Genomic dissection of Klebsiella pneumoniae infections in hospital patients reveals insights into an opportunistic pathogen.

Klebsiella pneumoniae is a major cause of opportunistic healthcare-associated infections, which are increasingly complicated by the presence of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenem resistance. We conducted a year-long prospective surveillance study of K. pneumoniae clinical isolates in hospital patients. Whole-genome sequence (WGS) data reveals a diverse pathogen population, including other species within the K. pneumoniae species complex (18%). Several infections were caused by K. variicola/K. pneumoniae hybrids, one of which shows evidence of nosocomial transmission. A wide range of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) phenotypes are observed, and diverse genetic mechanisms identified (mainly plasmid-borne genes). ESBLs are correlated with presence of other acquired AMR genes (median n = 10). Bacterial genomic features associated with nosocomial onset are ESBLs (OR 2.34, p = 0.015) and rhamnose-positive capsules (OR 3.12, p < 0.001). Virulence plasmid-encoded features (aerobactin, hypermucoidy) are observed at low-prevalence (<3%), mostly in community-onset cases. WGS-confirmed nosocomial transmission is implicated in just 10% of cases, but strongly associated with ESBLs (OR 21, p < 1 × 10-11). We estimate 28% risk of onward nosocomial transmission for ESBL-positive strains vs 1.7% for ESBL-negative strains. These data indicate that K. pneumoniae infections in hospitalised patients are due largely to opportunistic infections with diverse strains, with an additional burden from nosocomially-transmitted AMR strains and community-acquired hypervirulent strains

Researching the mental health needs of hard-to-reach groups: managing multiple sources of evidence

Background: common mental health problems impose substantial challenges to patients, carers, and health care systems. A range of interventions have demonstrable efficacy in improving the lives of people experiencing such problems. However many people are disadvantaged, either because they are unable to access primary care, or because access does not lead to adequate help. New methods are needed to understand the problems of access and generate solutions. In this paper we describe our methodological approach to managing multiple and diverse sources of evidence, within a research programme to increase equity of access to high quality mental health services in primary care.Methods: we began with a scoping review to identify the range and extent of relevant published material, and establish key concepts related to access. We then devised a strategy to collect - in parallel - evidence from six separate sources: a systematic review of published quantitative data on access-related studies; a meta-synthesis of published qualitative data on patient perspectives; dialogues with local stakeholders; a review of grey literature from statutory and voluntary service providers; secondary analysis of patient transcripts from previous qualitative studies; and primary data from interviews with service users and carers.We synthesised the findings from these diverse sources, made judgements on key emerging issues in relation to needs and services, and proposed a range of potential interventions. These proposals were debated and refined using iterative electronic and focus group consultation procedures involving international experts, local stakeholders and service users.Conclusions: our methods break new ground by generating and synthesising multiple sources of evidence, connecting scientific understanding with the perspectives of users, in order to develop innovative ways to meet the mental health needs of under-served group

Priorities for synthesis research in ecology and environmental science

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the National Science Foundation grant #1940692 for financial support for this workshop, and the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) and its staff for logistical support.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Priorities for synthesis research in ecology and environmental science

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the National Science Foundation grant #1940692 for financial support for this workshop, and the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis (NCEAS) and its staff for logistical support.Peer reviewedPublisher PD