APPRAISING OPPORTUNITIES TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WELL-BEING AND PERFORMANCE IN THE ORGANIZATIONAL SCIENCES

Despite a strong base of literature that shows appraisal (i.e., an individual’s assessment of the relevance of a possibly stressful situation to their own goals and their likelihood of effectively coping with it) is an important predictor of individual emotion, behavior, and performance, appraisal has been largely relegated to theory by the organizational sciences. The purpose of this work is to demonstrate why studying appraisal adds value to organizational science phenomena. This is accomplished through two empirical essays and a theory essay. First, a metaanalysis assesses the extent to which the challenge-hindrance framework, a perspective that explicitly suggests appraisal is unnecessary to understanding the effects of stressors (i.e., source of stress), applies to the context of entrepreneurship, where it is contended appraisal is most likely to play a role. Findings suggest that although the framework does apply, entrepreneurs (who operate in a more autonomous environment) experience better well-being and performance outcomes than non-entrepreneurs (who operate in more restrictive environments), and it is argued that appraisal is likely a factor in this difference. Second, a diary study tracks entrepreneurs’ daily appraisal, mood, and coping across a 20-day period in response to their self-identified largest source of stress. Results conclude that daily appraisal, which varies across time, directly affects daily mood and indirectly affects daily coping through mood, thus showing that appraisal predicts two important health indicators for entrepreneurs. Third, a theory on collective appraisal (i.e., the extent to which team members agree concerning which stressors are relevant to the team and how to respond to those stressors) is developed which turns appraisal from an individual-level construct to a team-level one. In so doing, the essay makes appraisal more useful to organizational science phenomena, which predominantly occur in team settings

Design and baseline characteristics of the finerenone in reducing cardiovascular mortality and morbidity in diabetic kidney disease trial

Background: Among people with diabetes, those with kidney disease have exceptionally high rates of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality and progression of their underlying kidney disease. Finerenone is a novel, nonsteroidal, selective mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist that has shown to reduce albuminuria in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) while revealing only a low risk of hyperkalemia. However, the effect of finerenone on CV and renal outcomes has not yet been investigated in long-term trials. Patients and Methods: The Finerenone in Reducing CV Mortality and Morbidity in Diabetic Kidney Disease (FIGARO-DKD) trial aims to assess the efficacy and safety of finerenone compared to placebo at reducing clinically important CV and renal outcomes in T2D patients with CKD. FIGARO-DKD is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, event-driven trial running in 47 countries with an expected duration of approximately 6 years. FIGARO-DKD randomized 7,437 patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate >= 25 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio >= 30 to <= 5,000 mg/g). The study has at least 90% power to detect a 20% reduction in the risk of the primary outcome (overall two-sided significance level alpha = 0.05), the composite of time to first occurrence of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure. Conclusions: FIGARO-DKD will determine whether an optimally treated cohort of T2D patients with CKD at high risk of CV and renal events will experience cardiorenal benefits with the addition of finerenone to their treatment regimen. Trial Registration: EudraCT number: 2015-000950-39; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02545049

Legislative History: An Act to Prohibit the Use of Artificial Devices by Game Wardens for the Purpose of Causing Hunting Violations (HP697)(LD 961)

https://digitalmaine.com/legishist118/1960/thumbnail.jp

'Over-the-counter' genetic testing: what does it really mean for primary care?

The publication of More Genes Direct by the Human Genetics Commission is a timely reminder of the potential impact that 'over-the-counter' genetic testing (that is, a direct genetic test without the need for a medical referral) may have on the NHS. This article considers the relevance of current genetic research on complex common diseases and how this might translate into risk estimates for developing conditions such as dementia, cancer, and cardiovascular disease. The implications for primary care include the need to understand the current limitations of genetic testing and its commercial application over the counter, and the importance of continuing to make risk assessments using family history. The authors recommend caution in the premature introduction of over-the-counter testing without a sound evidence base