Blending Geospatial Technology and Traditional Ecological Knowledge to Enhance Restoration Decision-Support Processes in Coastal Louisiana

More informed coastal restoration decisions have become increasingly important given limited resources available for restoration projects and the increasing magnitude of marsh degradation and loss across the Gulf Coast. This research investigated the feasibility and benefits of integrating geospatial technology with the traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) of an indigenous Louisiana coastal population to assess the impacts of current and historical ecosystem change on community viability. The primary goal was to provide coastal resource managers with a decision-support tool that allows for a more comprehensive method of assessing localized ecological change in the Gulf Coast region, which can also benefit human community sustainability. Using remote sensing (RS) and geographic information systems (GIS) mapping products, integrated with a coastal community’s TEK to achieve this goal, the research team determined a method for producing vulnerability/sustainability mapping products for an ecosystem-dependent livelihood base of a coastal population based on information derived from RS imagery prioritized with TEK. This study also demonstrates how such an approach can engage affected community residents who are interested in determining and addressing the causes and mitigating the decline of marsh habitat. Historical image data sets of the study area were acquired to understand evolution of land change to current conditions and project future vulnerability. Image-processing procedures were developed and applied to produce maps that detail land change in the study area at time intervals from 1968 to 2009. This information was combined in a GIS with acquired TEK and scientific data sets relating to marsh vegetation health and vulnerability characteristics to produce mapping products that provide new information for use in the coastal restoration decision-making process. This information includes: (1) marsh areas that are most vulnerable; and (2) the areas that are most significant to community sustainability

Use of Science in Gulf of Mexico Decision Making Involving Climate Change

This material is based upon research supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's National Center for Environmental Assessment/Global Change Research Program under Cooperative Agreement No. R-83023601-0. It is a joint project of Texas A&M University's Institute for Science, Technology and Public Policy in The Bush School of Government and Public Service, the Center for Hazards Assessment, Response and Technology at the University of New Orleans, the Center for Socioeconomic Research at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette, and the Environmental Sciences Institute at Florida A&M University. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.project final reportsurveyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Cooperative Agreement No. R-83023601-0

Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem: Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) well blowout released more petroleum hydrocarbons into the marine environment than any previous U.S. oil spill (4.9 million barrels), fouling marine life, damaging deep sea and shoreline habitats and causing closures of economically valuable fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. A suite of pollutants—liquid and gaseous petroleum compounds plus chemical dispersants—poured into ecosystems that had already been stressed by overfishing, development and global climate change. Beyond the direct effects that were captured in dramatic photographs of oiled birds in the media, it is likely that there are subtle, delayed, indirect and potentially synergistic impacts of these widely dispersed, highly bioavailable and toxic hydrocarbons and chemical dispersants on marine life from pelicans to salt marsh grasses and to deep-sea animals. As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it has stimulated public interest in protecting this economically, socially and environmentally critical region. The 2010 Mabus Report, commissioned by President Barack Obama and written by the secretary of the Navy, provides a blueprint for restoring the Gulf that is bold, visionary and strategic. It is clear that we need not only to repair the damage left behind by the oil but also to go well beyond that to restore the anthropogenically stressed and declining Gulf ecosystems to prosperity-sustaining levels of historic productivity. For this report, we assembled a team of leading scientists with expertise in coastal and marine ecosystems and with experience in their restoration to identify strategies and specific actions that will revitalize and sustain the Gulf coastal economy. Because the DWH spill intervened in ecosystems that are intimately interconnected and already under stress, and will remain stressed from global climate change, we argue that restoration of the Gulf must go beyond the traditional "in-place, in-kind" restoration approach that targets specific damaged habitats or species. A sustainable restoration of the Gulf of Mexico after DWH must: 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has been compromised by multiple human interventions predating the DWH spill; 2. Acknowledge that significant future environmental change is inevitable and must be factored into restoration plans and actions for them to be durable; 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and interconnected network of ecosystems from shoreline to deep sea; and 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem productivity in the Gulf are interdependent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to restoration planning. With these principles in mind, the authors provide the scientific basis for a sustainable restoration program along three themes: 1. Assess and repair damage from DWH and other stresses on the Gulf; 2. Protect existing habitats and populations; and 3. Integrate sustainable human use with ecological processes in the Gulf of Mexico. Under these themes, 15 historically informed, adaptive, ecosystem-based restoration actions are presented to recover Gulf resources and rebuild the resilience of its ecosystem. The vision that guides our recommendations fundamentally imbeds the restoration actions within the context of the changing environment so as to achieve resilience of resources, human communities and the economy into the indefinite future

