A typology of consumers based on money attitudes after major recession

Since the Great Recession, not all US consumers have felt the financial benefits of the sustained period of macroeconomic expansion. While some research demonstrates renewed consumer confidence and financial security among households, other studies highlight economic vulnerability and higher levels of distress relative to before the 2007/09 crisis. This study examines empirically the heterogeneity of consumers’ money attitudes in the post-recession economy. Based on a nationally representative sample of US consumers (n=1202), we identify four post-recession consumer types, distinguished by important attitudinal and behavioral differences: “Flourishing Frugal”; “Comfortable Cautious”; “Financial Middle”; and, “Financially Distressed”. While the prior studies offer broad strategic advice, this study indicates that marketers need differentiated strategies to target most effectively and deliver value to different consumer clusters

Antenatal corticosteroids for fetal lung maturation: an overview of Cochrane reviews

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows: The objective is to summarise the available evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews for the effectiveness and safety of antenatal corticosteroid therapy to improve infant outcomes

Breast cancer management pathways during the COVID-19 pandemic: outcomes from the UK ‘Alert Level 4’ phase of the B-MaP-C study

Abstract: Background: The B-MaP-C study aimed to determine alterations to breast cancer (BC) management during the peak transmission period of the UK COVID-19 pandemic and the potential impact of these treatment decisions. Methods: This was a national cohort study of patients with early BC undergoing multidisciplinary team (MDT)-guided treatment recommendations during the pandemic, designated ‘standard’ or ‘COVID-altered’, in the preoperative, operative and post-operative setting. Findings: Of 3776 patients (from 64 UK units) in the study, 2246 (59%) had ‘COVID-altered’ management. ‘Bridging’ endocrine therapy was used (n = 951) where theatre capacity was reduced. There was increasing access to COVID-19 low-risk theatres during the study period (59%). In line with national guidance, immediate breast reconstruction was avoided (n = 299). Where adjuvant chemotherapy was omitted (n = 81), the median benefit was only 3% (IQR 2–9%) using ‘NHS Predict’. There was the rapid adoption of new evidence-based hypofractionated radiotherapy (n = 781, from 46 units). Only 14 patients (1%) tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 during their treatment journey. Conclusions: The majority of ‘COVID-altered’ management decisions were largely in line with pre-COVID evidence-based guidelines, implying that breast cancer survival outcomes are unlikely to be negatively impacted by the pandemic. However, in this study, the potential impact of delays to BC presentation or diagnosis remains unknown

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

Corticosteroids for preventing neonatal respiratory morbidity after elective caesarean section at term

Background: Infants born at term by elective caesarean section are more likely to develop respiratory morbidity than infants born vaginally. Prophylactic corticosteroids in singleton preterm pregnancies accelerate lung maturation and reduce the incidence of respiratory complications. Objectives: The objective of this review was to assess the effect of prophylactic corticosteroid administration before elective caesarean section at term, as compared to usual management without corticosteroids, in reducing neonatal respiratory morbidity and admission to special care with respiratory complications. Search methods: We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register (14 June 2017), and reference lists of retrieved studies. Selection criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing prophylactic antenatal corticosteroid administration (betamethasone or dexamethasone) with placebo or with no treatment, given before elective caesarean section at term (at or after 37 weeks of gestation). Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We assessed the quality of the evidence using the GRADE approach. Main results: We included four trials (3956 women and 3893 neonates) at a moderate risk of bias, comparing prophylactic administration of betamethasone or dexamethasone versus placebo or usual treatment without steroids in term elective caesarean section. Women randomised to treatment group received either two intramuscular doses of betamethasone in the 48 hours before delivery, or intramuscular dexamethasone (two or four doses) prior to delivery (at 37 weeks' gestation or 48 hours before delivery), and were compared to the control group who received a saline placebo or treatment as usual. Prophylactic antenatal corticosteroid administration appeared to decrease the risk of respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) (risk ratio (RR) 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.27 to 0.87; 4 studies; 3817 participants; low-quality evidence), transient tachypnoea of the neonate (TTN) (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.29 to 0.65; 4 studies; 3821 participants; low-quality evidence), admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for respiratory morbidity (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.79; 3 studies; 3441 participants), and admission to neonatal special care (all levels) for respiratory complications (RR 0.45; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.90; 1 study; 942 participants; low-quality evidence). Administration of antenatal corticosteroids also appeared to reduce admission to neonatal special care (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.89; 2 studies; 2169 participants) and neonatal intensive care (RR 0.14; 95% CI 0.03 to 0.61; 1 study; 452 participants) for any indication, compared to placebo or usual care. Finally, prophylactic antenatal corticosteroids also appeared to reduce the length of stay in NICU by 2.70 days (mean difference (MD) -2.70; 95% CI -2.76 to -2.64; 2 studies; 32 participants). No reduction was found in the need for mechanical ventilation (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.68; 3 studies; 3441 participants; very-low quality), perinatal death (RR 0.67; 95% CI 0.11 to 4.10; 4 studies; 3893 participants) or neonatal sepsis (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.06 to 15.95; 2 studies; 2214 participants). There were no reported events of neonatal respiratory complications (other than RDS and tachypnoea of the newborn (TTN)), chronic lung disease, duration of mechanical ventilation or maternal postpartum infection, therefore results on these outcomes are non-estimable. The studies did not provide data on other pre-defined outcomes. The quality of evidence, as assessed using GRADE was low for the outcomes of RDS, TTN and admission to NICU for respiratory morbidity, indicating that the true effect could potentially be substantially different from our estimate of effect. Authors' conclusions: The results from the four trials are promising, but more high-quality studies with larger sample sizes that are adequately powered to detect the effect of prophylactic antenatal corticosteroids on outcomes of respiratory morbidity are needed, given the potential of the current studies for bias. Consideration should be given to the balance between statistical significance and clinical significance, particularly in view of the low event rates of significant respiratory morbidity (RDS or admission to NICU for respiratory complications) in this population. In addition, further trials on the long-term outcomes of these infants are needed to identify any potential harms and complications of antenatal corticosteroid administration at term

