Enriching the rich? A review of extracurricular activities, socioeconomic status and adolescent achievement

This paper reviews the literature on adolescent extracurricular activity participation, socioeconomic status and academic and labour market outcomes. We consider socioeconomic gradients of extracurricular activity participation in Australia and internationally, and contributors to the patterns found. The literature on the effect of extracurricular activity participation on academic and labour market outcomes in adolescence and early adulthood is also examined. Extracurricular activity participation is more common among more advantaged youths, a finding which is mostly attributable to budgetary and other objective constraints but may also be influenced by non-material family resources and values. There is good evidence that extracurricular activity participation positively affects grades and college attendance in the United States. However, based on the current literature we cannot conclude that the positive associations between participation and standardised test scores, college graduation, and labour market outcomes are anything more than correlational. This absence of high quality studies permitting causal inference was identified as a significant gap in the literature

Predicting physiological imbalance in Holstein dairy cows by three different sets of milk biomarkers

Blood biomarkers may be used to detect physiological imbalance and potential disease. However, blood sampling is difficult and expensive, and not applicable in commercial settings. Instead, individual milk samples are readily available at low cost, can be sampled easily and analysed instantly. The present observational study sampled blood and milk from 234 Holstein dairy cows from experimental herds in six European countries. The objective was to compare the use of three different sets of milk biomarkers for identification of cows in physiological imbalance and thus at risk of developing metabolic or infectious diseases. Random forests was used to predict body energy balance (EBAL), index for physiological imbalance (PI-index) and three clusters differentiating the metabolic status of cows created on basis of concentrations of plasma glucose, β-hydroxybutyrate (BHB), non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA) and serum IGF-1. These three metabolic clusters were interpreted as cows in balance, physiological imbalance and “intermediate cows” with physiological status in between. The three sets of milk biomarkers used for prediction were: milk Fourier transform mid-IR (FT-MIR) spectra, 19 immunoglobulin G (IgG) N-glycans and 8 milk metabolites and enzymes (MME). Blood biomarkers were sampled twice; around 14 days after calving (days in milk (DIM)) and around 35 DIM. MME and FT-MIR were sampled twice weekly 1−50 DIM whereas IgG N-glycan were measured only four times. Performances of EBAL and PI-index predictions were measured by coefficient of determination (R2cv) and root mean squared error (RMSEcv) from leave-one-cow-out cross-validation (cv). For metabolic clusters, performance was measured by sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy from this cross-validation. Best prediction of PI-index was obtained by MME (R2cv = 0.40 (95 % CI: 0.29−0.50) at 14 DIM and 0.35 (0.23−0.44) at 35 DIM) while FT-MIR showed a better performance than MME for prediction of EBAL (R2cv = 0.28 (0.24−0.33) vs 0.21 (0.18−0.25)). Global accuracies of predicting metabolic clusters from MME and FT-MIR were at the same level ranging from 0.54 (95 % CI: 0.39−0.68) to 0.65 (0.55−0.75) for MME and 0.51 (0.37−0.65) to 0.68 (0.53−0.81) for FT-MIR. R2cv and accuracies were lower for IgG N-glycans. In conclusion, neither EBAL nor PI-index were sufficiently well predicted to be used as a management tool for identification of risk cows. MME and FT-MIR may be used to predict the physiological status of the cows, while the use of IgG N-glycans for prediction still needs development. Nevertheless, accuracies need to be improved and a larger training data set is warranted

Genome-wide association for milk production and lactation curve parameters in Holstein dairy cows

The aim of this study was to identify genomic regions associated with 305-day milk yield and lactation curve parameters on primiparous (n = 9,910) and multiparous (n = 11,158) Holstein cows. The SNP solutions were estimated using a weighted single-step genomic BLUP approach and imputed high-density panel (777k) genotypes. The proportion of genetic variance explained by windows of 50 consecutive SNP (with an average of 165 Kb) was calculated, and regions that accounted for more than 0.50% of the variance were used to search for candidate genes. Estimated heritabilities were 0.37, 0.34, 0.17, 0.12, 0.30 and 0.19, respectively, for 305-day milk yield, peak yield, peak time, ramp, scale and decay for primiparous cows. Genetic correlations of 305-day milk yield with peak yield, peak time, ramp, scale and decay in primiparous cows were 0.99, 0.63, 0.20, 0.97 and -0.52, respectively. The results identified three windows on BTA14 associated with 305-day milk yield and the parameters of lactation curve in primi- and multiparous cows. Previously proposed candidate genes for milk yield supported by this work include GRINA, CYHR1, FOXH1, TONSL, PPP1R16A, ARHGAP39, MAF1, OPLAH and MROH1, whereas newly identified candidate genes are MIR2308, ZNF7, ZNF34, SLURP1, MAFA and KIFC2 (BTA14). The protein lipidation biological process term, which plays a key role in controlling protein localization and function, was identified as the most important term enriched by the identified genes

