérantes au cours des trois décennies suivant la Seconde guerre mondiale. S’affirmait l’idée que le contexte qui influait de façon fondamentale sur les événements politiques et qui façonnait la lutte des idées n’était autre que le social. L’article examine ensuite le rôle du tournant linguistique dans le déclin de ce paradigme. Le tournant linguistique a mis en exergue la nécessité d’un changement radical de perspective : non seulement une nouvelle façon d’écrire l’histoire, mais aussi réfléchir aux façons dont il faudrait aborder l’histoire britannique et sa position dans le monde. Les historiens ont opté pour une forme d’éclectisme, adoptant pour une bonne part les hypothèses et les procédés de l’approche discursive et même, lorsque c’est approprié, les techniques de la déconstruction. Ainsi, les travaux des spécialistes d’histoire économique sur la relation entre l’économie, l’administration politique et la puissance impériale de la Grande-Bretagne jusqu’à 1815 ont rejoint dans une large mesure l’approche discursive pratiquée par les spécialistes de l’histoire des partis et des mouvements politiques.This paper first examines the emergence and triumph of a set of attitudes and assumptions, which had already been prominent in the writing of British history since the 19th century, but which became dominant in the thirty years following the Second World War. In these was expressed the belief that the social was the fundamental terrain that shaped the way in which the events of political history and the battle of ideas were played out. Secondly, it examines the place of the linguistic turn in the decline and displacement of this ethos. Arguments about the linguistic turn pinpointed the need for a fundamental change of outlook, not only in thinking about how history should be written, but also in reflecting on how British history and its place in the world would need to be approached. Historians have generally employed a defensible form of eclecticism, adopting many of the assumptions and procedures of the discursive approach and even, when appropriate, techniques of deconstruction. The work of economic historians upon the relationship between Britain’s economy, polity and imperial power in the period up to 1815 has, therefore, largely dovetailed the discursive approach of historians of parties and political movements

Differential predictors for alcohol use in adolescents as a function of familial risk

Abstract: Traditional models of future alcohol use in adolescents have used variable-centered approaches, predicting alcohol use from a set of variables across entire samples or populations. Following the proposition that predictive factors may vary in adolescents as a function of family history, we used a two-pronged approach by first defining clusters of familial risk, followed by prediction analyses within each cluster. Thus, for the first time in adolescents, we tested whether adolescents with a family history of drug abuse exhibit a set of predictors different from adolescents without a family history. We apply this approach to a genetic risk score and individual differences in personality, cognition, behavior (risk-taking and discounting) substance use behavior at age 14, life events, and functional brain imaging, to predict scores on the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at age 14 and 16 in a sample of adolescents (N = 1659 at baseline, N = 1327 at follow-up) from the IMAGEN cohort, a longitudinal community-based cohort of adolescents. In the absence of familial risk (n = 616), individual differences in baseline drinking, personality measures (extraversion, negative thinking), discounting behaviors, life events, and ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation were significantly associated with future AUDIT scores, while the overall model explained 22% of the variance in future AUDIT. In the presence of familial risk (n = 711), drinking behavior at age 14, personality measures (extraversion, impulsivity), behavioral risk-taking, and life events were significantly associated with future AUDIT scores, explaining 20.1% of the overall variance. Results suggest that individual differences in personality, cognition, life events, brain function, and drinking behavior contribute differentially to the prediction of future alcohol misuse. This approach may inform more individualized preventive interventions

Differential predictors for alcohol use in adolescents as a function of familial risk

Abstract: Traditional models of future alcohol use in adolescents have used variable-centered approaches, predicting alcohol use from a set of variables across entire samples or populations. Following the proposition that predictive factors may vary in adolescents as a function of family history, we used a two-pronged approach by first defining clusters of familial risk, followed by prediction analyses within each cluster. Thus, for the first time in adolescents, we tested whether adolescents with a family history of drug abuse exhibit a set of predictors different from adolescents without a family history. We apply this approach to a genetic risk score and individual differences in personality, cognition, behavior (risk-taking and discounting) substance use behavior at age 14, life events, and functional brain imaging, to predict scores on the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) at age 14 and 16 in a sample of adolescents (N = 1659 at baseline, N = 1327 at follow-up) from the IMAGEN cohort, a longitudinal community-based cohort of adolescents. In the absence of familial risk (n = 616), individual differences in baseline drinking, personality measures (extraversion, negative thinking), discounting behaviors, life events, and ventral striatal activation during reward anticipation were significantly associated with future AUDIT scores, while the overall model explained 22% of the variance in future AUDIT. In the presence of familial risk (n = 711), drinking behavior at age 14, personality measures (extraversion, impulsivity), behavioral risk-taking, and life events were significantly associated with future AUDIT scores, explaining 20.1% of the overall variance. Results suggest that individual differences in personality, cognition, life events, brain function, and drinking behavior contribute differentially to the prediction of future alcohol misuse. This approach may inform more individualized preventive interventions

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Une autre histoire sociale ? (note critique)

Jones Gareth Stedman. Une autre histoire sociale ? (note critique). In: Annales. Histoire, Sciences Sociales. 53ᵉ année, N. 2, 1998. pp. 383-394