A Once and Future Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem: Restoration Recommendations of an Expert Working Group

The Deepwater Horizon (DWH) well blowout released more petroleum hydrocarbons into the marine environment than any previous U.S. oil spill (4.9 million barrels), fouling marine life, damaging deep sea and shoreline habitats and causing closures of economically valuable fisheries in the Gulf of Mexico. A suite of pollutants — liquid and gaseous petroleum compounds plus chemical dispersants — poured into ecosystems that had already been stressed by overfishing, development and global climate change. Beyond the direct effects that were captured in dramatic photographs of oiled birds in the media, it is likely that there are subtle, delayed, indirect and potentially synergistic impacts of these widely dispersed, highly bioavailable and toxic hydrocarbons and chemical dispersants on marine life from pelicans to salt marsh grasses and to deep-sea animals. As tragic as the DWH blowout was, it has stimulated public interest in protecting this economically, socially and environmentally critical region. The 2010 Mabus Report, commissioned by President Barack Obama and written by the secretary of the Navy, provides a blueprint for restoring the Gulf that is bold, visionary and strategic. It is clear that we need not only to repair the damage left behind by the oil but also to go well beyond that to restore the anthropogenically stressed and declining Gulf ecosystems to prosperity-sustaining levels of historic productivity. For this report, we assembled a team of leading scientists with expertise in coastal and marine ecosystems and with experience in their restoration to identify strategies and specific actions that will revitalize and sustain the Gulf coastal economy. Because the DWH spill intervened in ecosystems that are intimately interconnected and already under stress, and will remain stressed from global climate change, we argue that restoration of the Gulf must go beyond the traditional “in-place, in-kind” restoration approach that targets specific damaged habitats or species. A sustainable restoration of the Gulf of Mexico after DWH must: 1. Recognize that ecosystem resilience has been compromised by multiple human interventions predating the DWH spill; 2. Acknowledge that significant future environmental change is inevitable and must be factored into restoration plans and actions for them to be durable; 3. Treat the Gulf as a complex and interconnected network of ecosystems from shoreline to deep sea; and 4. Recognize that human and ecosystem productivity in the Gulf are interdependent, and that human needs from and effects on the Gulf must be integral to restoration planning. With these principles in mind, we provide the scientific basis for a sustainable restoration program along three themes: 1. Assess and repair damage from DWH and other stresses on the Gulf; 2. Protect existing habitats and populations; and 3. Integrate sustainable human use with ecological processes in the Gulf of Mexico. Under these themes, 15 historically informed, adaptive, ecosystem-based restoration actions are presented to recover Gulf resources and rebuild the resilience of its ecosystem. The vision that guides our recommendations fundamentally imbeds the restoration actions within the context of the changing environment so as to achieve resilience of resources, human communities and the economy into the indefinite future

Precision rehabilitation for aphasia by patient age, sex, aphasia severity, and time since stroke? A prespecified, systematic review based, individual participant data network subgroup meta-analysis

