Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 15, No. 1

• The Year of the Rupjonjim • Pennsylvania Summer-Houses and Summer-Kitchens • Religious and Educational References in Lancaster County Wills • Genealogy and Folk-Culture • Pennsylvania German Folktales: An Annotated Bibliography • Italian Immigrant Life in Northampton County, Pennsylvania, 1890-1915 Part IIhttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag/1021/thumbnail.jp

Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 19, No. 3

• Cooking in Red and White • Trade Cards, Catalogs, and Invoice Heads • The Encyclopaedia Cinematographica and Folklife Studies • The Cheese was Good • Notes and Documents: Eighteenth-Century Letters from Germany • The Ephrata Wall-Charts and Their Inscriptions • Itinerants - Peddlers, Drovers, Wagoners, Gypsies, Tramps: Folk-Cultural Questionnaire No. 15 • Engravings of Pennsylvania Millshttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag/1039/thumbnail.jp

The Dutchman Vol. 6, No. 1

● Editorial ● Somerset County Decorated Barns ● Butter Molds ● Restaurants, too, Go Dutch ● The Hostetter Fractur Collection ● Bindnagle\u27s Church ● The Harry S. High Folk Art Collection ● Lebanon Valley Date Stones ● Of Bells and Bell Towers ● John Durang, the First Native American Dancer ● Stoffel Rilbps\u27 Epistle ● The First Singing of Our National Anthem ● Pennsylvania Dutch Pioneershttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/dutchmanmag/1000/thumbnail.jp

Pennsylvania Folklife Vol. 9, No. 1

• Half-Timbering in American Architecture • The Strouse Dance • Schuylkill Boatmen and Their Ways • Some Early Phases of the Philadelphia Mummers\u27 Parade • Fantasticals • Joseph Henry Dubbs as a Folklorist • About the Authors • Horse Companies in Montgomery County • Books Not for Burninghttps://digitalcommons.ursinus.edu/pafolklifemag/1000/thumbnail.jp

Thigh-length compression stockings and DVT after stroke

Controversy exists as to whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with invasive bladder cancer, despite randomised controlled trials of more than 3000 patients. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effect of such treatment on survival in patients with this disease

Azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

Background Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatory actions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients were randomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once per day by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatment groups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment and were twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants and local study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to the outcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936. Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) were eligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was 65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomly allocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall, 561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days (rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median 10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days (rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, no significant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilation or death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24). Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or other prespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restricted to patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication. Funding UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council) and National Institute of Health Research