Expert-based development of a generic HACCP-based risk management system to prevent critical negative energy balance in dairy herds

The objective of this study was to develop a generic risk management system based on the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) principles for the prevention of critical negative energy balance (NEB) in dairy herds using an expert panel approach. In addition, we discuss the advantages and limitations of the system in terms of implementation in the individual dairy herd. For the expert panel, we invited 30 researchers and advisors with expertise in the field of dairy cow feeding and/or health management from eight European regions. They were invited to a Delphi-based set-up that included three inter-correlated questionnaires in which they were asked to suggest risk factors for critical NEB and to score these based on 'effect' and 'probability'. Finally, the experts were asked to suggest critical control points (CCPs) specified by alarm values, monitoring frequency and corrective actions related to the most relevant risk factors in an operational farm setting. A total of 12 experts (40 %) completed all three questionnaires. Of these 12 experts, seven were researchers and five were advisors and in total they represented seven out of the eight European regions addressed in the questionnaire study. When asking for suggestions on risk factors and CCPs, these were formulated as 'open questions', and the experts' suggestions were numerous and overlapping. The suggestions were merged via a process of linguistic editing in order to eliminate doublets. The editing process revealed that the experts provided a total of 34 CCPs for the 11 risk factors they scored as most important. The consensus among experts was relatively high when scoring the most important risk factors, while there were more diverse suggestions of CCPs with specification of alarm values and corrective actions. We therefore concluded that the expert panel approach only partly succeeded in developing a generic HACCP for critical NEB in dairy cows. We recommend that the output of this paper is used to inform key areas for implementation on the individual dairy farm by local farm teams including farmers and their advisors, who together can conduct herd-specific risk factor profiling, organise the ongoing monitoring of herd-specific CCPs, as well as implement corrective actions when CCP alarm values are exceeded

NIST Interlaboratory Study on Glycosylation Analysis of Monoclonal Antibodies: Comparison of Results from Diverse Analytical Methods