Background: Stroke rehabilitation interventions are routinely personalized to address individuals’ needs, goals, and challenges based on evidence from aggregated randomized controlled trials (RCT) data and meta-syntheses. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses may better inform the development of precision rehabilitation approaches, quantifying treatment responses while adjusting for confounders and reducing ecological bias. Aim: We explored associations between speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions frequency (days/week), intensity (h/week), and dosage (total SLT-hours) and language outcomes for different age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity subgroups by undertaking prespecified subgroup network meta-analyses of the RELEASE database. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registrations were systematically searched (inception-Sept2015) for RCTs, including ⩾ 10 IPD on stroke-related aphasia. We extracted demographic, stroke, aphasia, SLT, and risk of bias data. Overall-language ability, auditory comprehension, and functional communication outcomes were standardized. A one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered IPD into a single optimal model, examining SLT regimen and language recovery from baseline to first post-intervention follow-up, adjusting for covariates identified a-priori. Data were dichotomized by age (⩽/> 65 years), aphasia severity (mild–moderate/ moderate–severe based on language outcomes’ median value), chronicity (⩽/> 3 months), and sex subgroups. We reported estimates of means and 95% confidence intervals. Where relative variance was high (> 50%), results were reported for completeness. Results: 959 IPD (25 RCTs) were analyzed. For working-age participants, greatest language gains from baseline occurred alongside moderate to high-intensity SLT (functional communication 3-to-4 h/week; overall-language and comprehension > 9 h/week); older participants’ greatest gains occurred alongside low-intensity SLT (⩽ 2 h/week) except for auditory comprehension (> 9 h/week). For both age-groups, SLT-frequency and dosage associated with best language gains were similar. Participants ⩽ 3 months post-onset demonstrated greatest overall-language gains for SLT at low intensity/moderate dosage (⩽ 2 SLT-h/week; 20-to-50 h); for those > 3 months, post-stroke greatest gains were associated with moderate-intensity/high-dosage SLT (3–4 SLT-h/week; ⩾ 50 hours). For moderate–severe participants, 4 SLT-days/week conferred the greatest language gains across outcomes, with auditory comprehension gains only observed for ⩾ 4 SLT-days/week; mild–moderate participants’ greatest functional communication gains were associated with similar frequency (⩾ 4 SLT-days/week) and greatest overall-language gains with higher frequency SLT (⩾ 6 days/weekly). Males’ greatest gains were associated with SLT of moderate (functional communication; 3-to-4 h/weekly) or high intensity (overall-language and auditory comprehension; (> 9 h/weekly) compared to females for whom the greatest gains were associated with lower-intensity SLT ( 9 h over ⩾ 4 days/week. Conclusions: We observed a treatment response in most subgroups’ overall-language, auditory comprehension, and functional communication language gains. For some, the maximum treatment response varied in association with different SLT-frequency, intensity, and dosage. Where differences were observed, working-aged, chronic, mild–moderate, and male subgroups experienced their greatest language gains alongside high-frequency/intensity SLT. In contrast, older, moderate–severely impaired, and female subgroups within 3 months of aphasia onset made their greatest gains for lower-intensity SLT. The acceptability, clinical, and cost effectiveness of precision aphasia rehabilitation approaches based on age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity should be evaluated in future clinical RCTs

Complex speech-language therapy interventions for stroke-related aphasia: the RELEASE study incorporating a systematic review and individual participant data network meta-analysis

Background: People with language problems following stroke (aphasia) benefit from speech and language therapy. Optimising speech and language therapy for aphasia recovery is a research priority. Objectives: The objectives were to explore patterns and predictors of language and communication recovery, optimum speech and language therapy intervention provision, and whether or not effectiveness varies by participant subgroup or language domain. Design: This research comprised a systematic review, a meta-analysis and a network meta-analysis of individual participant data. Setting: Participant data were collected in research and clinical settings. Interventions: The intervention under investigation was speech and language therapy for aphasia after stroke. Main outcome measures: The main outcome measures were absolute changes in language scores from baseline on overall language ability, auditory comprehension, spoken language, reading comprehension, writing and functional communication. Data sources and participants: Electronic databases were systematically searched, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Linguistic and Language Behavior Abstracts and SpeechBITE (searched from inception to 2015). The results were screened for eligibility, and published and unpublished data sets (randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case series, registries) with at least 10 individual participant data reporting aphasia duration and severity were identified. Existing collaborators and primary researchers named in identified records were invited to contribute electronic data sets. Individual participant data in the public domain were extracted. Review methods: Data on demographics, speech and language therapy interventions, outcomes and quality criteria were independently extracted by two reviewers, or available as individual participant data data sets. Meta-analysis and network meta-analysis were used to generate hypotheses. Results: We retrieved 5928 individual participant data from 174 data sets across 28 countries, comprising 75 electronic (3940 individual participant data), 47 randomised controlled trial (1778 individual participant data) and 91 speech and language therapy intervention (2746 individual participant data) data sets. The median participant age was 63 years (interquartile range 53-72 years). We identified 53 unavailable, but potentially eligible, randomised controlled trials (46 of these appeared to include speech and language therapy). Relevant individual participant data were filtered into each analysis. Statistically significant predictors of recovery included age (functional communication, individual participant data: 532, n = 14 randomised controlled trials) and sex (overall language ability, individual participant data: 482, n = 11 randomised controlled trials; functional communication, individual participant data: 532, n = 14 randomised controlled trials). Older age and being a longer time since aphasia onset predicted poorer recovery. A negative relationship between baseline severity score and change from baseline (p < 0.0001) may reflect the reduced improvement possible from high baseline scores. The frequency, duration, intensity and dosage of speech and language therapy were variously associated with auditory comprehension, naming and functional communication recovery. There were insufficient data to examine spontaneous recovery. The greatest overall gains in language ability [14.95 points (95% confidence interval 8.7 to 21.2 points) on the Western Aphasia Battery-Aphasia Quotient] and functional communication [0.78 points (95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.1 points) on the Aachen Aphasia Test-Spontaneous Communication] were associated with receiving speech and language therapy 4 to 5 days weekly; for auditory comprehension [5.86 points (95% confidence interval 1.6 to 10.0 points) on the Aachen Aphasia Test-Token Test], the greatest gains were associated with receiving speech and language therapy 3 to 4 days weekly. The greatest overall gains in language ability [15.9 points (95% confidence interval 8.0 to 23.6 points) on the Western Aphasia Battery-Aphasia Quotient] and functional communication [0.77 points (95% confidence interval 0.36 to 1.2 points) on the Aachen Aphasia Test-Spontaneous Communication] were associated with speech and language therapy participation from 2 to 4 (and more than 9) hours weekly, whereas the highest auditory comprehension gains [7.3 points (95% confidence interval 4.1 to 10.5 points) on the Aachen Aphasia Test-Token Test] were associated with speech and language therapy participation in excess of 9 hours weekly (with similar gains notes for 4 hours weekly). While clinically similar gains were made alongside different speech and language therapy intensities, the greatest overall gains in language ability [18.37 points (95% confidence interval 10.58 to 26.16 points) on the Western Aphasia Battery-Aphasia Quotient] and auditory comprehension [5.23 points (95% confidence interval 1.51 to 8.95 points) on the Aachen Aphasia Test-Token Test] were associated with 20-50 hours of speech and language therapy. Network meta-analyses on naming and the duration of speech and language therapy interventions across language outcomes were unstable. Relative variance was acceptable (< 30%). Subgroups may benefit from specific interventions. Limitations: Data sets were graded as being at a low risk of bias but were predominantly based on highly selected research participants, assessments and interventions, thereby limiting generalisability. Conclusions: Frequency, intensity and dosage were associated with language gains from baseline, but varied by domain and subgroup