Mental health and wellbeing of jockeys

Despite receiving much public attention in recent years, the mental health status of jockeys has not been established. This study investigated the incidence of common mental health disorders in jockeys. Amateur (n=74) and professional (n=42) jockeys completed an online anonymous questionnaire incorporating validated self-reported measurement tools to assess the prevalence of psychological distress, depression, anxiety, social phobia, perceived stress and self-esteem. Personal and lifestyle characteristics were also reported. Fifty four percent of jockeys were experiencing symptoms of at least one of general psychological distress, depression, general anxiety disorder or social anxiety. Professional jockeys displayed significantly greater mean scores on measures of psychological distress (p<0.01), depression (p<0.05), anxiety (p<0.05) and perceived stress (p<0.01). No difference was present in measures between professional flat and jump jockeys. Professional jockeys were classified as displaying symptoms of depression (mean score 20.29; 57.1% at or above threshold of 16) and perceived stress (mean score 20.24; 52.4% at or above threshold of 20). Current injury, social anxiety or high levels of perceived stress increased the likelihood of displaying depressive symptoms in the jockey sample. With a high prevalence of depression and perceived stress evident in professional jockeys, mental health support strategies should be implemented with specific focus on stress management and dealing with injury. Future research should further investigate factors that increase the susceptibility of jockeys to mental health disorders

Vaginal birth core information set: study protocol for a Delphi study to achieve a consensus on a ‘core information set’ for vaginal birth

Introduction Studies have shown that women are often underinformed about potential benefits and risks of vaginal birth. This is in contrast to other modes of birth, such as caesarean birth, for which the risks/benefits are often conveyed prior to undergoing the procedure. A core information set (CIS) is an agreed set of information points that should be discussed with all patients prior to undergoing a procedure or intervention. This CIS could improve the quality of information given regarding mode of birth options, as women will be given information prioritised by patients and stakeholders regarding vaginal birth, empowering them to make informed decisions about their birth. We aim to describe the protocol for the development of this vaginal birth CIS.Methods and analysis We will develop the CIS by: (1) Compiling a ‘long-list’ of information points about vaginal birth by: undertaking a scoping review of studies and patient information leaflets; interviews with antenatal/postnatal women, an online survey of stakeholders. (2) Collating the ‘long-list’ of information points and developing the Delphi survey. Think-aloud interviews will refine the survey. (3) Conducting a two-round Delphi survey. 200 stakeholder participants will be recruited. Items rated critically important by ≥80% of participants in one stakeholder group, or with no consensus, will be carried through to a stakeholder consensus meeting to decide the final CIS. Planned start date is 1 June 2022. Planned end date is 31 August 2023.Ethics and dissemination This project has been given a favourable ethics opinion by the University of Bristol Research Ethics Committee (Ref: 10530). Approval from the ethics committee will be sought for any protocol amendments, and the principal investigator will be responsible for these changes. Findings will be presented at relevant conferences and published in a high-impact journal. We will disseminate the CIS, via Policy Bristol, to clinical policy and guideline developers