Glycosylation is a topic of intense current interest in the development of biopharmaceuticals because it is related to drug safety and efficacy. This work describes results of an interlaboratory study on the glycosylation of the Primary Sample (PS) of NISTmAb, a monoclonal antibody reference material. Seventy-six laboratories from industry, university, research, government, and hospital sectors in Europe, North America, Asia, and Australia submit- Avenue, Silver Spring, Maryland 20993; 22Glycoscience Research Laboratory, Genos, Borongajska cesta 83h, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 23Faculty of Pharmacy and Biochemistry, University of Zagreb, A. Kovacˇ ic´ a 1, 10 000 Zagreb, Croatia; 24Department of Chemistry, Georgia State University, 100 Piedmont Avenue, Atlanta, Georgia 30303; 25glyXera GmbH, Brenneckestrasse 20 * ZENIT / 39120 Magdeburg, Germany; 26Health Products and Foods Branch, Health Canada, AL 2201E, 251 Sir Frederick Banting Driveway, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0K9 Canada; 27Graduate School of Advanced Sciences of Matter, Hiroshima University, 1-3-1 Kagamiyama Higashi-Hiroshima 739–8530 Japan; 28ImmunoGen, 830 Winter Street, Waltham, Massachusetts 02451; 29Department of Medical Physiology, Jagiellonian University Medical College, ul. Michalowskiego 12, 31–126 Krakow, Poland; 30Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University, 400 N. Broadway Street Baltimore, Maryland 21287; 31Mass Spec Core Facility, KBI Biopharma, 1101 Hamlin Road Durham, North Carolina 27704; 32Division of Mass Spectrometry, Korea Basic Science Institute, 162 YeonGuDanji-Ro, Ochang-eup, Cheongwon-gu, Cheongju Chungbuk, 363–883 Korea (South); 33Advanced Therapy Products Research Division, Korea National Institute of Food and Drug Safety, 187 Osongsaengmyeong 2-ro Osong-eup, Heungdeok-gu, Cheongju-si, Chungcheongbuk-do, 363–700, Korea (South); 34Center for Proteomics and Metabolomics, Leiden University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9600, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands; 35Ludger Limited, Culham Science Centre, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, OX14 3EB, United Kingdom; 36Biomolecular Discovery and Design Research Centre and ARC Centre of Excellence for Nanoscale BioPhotonics (CNBP), Macquarie University, North Ryde, Australia; 37Proteomics, Central European Institute for Technology, Masaryk University, Kamenice 5, A26, 625 00 BRNO, Czech Republic; 38Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems, Sandtorstrasse 1, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany; 39Department of Biomolecular Sciences, Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces, 14424 Potsdam, Germany; 40AstraZeneca, Granta Park, Cambridgeshire, CB21 6GH United Kingdom; 41Merck, 2015 Galloping Hill Rd, Kenilworth, New Jersey 07033; 42Analytical R&D, MilliporeSigma, 2909 Laclede Ave. St. Louis, Missouri 63103; 43MS Bioworks, LLC, 3950 Varsity Drive Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108; 44MSD, Molenstraat 110, 5342 CC Oss, The Netherlands; 45Exploratory Research Center on Life and Living Systems (ExCELLS), National Institutes of Natural Sciences, 5–1 Higashiyama, Myodaiji, Okazaki 444–8787 Japan; 46Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Nagoya City University, 3–1 Tanabe-dori, Mizuhoku, Nagoya 467–8603 Japan; 47Medical & Biological Laboratories Co., Ltd, 2-22-8 Chikusa, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464–0858 Japan; 48National Institute for Biological Standards and Control, Blanche Lane, South Mimms, Potters Bar, Hertfordshire EN6 3QG United Kingdom; 49Division of Biological Chemistry & Biologicals, National Institute of Health Sciences, 1-18-1 Kamiyoga, Setagaya-ku, Tokyo 158–8501 Japan; 50New England Biolabs, Inc., 240 County Road, Ipswich, Massachusetts 01938; 51New York University, 100 Washington Square East New York City, New York 10003; 52Target Discovery Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, United Kingdom; 53GlycoScience Group, The National Institute for Bioprocessing Research and Training, Fosters Avenue, Mount Merrion, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland; 54Department of Chemistry, North Carolina State University, 2620 Yarborough Drive Raleigh, North Carolina 27695; 55Pantheon, 201 College Road East Princeton, New Jersey 08540; 56Pfizer Inc., 1 Burtt Road Andover, Massachusetts 01810; 57Proteodynamics, ZI La Varenne 20–22 rue Henri et Gilberte Goudier 63200 RIOM, France; 58ProZyme, Inc., 3832 Bay Center Place Hayward, California 94545; 59Koichi Tanaka Mass Spectrometry Research Laboratory, Shimadzu Corporation, 1 Nishinokyo Kuwabara-cho Nakagyo-ku, Kyoto, 604 8511 Japan; 60Children’s GMP LLC, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Place Memphis, Tennessee 38105; 61Sumitomo Bakelite Co., Ltd., 1–5 Muromati 1-Chome, Nishiku, Kobe, 651–2241 Japan; 62Synthon Biopharmaceuticals, Microweg 22 P.O. Box 7071, 6503 GN Nijmegen, The Netherlands; 63Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Co., 40 Landsdowne Street Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; 64Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Texas Tech University, 2500 Broadway, Lubbock, Texas 79409; 65Thermo Fisher Scientific, 1214 Oakmead Parkway Sunnyvale, California 94085; 66United States Pharmacopeia India Pvt. Ltd. IKP Knowledge Park, Genome Valley, Shamirpet, Turkapally Village, Medchal District, Hyderabad 500 101 Telangana, India; 67Alberta Glycomics Centre, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 68Department of Chemistry, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G2 Canada; 69Department of Chemistry, University of California, One Shields Ave, Davis, California 95616; 70Horva´ th Csaba Memorial Laboratory for Bioseparation Sciences, Research Center for Molecular Medicine, Doctoral School of Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Egyetem ter 1, Hungary; 71Translational Glycomics Research Group, Research Institute of Biomolecular and Chemical Engineering, University of Pannonia, Veszprem, Egyetem ut 10, Hungary; 72Delaware Biotechnology Institute, University of Delaware, 15 Innovation Way Newark, Delaware 19711; 73Proteomics Core Facility, University of Gothenburg, Medicinaregatan 1G SE 41390 Gothenburg, Sweden; 74Department of Medical Biochemistry and Cell Biology, University of Gothenburg, Institute of Biomedicine, Sahlgrenska Academy, Medicinaregatan 9A, Box 440, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden; 75Department of Clinical Chemistry and Transfusion Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Bruna Straket 16, 41345 Gothenburg, Sweden; 76Department of Chemistry, University of Hamburg, Martin Luther King Pl. 6 20146 Hamburg, Germany; 77Department of Chemistry, University of Manitoba, 144 Dysart Road, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R3T 2N2; 78Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry of Interactions and Systems, University of Strasbourg, UMR Unistra-CNRS 7140, France; 79Natural and Medical Sciences Institute, University of Tu¨ bingen, Markwiesenstrae 55, 72770 Reutlingen, Germany; 80Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht University, Padualaan 8, 3584 CH Utrecht, The Netherlands; 81Division of Bioanalytical Chemistry, Amsterdam Institute for Molecules, Medicines and Systems, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, de Boelelaan 1085, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; 82Department of Chemistry, Waters Corporation, 34 Maple Street Milford, Massachusetts 01757; 83Zoetis, 333 Portage St. Kalamazoo, Michigan 49007 Author’s Choice—Final version open access under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY license. Received July 24, 2019, and in revised form, August 26, 2019 Published, MCP Papers in Press, October 7, 2019, DOI 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677 ER: NISTmAb Glycosylation Interlaboratory Study 12 Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19.1 Downloaded from https://www.mcponline.org by guest on January 20, 2020 ted a total of 103 reports on glycan distributions. The principal objective of this study was to report and compare results for the full range of analytical methods presently used in the glycosylation analysis of mAbs. Therefore, participation was unrestricted, with laboratories choosing their own measurement techniques. Protein glycosylation was determined in various ways, including at the level of intact mAb, protein fragments, glycopeptides, or released glycans, using a wide variety of methods for derivatization, separation, identification, and quantification. Consequently, the diversity of results was enormous, with the number of glycan compositions identified by each laboratory ranging from 4 to 48. In total, one hundred sixteen glycan compositions were reported, of which 57 compositions could be assigned consensus abundance values. These consensus medians provide communityderived values for NISTmAb PS. Agreement with the consensus medians did not depend on the specific method or laboratory type. The study provides a view of the current state-of-the-art for biologic glycosylation measurement and suggests a clear need for harmonization of glycosylation analysis methods. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 19: 11–30, 2020. DOI: 10.1074/mcp.RA119.001677.L