Communicating simply, but not too simply: Reporting of participants and speech and language interventions for aphasia after stroke

Purpose: Speech and language pathology (SLP) for aphasia is a complex intervention delivered to a heterogeneous population within diverse settings. Simplistic descriptions of participants and interventions in research hinder replication, interpretation of results, guideline and research developments through secondary data analyses. This study aimed to describe the availability of participant and intervention descriptors in existing aphasia research datasets. Method: We systematically identified aphasia research datasets containing ≥10 participants with information on time since stroke and language ability. We extracted participant and SLP intervention descriptions and considered the availability of data compared to historical and current reporting standards. We developed an extension to the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist to support meaningful classification and synthesis of the SLP interventions to support secondary data analysis. Result: Of 11, 314 identified records we screened 1131 full texts and received 75 dataset contributions. We extracted data from 99 additional public domain datasets. Participant age (97.1%) and sex (90.8%) were commonly available. Prior stroke (25.8%), living context (12.1%) and socio-economic status (2.3%) were rarely available. Therapy impairment target, frequency and duration were most commonly available but predominately described at group level. Home practice (46.3%) and tailoring (functional relevance 46.3%) were inconsistently available. Conclusion : Gaps in the availability of participant and intervention details were significant, hampering clinical implementation of evidence into practice and development of our field of research. Improvements in the quality and consistency of participant and intervention data reported in aphasia research are required to maximise clinical implementation, replication in research and the generation of insights from secondary data analysis. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD4201811094

Precision rehabilitation for aphasia by patient age, sex, aphasia severity, and time since stroke? A prespecified, systematic review-based, individual participant data, network, subgroup meta-analysis

