Profiles of learning. The Basic Skills Testing Program in New South Wales 1989

The 1989 Basic Skills Testing Program in New South Wales provides the most comprehensive picture yet compiled of literacy and numeracy learning in Australian primary schools. In 1989, some 53,800 Year 6 students in NSW government schools were tested in five aspects of literacy and numeracy. Another 2,300 Year 3 students took part in a pilot study. This book discusses the writing of the tests, the analysis of results, and the reporting of results to parents, teachers and schools. The aim of the basic skills tests is to describe, in positive terms, the skills that students have mastered, to identify areas in which students have special strengths and weaknesses, and to provide guides to further learning. The picture that emerges from this study is of widespread success in learning. The results point to much good teaching and a fine start in learning for most primary students. But this generally optimistic picture is over shadowed by the performances of some students who have not yet mastered essential Year 6 skills. Part I of the book describes the skills typical of students performing at each of five skill levels in each of five areas of learning (Reading, Language, Number, Measurement, and Space) on the tests. Part II shows how different subgroups of students performed on the tests. Results on each aspect of literacy and numeracy are reported separately for girls and boys, students with non-English-speaking backgrounds, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, and several age groupings. Part III explains and gives examples of reports mailed to parents, more detailed reports given to teachers, and summary tables generated for each school. Part IV describes procedures used to develop BSTP tests and to analyze students\u27 results in preparation for reporting. Numerous test items are presented

The Vehicle, Fall 2006

Table of Contents Ferris WheelEmily Daviscover HerStephen Jefferiespage 1 UntitledBob Freyderpage 2 Writing at O\u27BrienWillie Joseph Morrispage 3 Blanks and HabitsRebecca M. Griffithpage 4 Soldier\u27s NightmareCraig A. Dennispage 5 UntitledLindsey Durbinpage 6 A Slow, Painless DeathJacob Fosterpage 7 ThoughtAmanda Yealepage 8 The SociopathBob Freyderpage 9 EasyRebecca M. Griffithpage 10 My PartnerDiedre Mapespage 11 BarriersSuzanne Krahnpage 12 The mind is a prisonJordan Hohespage 13 We Were Shirtless When Thousands DiedMitch Jamespage 14 ComplaintAmanda Yealepage 15 UntitledBob Freyderpage 16 MarkedAmanda Yealepage 17 She Wears Red Lipstick, He, Heartsick EyesRebecca M. Griffithpage 18 PrayerAmanda Yealepage 19 HomeDeej Rolewskipage 20 Your DreamDiedre Mapespage 21 Even Fingers Get LonelySuzanne Krahnpage 22 AggressivityMitch Jamespage 23 FallenMitch Jamespage 24 CollapseMario Podeschipage 36 The Italian CrisisAndy Masterspage 41 About the Authorshttps://thekeep.eiu.edu/vehicle/1084/thumbnail.jp

The Vehicle, Fall 2006

Table of Contents Ferris WheelEmily Daviscover HerStephen Jefferiespage 1 UntitledBob Freyderpage 2 Writing at O\u27BrienWillie Joseph Morrispage 3 Blanks and HabitsRebecca M. Griffithpage 4 Soldier\u27s NightmareCraig A. Dennispage 5 UntitledLindsey Durbinpage 6 A Slow, Painless DeathJacob Fosterpage 7 ThoughtAmanda Yealepage 8 The SociopathBob Freyderpage 9 EasyRebecca M. Griffithpage 10 My PartnerDiedre Mapespage 11 BarriersSuzanne Krahnpage 12 The mind is a prisonJordan Hohespage 13 We Were Shirtless When Thousands DiedMitch Jamespage 14 ComplaintAmanda Yealepage 15 UntitledBob Freyderpage 16 MarkedAmanda Yealepage 17 She Wears Red Lipstick, He, Heartsick EyesRebecca M. Griffithpage 18 PrayerAmanda Yealepage 19 HomeDeej Rolewskipage 20 Your DreamDiedre Mapespage 21 Even Fingers Get LonelySuzanne Krahnpage 22 AggressivityMitch Jamespage 23 FallenMitch Jamespage 24 CollapseMario Podeschipage 36 The Italian CrisisAndy Masterspage 41 About the Authorshttps://thekeep.eiu.edu/vehicle/1084/thumbnail.jp

Changing platforms without stopping the train: experiences of data management and data management systems when adapting platform protocols by adding and closing comparisons.

BACKGROUND: There is limited research and literature on the data management challenges encountered in multi-arm, multi-stage platform and umbrella protocols. These trial designs allow both (1) seamless addition of new research comparisons and (2) early stopping of accrual to individual comparisons that do not show sufficient activity. FOCUS4 (colorectal cancer) and STAMPEDE (prostate cancer), run from the Medical Research Council Clinical Trials Unit (CTU) at UCL, are two leading UK examples of clinical trials implementing adaptive platform protocol designs. To date, STAMPEDE has added five new research comparisons, closed two research comparisons following pre-planned interim analysis (lack of benefit), adapted the control arm following results from STAMPEDE and other relevant trials, and completed recruitment to six research comparisons. FOCUS4 has closed one research comparison following pre-planned interim analysis (lack of benefit) and added one new research comparison, with a number of further comparisons in the pipeline. We share our experiences from the operational aspects of running these adaptive trials, focusing on data management. METHODS: We held discussion groups with STAMPEDE and FOCUS4 CTU data management staff to identify data management challenges specific to adaptive platform protocols. We collated data on a number of case report form (CRF) changes, database amendments and database growth since each trial began. DISCUSSION: We found similar adaptive protocol-specific challenges in both trials. Adding comparisons to and removing them from open trials provides extra layers of complexity to CRF and database development. At the start of an adaptive trial, CRFs and databases must be designed to be flexible and scalable in order to cope with the continuous changes, ensuring future data requirements are considered where possible. When adding or stopping a comparison, the challenge is to incorporate new data requirements while ensuring data collection within ongoing comparisons is unaffected. Some changes may apply to all comparisons; others may be comparison-specific or applicable only to patients recruited during a specific time period. We discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches to CRF and database design we implemented in these trials, particularly in relation to use and maintenance of generic versus comparison-specific CRFs and databases. The work required to add or remove a comparison, including the development and testing of changes, updating of documentation, and training of sites, must be undertaken alongside data management of ongoing comparisons. Adequate resource is required for these competing data management tasks, especially in trials with long follow-up. A plan is needed for regular and pre-analysis data cleaning for multiple comparisons that could recruit at different rates and periods of time. Data-cleaning activities may need to be split and prioritised, especially if analyses for different comparisons overlap in time. CONCLUSIONS: Adaptive trials offer an efficient model to run randomised controlled trials, but setting up and conducting the data management activities in these trials can be operationally challenging. Trialists and funders must plan for scalability in data collection and the resource required to cope with additional competing data management tasks

SPHEREx: NASA's near-infrared spectrophotometric all-sky survey

SPHEREx, the Spectro-Photometer for the History of the Universe, Epoch of Reionization, and ices Explorer, is a NASA MIDEX mission planned for launch in 2024. SPHEREx will carry out the first all-sky spectral survey at wavelengths between 0.75µm and 5µm with spectral resolving power ~40 between 0.75 and 3.8µm and ~120 between 3.8 and 5µm At the end of its two-year mission, SPHEREx will provide 0.75-to-5µm spectra of each 6.”2 x 6.”2 pixel on the sky - 14 billion spectra in all. This paper updates an earlier description of SPHEREx presenting changes made during the mission's Preliminary Design Phase, including a discussion of instrument integration and test ow and a summary of the data processing, analysis, and distribution plans

Adjunctive rifampicin for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (ARREST): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia is a common cause of severe community-acquired and hospital-acquired infection worldwide. We tested the hypothesis that adjunctive rifampicin would reduce bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death, by enhancing early S aureus killing, sterilising infected foci and blood faster, and reducing risks of dissemination and metastatic infection. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adults (≥18 years) with S aureus bacteraemia who had received ≤96 h of active antibiotic therapy were recruited from 29 UK hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a computer-generated sequential randomisation list to receive 2 weeks of adjunctive rifampicin (600 mg or 900 mg per day according to weight, oral or intravenous) versus identical placebo, together with standard antibiotic therapy. Randomisation was stratified by centre. Patients, investigators, and those caring for the patients were masked to group allocation. The primary outcome was time to bacteriologically confirmed treatment failure or disease recurrence, or death (all-cause), from randomisation to 12 weeks, adjudicated by an independent review committee masked to the treatment. Analysis was intention to treat. This trial was registered, number ISRCTN37666216, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Dec 10, 2012, and Oct 25, 2016, 758 eligible participants were randomly assigned: 370 to rifampicin and 388 to placebo. 485 (64%) participants had community-acquired S aureus infections, and 132 (17%) had nosocomial S aureus infections. 47 (6%) had meticillin-resistant infections. 301 (40%) participants had an initial deep infection focus. Standard antibiotics were given for 29 (IQR 18-45) days; 619 (82%) participants received flucloxacillin. By week 12, 62 (17%) of participants who received rifampicin versus 71 (18%) who received placebo experienced treatment failure or disease recurrence, or died (absolute risk difference -1·4%, 95% CI -7·0 to 4·3; hazard ratio 0·96, 0·68-1·35, p=0·81). From randomisation to 12 weeks, no evidence of differences in serious (p=0·17) or grade 3-4 (p=0·36) adverse events were observed; however, 63 (17%) participants in the rifampicin group versus 39 (10%) in the placebo group had antibiotic or trial drug-modifying adverse events (p=0·004), and 24 (6%) versus six (2%) had drug interactions (p=0·0005). INTERPRETATION: Adjunctive rifampicin provided no overall benefit over standard antibiotic therapy in adults with S aureus bacteraemia. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment

Genomic reconstruction of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic in England.

The evolution of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus leads to new variants that warrant timely epidemiological characterization. Here we use the dense genomic surveillance data generated by the COVID-19 Genomics UK Consortium to reconstruct the dynamics of 71 different lineages in each of 315 English local authorities between September 2020 and June 2021. This analysis reveals a series of subepidemics that peaked in early autumn 2020, followed by a jump in transmissibility of the B.1.1.7/Alpha lineage. The Alpha variant grew when other lineages declined during the second national lockdown and regionally tiered restrictions between November and December 2020. A third more stringent national lockdown suppressed the Alpha variant and eliminated nearly all other lineages in early 2021. Yet a series of variants (most of which contained the spike E484K mutation) defied these trends and persisted at moderately increasing proportions. However, by accounting for sustained introductions, we found that the transmissibility of these variants is unlikely to have exceeded the transmissibility of the Alpha variant. Finally, B.1.617.2/Delta was repeatedly introduced in England and grew rapidly in early summer 2021, constituting approximately 98% of sampled SARS-CoV-2 genomes on 26 June 2021

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570