Effect of health insurance on the utilisation of allied health services by people with chronic disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Allied health services benefit the management of many chronic diseases. The effects of health insurance on the utilisation of allied health services has not yet been established despite health insurance frequently being identified as a factor promoting utilisation of medical and hospital services among people with chronic disease. The objective of this systematic reviewand meta-analysis was to establish the effects of health insurance on the utilisation of allied health services by people with chronic disease. Medline (Ovid Medline 1948 to Present with Daily Update), EMBASE (1980 to 1 April 2011), CINAHL, PsychINFO and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to 12 April 2011 inclusive. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were published in English, randomised controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, quantitative observational studies and included people with one or more chronic diseases using allied health services and health insurance. A full-text review was performed independently by two reviewers. Meta-analyses were conducted. One hundred and fifty-eight citations were retrieved and seven articles were included in the meta-analyses. The pooled odds ratio (95% CI) of having insurance (versus no insurance) on the utilisation of allied health services among people with chronic disease was 1.33 (1.16-1.52; P<0.001). There was a significant effect of insurance on the utilisation of non-physiotherapy services, pooled odds ratio (95% CI) 4.80 (1.46-15.79; P≤0.01) but having insurance compared with insurance of a lesser coverage was not significantly associated with an increase in physiotherapy utilisation, pooled odds ratio (95% CI) 1.53 (0.81-2.91; P≤0.19). The presence of co-morbidity or functional limitation and higher levels of education increased utilisation whereas gender, race, marital status and income had a limited and variable effect, according to the study population. The review was limited by the considerable heterogeneity in the research questions being asked, sample sizes, study methodology (including allied health service), insurance type and dependent variables analysed. The presence of health insurance was generally associated with increased utilisation of allied health services; however, this varied depending on the population, provider type and insurance product