Who should be prioritized for renal transplantation?: Analysis of key stakeholder preferences using discrete choice experiments

Background Policies for allocating deceased donor kidneys have recently shifted from allocation based on Human Leucocyte Antigen (HLA) tissue matching in the UK and USA. Newer allocation algorithms incorporate waiting time as a primary factor, and in the UK, young adults are also favoured. However, there is little contemporary UK research on the views of stakeholders in the transplant process to inform future allocation policy. This research project aimed to address this issue. Methods Discrete Choice Experiment (DCE) questionnaires were used to establish priorities for kidney transplantation among different stakeholder groups in the UK. Questionnaires were targeted at patients, carers, donors / relatives of deceased donors, and healthcare professionals. Attributes considered included: waiting time; donor-recipient HLA match; whether a recipient had dependents; diseases affecting life expectancy; and diseases affecting quality of life. Results Responses were obtained from 908 patients (including 98 ethnic minorities); 41 carers; 48 donors / relatives of deceased donors; and 113 healthcare professionals. The patient group demonstrated statistically different preferences for every attribute (i.e. significantly different from zero) so implying that changes in given attributes affected preferences, except when prioritizing those with no rather than moderate diseases affecting quality of life. The attributes valued highly related to waiting time, tissue match, prioritizing those with dependents, and prioritizing those with moderate rather than severe diseases affecting life expectancy. Some preferences differed between healthcare professionals and patients, and ethnic minority and non-ethnic minority patients. Only non-ethnic minority patients and healthcare professionals clearly prioritized those with better tissue matches. Conclusions Our econometric results are broadly supportive of the 2006 shift in UK transplant policy which emphasized prioritizing the young and long waiters. However, our findings suggest the need for a further review in the light of observed differences in preferences amongst ethnic minorities, and also because those with dependents may be a further priority.</p

Absence of an association of human polyomavirus and papillomavirus infection with lung cancer in China: a nested case–control study

BACKGROUND: Studies of human polyomavirus (HPyV) infection and lung cancer are limited and those regarding the association of human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and lung cancer have produced inconsistent results. METHODS: We conducted a nested case–control study to assess the association between incident lung cancer of various histologies and evidence of prior infection with HPyVs and HPVs. We selected serum from 183 cases and 217 frequency matched controls from the Yunnan Tin Miner’s Cohort study, which was designed to identify biomarkers for early detection of lung cancer. Using multiplex liquid bead microarray (LBMA) antibody assays, we tested for antibodies to the VP1 structural protein and small T antigen (ST-Ag) of Merkel cell, KI, and WU HPyVs. We also tested for antibodies against HPV L1 structural proteins (high-risk types 16, 18, 31, 33, 52, and 58 and low-risk types 6 and 11) and E6 and E7 oncoproteins (high risk types 16 and 18). Measures of antibody reactivity were log transformed and analyzed using logistic regression. RESULTS: We found no association between KIV, WUV, and MCV antibody levels and incident lung cancer (P-corrected for multiple comparisons >0.10 for all trend tests). We also found no association with HPV-16, 18, 31, 33, 52, and 58 seropositivity (P-corrected for multiple comparisons >0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Future studies of infectious etiologies of lung cancer should look beyond HPyVs and HPVs as candidate infectious agents. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2381-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Mental Representations of Weekdays

Keeping social appointments involves keeping track of what day it is. In practice, mismatches between apparent day and actual day are common. For example, a person might think the current day is Wednesday when in fact it is Thursday. Here we show that such mismatches are highly systematic, and can be traced to specific properties of their mental representations. In Study 1, mismatches between apparent day and actual day occurred more frequently on midweek days (Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday) than on other days, and were mainly due to intrusions from immediately neighboring days. In Study 2, reaction times to report the current day were fastest on Monday and Friday, and slowest midweek. In Study 3, participants generated fewer semantic associations for "Tuesday", "Wednesday" and "Thursday" than for other weekday names. Similarly, Google searches found fewer occurrences of midweek days in webpages and books. Analysis of affective norms revealed that participants' associations were strongly negative for Monday, strongly positive for Friday, and graded over the intervening days. Midweek days are confusable because their mental representations are sparse and similar. Mondays and Fridays are less confusable because their mental representations are rich and distinctive, forming two extremes along a continuum of change

ICAR: endoscopic skull‐base surgery

n/