On-field rehabilitation in football: current practice and perceptions. A survey of the English Premier League and Football League.

Return to play related research is increasing rapidly, with two recent competency-based frameworks offering conceptualised support for on-field rehabilitation (OFR) decision-making. It is still unknown, however, who is responsible for OFR and how they typically select, monitor, and progress OFR processes. The purpose of this study was to investigate current OFR practice within English professional football to support practitioners with decision-making and highlight opportunities for future research related to the design, monitoring, and progression of OFR. Sixty-nine practitioners responsible for the design and implementation of OFR at 69 clubs (75% of the English Premier League and Football League) responded to a survey containing 30 questions (14 open and 16 closed). The main findings were that therapists (physiotherapists/sports therapists) have the largest influence on OFR, followed by physical performance coaches (sports scientists/strength and conditioning coaches), technical coaches and medical doctors. There was more agreement for the ordering of specific OFR drills earlier in the process when activities are easier to control. The most frequently reported objective monitoring tool was global positioning systems (GPS), with functional/clinical experience/expertise remaining subjectively vital. GPS outputs ( ., sprint metrics and accelerations/decelerations) were most used for between session decision-making, with verbal communication being key for within session decision-making. Future research should use evidence of current practice, such as drill design and monitoring techniques, to explore drill-level analysis and give practitioners greater insights into which stage of current OFR frameworks specific drills fall, and how they might be more objectively progressed/regressed

The Plasmodium falciparum STEVOR Multigene Family Mediates Antigenic Variation of the Infected Erythrocyte

Modifications of the Plasmodium falciparum–infected red blood cell (iRBC) surface have been linked to parasite-associated pathology. Such modifications enable the parasite to establish long-lasting chronic infection by evading antibody mediate immune recognition and splenic clearance. With the exception of the well-demonstrated roles of var-encoded PfEMP1 in virulence and immune evasion, the biological significance of other variant surface antigens (rif and stevor) is largely unknown. While PfEMP1 and RIFIN have been located on the iRBC surface, recent studies have located STEVOR at the iRBC membrane where it may be exposed on the erythrocyte surface. To investigate the role of STEVOR in more detail, we have developed antibodies against two putative STEVOR proteins and used a combination of indirect immunofluorescence assays (IFA), live IFA, flow cytometry, as well as agglutination assays, which enable us to demonstrate that STEVOR is clonally variant at the surface of schizont stage parasites. Crucially, expression of different STEVOR on the surface of the iRBC changes the antigenic property of the parasite. Taken together, our data for the first time demonstrate that STEVOR plays a role in creating antigenic diversity of schizont stage parasites, thereby adding additional complexity to the immunogenic properties of the iRBC. Furthermore, it clearly demonstrates that to obtain a complete understanding of how parasite-induced pathology is linked to variation on the surface of the iRBC, focusing the interactions of multiple multigene families needs to be considered

The nature and function of talent identification in junior-elite football in English category one academies

The focus of this study was to examine the nature and function of talent identification in category one football academies in the UK. Data were collected from three participant groups: heads of recruitment (n = 12), recruitment staff (n = 18) and scouts (n = 7). Data were collected by means of semi-structured interviews, conducted either face-to-face or via Skype®. Four themes emerged from the data: (1) league structures in junior grassroots football; (2) reflective practice; (3) looking at the whole player; and (4) luck. The paper concludes by suggesting that there are issues that need to be considered by the football association, county football associations and clubs. Those issues include the organization of leagues in junior football, the education of scouts and recruitment staff around reflective practice and understanding how to identify psycho-social attributes whilst identifying talent

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca