Judicial implementation of article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe : the case of migrant children including unaccompanied children

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) and its Optional Protocols provide the basis for establishing effective mechanisms to address the multifaceted challenges faced by States and other actors, including regional organizations, in ensuring that children are able to access and enjoy their rights. Article 3 of the CRC states that “in all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration”. This principle is of particular relevance to the situation of migrant children, including unaccompanied migrant children, in regular or irregular situations that are the focus of this study. This study reviews judicial decisions from the CJEU and the ECtHR and from selected European national courts, which apply the principle of the best interests of the child to cases involving migrant children in irregular situations, including unaccompanied and separated children. The selected cases are meant to be illustrative of the type of issues that are raised before national courts and of the way in which these courts interpret their obligation under Article 3 of the CRC to treat the best interests of the child as a primary consideration. Finally, the study identifies a number of relevant cases which explicitly refer to the best interests of the child and that may serve as good practice in guiding future jurisprudence throughout Europe.Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Regional Office for Europ

Note on Unaccompanied Children Fleeing from Ukraine

It is evident that the scale and pace, and potentially long lasting nature, of the situation leads to huge difficulties in organising comprehensive responses from a legal, policy and practical perspective. Clearly, lack of shared information, and lack of connection between the different actors, could cause additional problems and place already vulnerable children at further risk.This joint report, by Child Circle and KIND, aims to serve the efforts of the many stakeholders who are working together under a common EU framework of measures, by providing an overview of key issues to consider in particular from the perspective of procedural safeguards and access to protection and safety

Could targeted exercise programmes prevent lower limb injury in community Australian football?

Background: Australian football is a popular sport in Australia, at both the community and elite levels. It is a high-speed contact sport with a higher incidence of medically treated injuries when compared with most other organized sports. Hamstring injuries, ligament injuries to the knee or ankle, hip/groin injuries and tendinopathies are particularly common and often result in considerable time lost from sport. Consequently, the prevention of lower limb injuries is a priority for both community and elite Australian football organizations. There is considerable literature available on exercise programmes aimed at reducing lower limb injuries in Australian football and other running-related sports. The quality and outcomes of these studies have varied considerably, but indicate that exercise protocols may be an effective means of preventing lower limb injuries. Despite this, there has been limited high-quality and systematic evaluation of these data. Objective: The aim of this literature review is to systematically evaluate the evidence about the benefits of lower limb injury prevention exercise protocols aimed at reducing the most common severe lower limb injuries in Australian football. Methods: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Bone Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialized Register, MEDLINE and other electronic databases were searched, from January 1990 to December 2010. Papers reporting the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs, cohort and case-control studies were extracted. Primary outcomes were injury reduction or risk factor identification and/or modification. Secondary outcomes were adherence to any trialled interventions, injury severity and adverse effects such as secondary injuries and muscle soreness. The methodological quality of extracted manuscripts was assessed and results were collated. Results: Forty-seven papers were identified and reviewed of which 18 related to hamstring injury, eight related to knee or ankle ligament injury, five related to tendon injury and four were hip or groin injury related. Another 12 papers targeted general lower limb injuries. Most (n = 27 [57 %]) were observational studies, investigating injury risk factors. Twenty reported the results of intervention trials. Of these, 15 were efficacy trials reporting the effects of an intervention in reducing injury rates, four were biomechanical interventions in which the impact of the intervention on a known injury risk factor was assessed and one reported changes in injury risk factors as well as injury rates. The strength of the evidence base for exercise programmes for lower limb injury prevention was found to be limited, primarily due to the research methods employed, low adherence to interventions by the study participants and a lack of statistical power. Limited evidence obtained from a small number of RCTs suggests that balance and control exercises might be efficacious in preventing ankle ligament injuries and a programme involving a combination of balance and control exercises, eccentric hamstring, plyometrics and strength exercises could be efficacious in preventing all lower limb injuries. Conclusions: Overall, the evidence for exercise programmes as an efficacious lower limb injury prevention strategy is predominantly restricted to studies addressing injury aetiology and mechanisms. The findings of this review highlight the need to develop and test interventions in well designed population-based trials with an emphasis on promoting intervention uptake and adherence and, hence, intervention effectiveness. The results of this review can inform the development of the components of a future lower limb injury prevention exercise protocol for community-level Australian football. © 2013 Springer International Publishing Switzerland. Funded by the NHMRC

The P323L substitution in the SARS-CoV-2 polymerase (NSP12) confers a selective advantage during infection

Background The mutational landscape of SARS-CoV-2 varies at the dominant viral genome sequence and minor genomic variant population. During the COVID-19 pandemic, an early substitution in the genome was the D614G change in the spike protein, associated with an increase in transmissibility. Genomes with D614G are accompanied by a P323L substitution in the viral polymerase (NSP12). However, P323L is not thought to be under strong selective pressure. Results Investigation of P323L/D614G substitutions in the population shows rapid emergence during the containment phase and early surge phase during the first wave. These substitutions emerge from minor genomic variants which become dominant viral genome sequence. This is investigated in vivo and in vitro using SARS-CoV-2 with P323 and D614 in the dominant genome sequence and L323 and G614 in the minor variant population. During infection, there is rapid selection of L323 into the dominant viral genome sequence but not G614. Reverse genetics is used to create two viruses (either P323 or L323) with the same genetic background. L323 shows greater abundance of viral RNA and proteins and a smaller plaque morphology than P323. Conclusions These data suggest that P323L is an important contribution in the emergence of variants with transmission advantages. Sequence analysis of viral populations suggests it may be possible to predict the emergence of a new variant based on tracking the frequency of minor variant genomes. The ability to predict an emerging variant of SARS-CoV-2 in the global landscape may aid in the evaluation of medical countermeasures and non-pharmaceutical interventions

Para-infectious brain injury in COVID-19 persists at follow-up despite attenuated cytokine and autoantibody responses

To understand neurological complications of COVID-19 better both acutely and for recovery, we measured markers of brain injury, inflammatory mediators, and autoantibodies in 203 hospitalised participants; 111 with acute sera (1–11 days post-admission) and 92 convalescent sera (56 with COVID-19-associated neurological diagnoses). Here we show that compared to 60 uninfected controls, tTau, GFAP, NfL, and UCH-L1 are increased with COVID-19 infection at acute timepoints and NfL and GFAP are significantly higher in participants with neurological complications. Inflammatory mediators (IL-6, IL-12p40, HGF, M-CSF, CCL2, and IL-1RA) are associated with both altered consciousness and markers of brain injury. Autoantibodies are more common in COVID-19 than controls and some (including against MYL7, UCH-L1, and GRIN3B) are more frequent with altered consciousness. Additionally, convalescent participants with neurological complications show elevated GFAP and NfL, unrelated to attenuated systemic inflammatory mediators and to autoantibody responses. Overall, neurological complications of COVID-19 are associated with evidence of neuroglial injury in both acute and late disease and these correlate with dysregulated innate and adaptive immune responses acutely

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

A Clinical Nurse Leader (CNL) practice development model to support integration of the CNL role into microsystem care delivery.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Office of Nursing Services (ONS) was an early adopter of Clinical Nurse Leader (CNL) practice, generating some of the earliest pilot data of CNL practice effectiveness. In 2011 the VHA ONS CNL Implementation & Evaluation Service (CNL I&E) piloted a curriculum to facilitate CNL transition to effective practice at local VHA settings. In 2015, the CNL I&E and local VHA setting stakeholders collaborated to refine the program, based on lessons learned at the national and local level. The workgroup reviewed the literature to identify theoretical frameworks for CNL practice and practice development. The workgroup selected Benner et al.'s Novice-to-Expert model as the defining framework for CNL practice development, and Bender et al.'s CNL Practice Model as the defining framework for CNL practice integration. The selected frameworks were cross-walked against existing curriculum elements to identify and clarify additional practice development needs. The work generated key insights into: core stages of transition to effective practice; CNL progress and expectations for each stage; and organizational support structures necessary for CNL success at each stage. The refined CNL development model is a robust tool that can be applied to support consistent and effective integration of CNL practice into care delivery

A Clinical Nurse Leader (CNL) practice development model to support integration of the CNL role into microsystem care delivery.

The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Office of Nursing Services (ONS) was an early adopter of Clinical Nurse Leader (CNL) practice, generating some of the earliest pilot data of CNL practice effectiveness. In 2011 the VHA ONS CNL Implementation & Evaluation Service (CNL I&E) piloted a curriculum to facilitate CNL transition to effective practice at local VHA settings. In 2015, the CNL I&E and local VHA setting stakeholders collaborated to refine the program, based on lessons learned at the national and local level. The workgroup reviewed the literature to identify theoretical frameworks for CNL practice and practice development. The workgroup selected Benner et al.'s Novice-to-Expert model as the defining framework for CNL practice development, and Bender et al.'s CNL Practice Model as the defining framework for CNL practice integration. The selected frameworks were cross-walked against existing curriculum elements to identify and clarify additional practice development needs. The work generated key insights into: core stages of transition to effective practice; CNL progress and expectations for each stage; and organizational support structures necessary for CNL success at each stage. The refined CNL development model is a robust tool that can be applied to support consistent and effective integration of CNL practice into care delivery

The risk of skin cancer in women who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations.

BACKGROUND: It has not been clearly established if skin cancer or melanoma are manifestations of BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carrier status. Estimating the risk of skin cancer is an important step towards developing screening recommendations. METHODS: We report the findings of a prospective cohort study of 6,207 women from North America who carry BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. Women were followed from the date of baseline questionnaire to the diagnosis of skin cancer, to age 80 years, death from any cause, or the date of last follow-up. RESULTS: During the mean follow-up period of eight years, 3.7% of women with a BRCA1 mutation (133 of 3,623) and 3.8% of women with a BRCA2 mutation (99 of 2,584) reported a diagnosis of skin cancer (including both keratinocyte carcinomas and melanoma). The cumulative risk of all types of skin cancer from age 20 to 80 years was 14.1% for BRCA1 carriers and 10.7% for BRCA2 carriers. The cumulative risk of melanoma was 2.5% for BRCA1 carriers and 2.3% for BRCA2 carriers, compared to 1.5% for women in the general population in the United States. The strongest risk factor for skin cancer was a prior diagnosis of skin cancer. CONCLUSION: The risk of non-melanoma skin cancer in women who carry a mutation in BRCA1 or BRCA2 is similar to that of non-carrier women. The risk of melanoma appears to be slightly elevated. We suggest that a referral to a dermatologist or primary care provider for BRCA mutation carriers for annual skin examination and counselling regarding limiting UV exposure, the use of sunscreen and recognizing the early signs of melanoma might be warranted, but further studies are necessary