Pan-Britain, mixed-methods study of multidisciplinary teams teaching parents to manage children's long-term kidney conditions at home: Study protocol

Background Care of children and young people (children) with long-term kidney conditions is usually managed by multidisciplinary teams. Published guidance recommends that whenever possible children with long-term conditions remain at home, meaning parents may be responsible for performing the majority of clinical care-giving. Multidisciplinary team members, therefore, spend considerable time promoting parents' learning about care-delivery and monitoring care-giving. However, this parent-educative aspect of clinicians' role is rarely articulated in the literature so little evidence exists to inform professionals' parent-teaching interventions. Methods This ongoing study addresses this issue using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods involving the twelve children's kidney units in England, Scotland and Wales. Phase I involves a survey of multidisciplinary team members' parent-teaching interventions using: i) A telephone-administered questionnaire to determine: the numbers of professionals from different disciplines in each team, the information/skills individual professionals relay to parents and the teaching strategies/interventions they use. Data will be managed using SPSS to produce descriptive statistics ii) Digitally-recorded, qualitative group or individual interviews with multidisciplinary team members to explore their accounts of the parent-teaching component of their role. Interviews will be transcribed anonymously and analysed using Framework Technique. Sampling criteria will be derived from analysis to identify one/two unit(s) for subsequent in-depth study Phase II involves six prospective, ethnographic case-studies of professional-parent interactions during parent-teaching encounters. Parents of six children with a long-term kidney condition will be purposively sampled according to their child's age, diagnosis, ethnicity and the clinical care-giving required; snowball sampling will identify the professionals involved in each case-study. Participants will provide signed consent; data gathering will involve a combination of: minimally-obtrusive observations in the clinical setting and families' homes; de-briefing interviews with participants to obtain views on selected interactions; focussed 'verbatim' field-notes, and case-note reviews. Data gathering will focus on communication between parents and professionals as parents learn care-giving skills and knowledge. Interviews will be digitally recorded and transcribed anonymously. Discussion This study involves an iterative-inductive approach and will provide a unique, detailed insight into the social context in which professionals teach and parents learn; it will inform professionals' parent-educative roles, educational curricula, and health care polic

Cross-cultural differences in informal argumentation: norms, inductive biases and evidentiality

Cross-cultural differences in argumentation may be explained by the use of different norms of reasoning. However, some norms derive from, presumably universal, mathematical laws. This inconsistency can be resolved, by considering that some norms of argumentation, like Bayes theorem, are mathematical functions. Systematic variation in the inputs may produce culture-dependent inductive biases although the function remains invariant. This hypothesis was tested by fitting a Bayesian model to data on informal argumentation from Turkish and English cultures, which linguistically mark evidence quality differently. The experiment varied evidential marking and informant reliability in argumentative dialogues and revealed cross-cultural differences for both independent variables. The Bayesian model fitted the data from both cultures well but there were differences in the parameters consistent with culture-specific inductive biases. These findings are related to current controversies over the universality of the norms of reasoning and the role of normative theories in the psychology of reasoning

Validation of a novel multivariate method of defining HIV-associated cognitive impairment

Background. The optimum method of defining cognitive impairment in virally suppressed people living with HIV is unknown. We evaluated the relationships between cognitive impairment, including using a novel multivariate method (NMM), patient– reported outcome measures (PROMs), and neuroimaging markers of brain structure across 3 cohorts. Methods. Differences in the prevalence of cognitive impairment, PROMs, and neuroimaging data from the COBRA, CHARTER, and POPPY cohorts (total n = 908) were determined between HIV-positive participants with and without cognitive impairment defined using the HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND), global deficit score (GDS), and NMM criteria. Results. The prevalence of cognitive impairment varied by up to 27% between methods used to define impairment (eg, 48% for HAND vs 21% for NMM in the CHARTER study). Associations between objective cognitive impairment and subjective cognitive complaints generally were weak. Physical and mental health summary scores (SF-36) were lowest for NMM-defined impairment (P < .05). There were no differences in brain volumes or cortical thickness between participants with and without cognitive impairment defined using the HAND and GDS measures. In contrast, those identified with cognitive impairment by the NMM had reduced mean cortical thickness in both hemispheres (P < .05), as well as smaller brain volumes (P < .01). The associations with measures of white matter microstructure and brain-predicted age generally were weaker. Conclusion. Different methods of defining cognitive impairment identify different people with varying symptomatology and measures of brain injury. Overall, NMM-defined impairment was associated with most neuroimaging abnormalities and poorer selfreported health status. This may be due to the statistical advantage of using a multivariate approac

Mortality from gastrointestinal congenital anomalies at 264 hospitals in 74 low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries: a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study

Summary Background Congenital anomalies are the fifth leading cause of mortality in children younger than 5 years globally. Many gastrointestinal congenital anomalies are fatal without timely access to neonatal surgical care, but few studies have been done on these conditions in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs). We compared outcomes of the seven most common gastrointestinal congenital anomalies in low-income, middle-income, and high-income countries globally, and identified factors associated with mortality. Methods We did a multicentre, international prospective cohort study of patients younger than 16 years, presenting to hospital for the first time with oesophageal atresia, congenital diaphragmatic hernia, intestinal atresia, gastroschisis, exomphalos, anorectal malformation, and Hirschsprung’s disease. Recruitment was of consecutive patients for a minimum of 1 month between October, 2018, and April, 2019. We collected data on patient demographics, clinical status, interventions, and outcomes using the REDCap platform. Patients were followed up for 30 days after primary intervention, or 30 days after admission if they did not receive an intervention. The primary outcome was all-cause, in-hospital mortality for all conditions combined and each condition individually, stratified by country income status. We did a complete case analysis. Findings We included 3849 patients with 3975 study conditions (560 with oesophageal atresia, 448 with congenital diaphragmatic hernia, 681 with intestinal atresia, 453 with gastroschisis, 325 with exomphalos, 991 with anorectal malformation, and 517 with Hirschsprung’s disease) from 264 hospitals (89 in high-income countries, 166 in middleincome countries, and nine in low-income countries) in 74 countries. Of the 3849 patients, 2231 (58·0%) were male. Median gestational age at birth was 38 weeks (IQR 36–39) and median bodyweight at presentation was 2·8 kg (2·3–3·3). Mortality among all patients was 37 (39·8%) of 93 in low-income countries, 583 (20·4%) of 2860 in middle-income countries, and 50 (5·6%) of 896 in high-income countries (p<0·0001 between all country income groups). Gastroschisis had the greatest difference in mortality between country income strata (nine [90·0%] of ten in lowincome countries, 97 [31·9%] of 304 in middle-income countries, and two [1·4%] of 139 in high-income countries; p≤0·0001 between all country income groups). Factors significantly associated with higher mortality for all patients combined included country income status (low-income vs high-income countries, risk ratio 2·78 [95% CI 1·88–4·11], p<0·0001; middle-income vs high-income countries, 2·11 [1·59–2·79], p<0·0001), sepsis at presentation (1·20 [1·04–1·40], p=0·016), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score at primary intervention (ASA 4–5 vs ASA 1–2, 1·82 [1·40–2·35], p<0·0001; ASA 3 vs ASA 1–2, 1·58, [1·30–1·92], p<0·0001]), surgical safety checklist not used (1·39 [1·02–1·90], p=0·035), and ventilation or parenteral nutrition unavailable when needed (ventilation 1·96, [1·41–2·71], p=0·0001; parenteral nutrition 1·35, [1·05–1·74], p=0·018). Administration of parenteral nutrition (0·61, [0·47–0·79], p=0·0002) and use of a peripherally inserted central catheter (0·65 [0·50–0·86], p=0·0024) or percutaneous central line (0·69 [0·48–1·00], p=0·049) were associated with lower mortality. Interpretation Unacceptable differences in mortality exist for gastrointestinal congenital anomalies between lowincome, middle-income, and high-income countries. Improving access to quality neonatal surgical care in LMICs will be vital to achieve Sustainable Development Goal 3.2 of ending preventable deaths in neonates and children younger than 5 years by 2030

How do judges in Comparative Judgement exercises make their judgements?

Two of the central issues in comparative judgement (CJ), which are perhaps underexplored compared to questions of the method's reliability and technical quality, are "what processes do judges use to make their decisions" and "what features do they focus on when making their decisions?" This article discusses both, in the context of CJ for standard maintaining, by reporting the results of both a study into the processes used by judges when making CJ judgements, and the outcomes of surveys of judges who have used CJ. In the first instance, using insights from observations of judges and their being asked to think aloud while they judged, we highlight the variety of processes used when making their decisions, including comparative reference, re-marking and question-by question evaluation. We then develop a four dimension model to explore what impacts what judges attend to, and explore through survey responses the distinctive ways in which the structure of the question paper, different elements of candidate responses, judges' own preferences and the CJ task itself affect decision-making. We conclude by discussing, in the light of these factors, whether the judgements made in CJ (or in the judgemental element of current standard maintaining procedures) are meaningfully holistic, and whether judges can properly take into account differences in difficulty between different papers

Cognitive control network connectivity differentially disrupted in treatment resistant schizophrenia: Impaired cognitive control connectivity in treatment-resistant schizophrenia

Antipsychotic treatment resistance affects a third of people with schizophrenia and the underlying mechanism remains unclear. We used an fMRI emotion-yoked reward learning task, allied to prefrontal cortical glutamate levels, to explain the role of cognitive control in differentiating treatment-resistant from responsive patients. We investigated how reward learning is disrupted at the network level in 21 medicated treatment-responsive and 20 medicated treatment-resistant patients with schizophrenia compared with 24 healthy controls (HC). Dynamic Causal Modelling assessed how effective connectivity between regions in acortico-striatal-limbic network is disrupted in each patient group compared to HC. Connectivity was also examined with respect to symptoms, salience and anterior cingulate (ACC) glutamate levels measured from the same region of the ACC. We found that ACCconnectivity differentiated these patient groups, with responsive patients exhibiting increased top-down connectivity from ACC to sensory regions and reduced ACC drive to the striatum, while resistant patients showed altered connectivity within the ACC itself. In these resistant patients, the ACC drive to striatum was positively correlated with their symptom severity. ACC glutamate levels were found to correlate with ACC control over sensory regions in responsive patients but not in resistant patients. We suggest a central non-dopaminergic impairment that impacts cognitive control networks in treatment-resistant schizophrenia. This impairment was associated with disrupted reward learning and could be underpinned by aberrant glutamate function. These findings should form the focus of future treatment strategies (e.g. glutamatergic targets and giving clozapine earlier) in resistant patients