Background: Stroke rehabilitation interventions are routinely personalized to address individuals’ needs, goals, and challenges based on evidence from aggregated randomized controlled trials (RCT) data and meta-syntheses. Individual participant data (IPD) meta-analyses may better inform the development of precision rehabilitation approaches, quantifying treatment responses while adjusting for confounders and reducing ecological bias. Aim: We explored associations between speech and language therapy (SLT) interventions frequency (days/week), intensity (h/week), and dosage (total SLT-hours) and language outcomes for different age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity subgroups by undertaking prespecified subgroup network meta-analyses of the RELEASE database. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and trial registrations were systematically searched (inception-Sept2015) for RCTs, including ⩾ 10 IPD on stroke-related aphasia. We extracted demographic, stroke, aphasia, SLT, and risk of bias data. Overall-language ability, auditory comprehension, and functional communication outcomes were standardized. A one-stage, random effects, network meta-analysis approach filtered IPD into a single optimal model, examining SLT regimen and language recovery from baseline to first post-intervention follow-up, adjusting for covariates identified a-priori. Data were dichotomized by age (⩽/> 65 years), aphasia severity (mild–moderate/ moderate–severe based on language outcomes’ median value), chronicity (⩽/> 3 months), and sex subgroups. We reported estimates of means and 95% confidence intervals. Where relative variance was high (> 50%), results were reported for completeness. Results: 959 IPD (25 RCTs) were analyzed. For working-age participants, greatest language gains from baseline occurred alongside moderate to high-intensity SLT (functional communication 3-to-4 h/week; overall-language and comprehension > 9 h/week); older participants’ greatest gains occurred alongside low-intensity SLT (⩽ 2 h/week) except for auditory comprehension (> 9 h/week). For both age-groups, SLT-frequency and dosage associated with best language gains were similar. Participants ⩽ 3 months post-onset demonstrated greatest overall-language gains for SLT at low intensity/moderate dosage (⩽ 2 SLT-h/week; 20-to-50 h); for those > 3 months, post-stroke greatest gains were associated with moderate-intensity/high-dosage SLT (3–4 SLT-h/week; ⩾ 50 hours). For moderate–severe participants, 4 SLT-days/week conferred the greatest language gains across outcomes, with auditory comprehension gains only observed for ⩾ 4 SLT-days/week; mild–moderate participants’ greatest functional communication gains were associated with similar frequency (⩾ 4 SLT-days/week) and greatest overall-language gains with higher frequency SLT (⩾ 6 days/weekly). Males’ greatest gains were associated with SLT of moderate (functional communication; 3-to-4 h/weekly) or high intensity (overall-language and auditory comprehension; (> 9 h/weekly) compared to females for whom the greatest gains were associated with lower-intensity SLT ( 9 h over ⩾ 4 days/week. Conclusions: We observed a treatment response in most subgroups’ overall-language, auditory comprehension, and functional communication language gains. For some, the maximum treatment response varied in association with different SLT-frequency, intensity, and dosage. Where differences were observed, working-aged, chronic, mild–moderate, and male subgroups experienced their greatest language gains alongside high-frequency/intensity SLT. In contrast, older, moderate–severely impaired, and female subgroups within 3 months of aphasia onset made their greatest gains for lower-intensity SLT. The acceptability, clinical, and cost effectiveness of precision aphasia rehabilitation approaches based on age, sex, aphasia severity, and chronicity should be evaluated in future clinical RCTs

Utilising a systematic review-based approach to create a database of individual participant data for meta- and network meta-analyses: the RELEASE database of aphasia after stroke

Background: Collation of aphasia research data across settings, countries and study designs using big data principles will support analyses across different language modalities, levels of impairment, and therapy interventions in this heterogeneous population. Big data approaches in aphasia research may support vital analyses, which are unachievable within individual trial datasets. However, we lack insight into the requirements for a systematically created database, the feasibility and challenges and potential utility of the type of data collated. Aim: To report the development, preparation and establishment of an internationally agreed aphasia after stroke research database of individual participant data (IPD) to facilitate planned aphasia research analyses. Methods: Data were collated by systematically identifying existing, eligible studies in any language (≥10 IPD, data on time since stroke, and language performance) and included sourcing from relevant aphasia research networks. We invited electronic contributions and also extracted IPD from the public domain. Data were assessed for completeness, validity of value-ranges within variables, and described according to pre-defined categories of demographic data, therapy descriptions, and language domain measurements. We cleaned, clarified, imputed and standardised relevant data in collaboration with the original study investigators. We presented participant, language, stroke, and therapy data characteristics of the final database using summary statistics. Results: From 5256 screened records, 698 datasets were potentially eligible for inclusion; 174 datasets (5928 IPD) from 28 countries were included, 47/174 RCT datasets (1778 IPD) and 91/174 (2834 IPD) included a speech and language therapy (SLT) intervention. Participants’ median age was 63 years (interquartile range [53, 72]), 3407 (61.4%) were male and median recruitment time was 321 days (IQR 30, 1156) after stroke. IPD were available for aphasia severity or ability overall (n = 2699; 80 datasets), naming (n = 2886; 75 datasets), auditory comprehension (n = 2750; 71 datasets), functional communication (n = 1591; 29 datasets), reading (n = 770; 12 datasets) and writing (n = 724; 13 datasets). Information on SLT interventions were described by theoretical approach, therapy target, mode of delivery, setting and provider. Therapy regimen was described according to intensity (1882 IPD; 60 datasets), frequency (2057 IPD; 66 datasets), duration (1960 IPD; 64 datasets) and dosage (1978 IPD; 62 datasets). Discussion: Our international IPD archive demonstrates the application of big data principles in the context of aphasia research; our rigorous methodology for data acquisition and cleaning can serve as a template for the establishment of similar databases in other research areas