34 research outputs found
A phase IV, multi-centre, randomized clinical trial comparing two pertussis-containing vaccines in pregnant women in England and vaccine responses in their infants.
BACKGROUND: Pertussis vaccines containing three or five pertussis antigens are recommended in pregnancy in many countries, but no studies have compared the effect on infants' antigen-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) concentrations. The aim of this study was to compare anti-pertussis IgG responses following primary immunization in infants of mothers vaccinated with TdaP5-IPV (low dose diphtheria toxoid, tetanus toxoid, acellular pertussis [five antigens] and inactivated polio) or TdaP3-IPV in pregnancy (three pertussis antigens). METHODS: This multi-centre phase IV randomized clinical trial was conducted in a tertiary referral centre and primary care sites in England. Women were randomized to receive TdaP5-IPV (n = 77) or TdaP3-IPV (n = 77) at 28-32 gestational weeks. A non-randomized control group of 44 women who had not received a pertussis-containing vaccine in pregnancy and their 47 infants were enrolled post-partum. RESULTS: Following infant primary immunization, there was no difference in the geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of anti-pertussis toxin, filamentous haemagglutinin or pertactin IgG between infants born to women vaccinated with TdaP5-IPV (n = 67) or TdaP3-IPV (n = 63). However, the GMC of anti-pertussis toxin IgG was lower in infants born to TdaP5-IPV- and TdaP3-IPV-vaccinated mothers compared to infants born to unvaccinated mothers (n = 45) (geometric mean ratio 0.71 [0.56-0.90] and 0.78 [0.61-0.98], respectively); by 13 months of age, this difference was no longer observed. CONCLUSION: Blunting of anti-pertussis toxin IgG response following primary immunization occurs in infants born to women vaccinated with TdaP5-IPV and TdaP3-IPV, with no difference between maternal vaccines. The blunting effect had resolved by 13 months of age. These results may be helpful for countries considering which pertussis-containing vaccine to recommend for use in pregnancy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02145624 , registered 23 May 2014
OVERHEATED SECURITY? The Securitisation of Climate Change and the Governmentalisation of Security
Since the mid-2000s, climate change has become one of the defining security issues in political as well as academic debates and amongst others has repeatedly been discussed in the UN Security Council and countless high level government reports in various countries. Beyond the question whether the characterisation as ‘security issue’ is backed up by any robust empirical findings, this begs the question whether the ‘securitisation’ of climate change itself has had tangible political consequences. Moreover, within this research area there is still a lively discussion about which security conceptions apply, how to conceptualise (successful) securitisation and whether it is a (politically and normatively) desirable approach to deal with climate change. The aim of this dissertation is to shed light on these issues and particularly to contribute to a more thorough understanding of different forms or ‘discourses’ of securitisation and their political effects on a theoretical and empirical level. Theoretically, it conceptualises securitisation as resting on different forms of power, which are derived from Michel Foucault’s governmentality lectures. The main argument is that this framework allows me to better capture the ambiguous and diverse variants of securitisation and the ever-changing concept of security as well as to come to a more thorough understanding of the political consequences and powerful effects of constructing issues in terms of security. Empirically, the thesis looks at three country cases, namely the United States, Germany and Mexico. This comparative angle allows me to go beyond the existing literature on the securitisation of climate change that mostly looks at the global level, and to come to a more comprehensive and detailed understanding of different climate security discourses and their political consequences. Concerning the main results, the thesis finds that climate change has indeed been securitised very differently in the three countries and thus has facilitated diverse political consequences. These range from an incorporation of climate change into the defence sector in the US, the legitimisation of far-reaching climate policies in Germany, to the integration of climate change into several civil protection and agricultural insurance schemes in Mexico. Moreover, resting on different forms of power, the securitisation of climate change has played a key role in constructing specific actors and forms of knowledge as legitimate as well as in shaping certain identities in the face of the dangers of climate change. From a normative perspective, neither of these political consequences is purely good or bad but highly ambiguous and necessitates a careful, contextual assessment
A922 Sequential measurement of 1 hour creatinine clearance (1-CRCL) in critically ill patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI)
Meeting abstrac
Aligning evidence generation and use across health, development, and environment
© 2019 The Authors Although health, development, and environment challenges are interconnected, evidence remains fractured across sectors due to methodological and conceptual differences in research and practice. Aligned methods are needed to support Sustainable Development Goal advances and similar agendas. The Bridge Collaborative, an emergent research-practice collaboration, presents principles and recommendations that help harmonize methods for evidence generation and use. Recommendations were generated in the context of designing and evaluating evidence of impact for interventions related to five global challenges (stabilizing the global climate, making food production sustainable, decreasing air pollution and respiratory disease, improving sanitation and water security, and solving hunger and malnutrition) and serve as a starting point for further iteration and testing in a broader set of contexts and disciplines. We adopted six principles and emphasize three methodological recommendations: (1) creation of compatible results chains, (2) consideration of all relevant types of evidence, and (3) evaluation of strength of evidence using a unified rubric. We provide detailed suggestions for how these recommendations can be applied in practice, streamlining efforts to apply multi-objective approaches and/or synthesize evidence in multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary teams. These recommendations advance the necessary process of reconciling existing evidence standards in health, development, and environment, and initiate a common basis for integrated evidence generation and use in research, practice, and policy design