Influential Article Review - Understanding How Trade Coordination Affects Innovation

This paper examines technological innovation. We present insights from a highly influential paper. Here are the highlights from this paper: Based on the theory of technology spillover in international trade, this paper discusses the technological innovation effect of trade by taking the influence of domestic trade into account. Under the constraint of the production possibility frontier, there is either complementarity or substitutability between domestic and foreign trade. It must be decided whether resources should be concentrated in one of the sectors (trade specialization) or instead allocated equally (trade equalization) between the two sectors. This paper firstly discusses how domestic trade and foreign trade work together to influence technological innovation, and how trade equalization and specialization affect different types of innovation. Using a provincial-level panel dataset from 2007 to 2015 in China, this paper constructs the indicators of domestic and foreign trade linkage and examines the impact of trade on innovation. The findings show that trade equalization mainly promotes incremental innovation, while trade specialization improves radical innovation. Thus, in the area of incremental innovation, attention should be paid to the equalized development of domestic and foreign trade, while in areas pursuing radical innovation, emphasis should be put on the specialization of the trade sector, avoiding equal allocation of resources to the two sectors. For our overseas readers, we then present the insights from this paper in Spanish, French, Portuguese, and German

Gender-based depression trajectories following heart disease onset: significant predictors and health outcomes

Background Using a nationally representative sample of U.S. older adults (50+), this study investigates gender-based depression trajectories following heart disease onset and associated risk of disability and mortality over an 8-year period. Method Six waves of longitudinal data from the Health and Retirement Study (2006–2016) were used (n = 1787). Heart disease onset was defined as self-reporting no heart disease at baseline but reporting a positive diagnosis in a subsequent wave. Growth Mixture Modelling identified depression trajectories. Multinomial logistic regression models determined significant predictors of depression trajectories. Cox proportional-hazards models examined the associated disability and mortality risks. Results Three distinct depression trajectories were identified, including persistent minimal depression (men: 68.65%; women: 60.17%), moderate depression (women: 29.70%; men: 17.97%), and chronic depression (women: 10.12%) or emerging depression (men: 13.38%). Younger age and depression status at baseline were associated with women’s chronic depression and men’s emerging depression. Chronic/emerging and moderate depression were associated with higher disability risks than was minimal depression among both women and men (hazard ratios [HR] ranged from 2.12 to 3.92, p < 0.001). Only men’s emerging depression was linked to higher mortality risk compared to minimal depression (HR = 2.03, p < 0.001). Conclusion Longitudinal course of depression following onset of heart disease is heterogeneous in later life. Unfavorable depression trajectories (i.e. moderate, chronic, and emerging) were associated with higher disability risk compared to the minimal depression trajectory. Study findings characterize risk stratification regarding depression after heart disease onset, which can inform the development of interventions to improve health outcomes among older adults with heart conditions.This accepted article is published as Dexia Kong, Peiyi Lu, Phyllis Solomon, and Mack Shelley, “Gender-based depression trajectories following heart disease onset: Significant predictors and health outcomes,” Aging and Mental Health, 36(4), 754-761 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2021.1891202. Posted with permission

A Research Agenda for Communication Between Health Care Professionals and Patients Living With Serious Illness

Importance Poor communication by health care professionals contributes to physical and psychological suffering in patients living with serious illness. Patients may not fully understand their illness, prognosis, and treatment options or may not receive medical care consistent with their goals. Despite considerable research exploring the role of communication in this setting, many questions remain, and a clear agenda for communication research is lacking. Observations Through a consensus conference and subsequent activities, we reviewed the state of the science, identified key evidence gaps in understanding the impact of communication on patient outcomes, and created an agenda for future research. We considered 7 broad topics: shared decision making, advance care planning, communication training, measuring communication, communication about prognosis, emotion and serious illness communication, and cultural issues. We identified 5 areas in which further research could substantially move the field forward and help enhance patient care: measurement and methodology, including how to determine communication quality; mechanisms of communication, such as identifying the specific clinician behaviors that patients experience as both honest and compassionate, or the role of bias in the clinical encounter; alternative approaches to advance care planning that focus on the quality of serious illness communication and not simply completion of forms; teaching and disseminating communication skills; and approaches, such as economic incentives and other clinician motivators, to change communication behavior. Conclusions Our findings highlight the urgent need to improve quality of communication between health care professionals and patients living with serious illness through a broad range of research that covers communication skills, tools, patient education, and models of care

Liver Fibrosis Linked to Cognitive Performance in HIV and Hepatitis C

Since HIV impairs gut barriers to pathogens, HIV-infected adults may be vulnerable to Minimal Hepatic Encephalopathy (MHE) in the absence of cirrhosis

Clinical symptoms, signs and tests for identification of impending and current water-loss dehydration in older people (Review)

BackgroundThere is evidence that water-loss dehydration is common in older people and associated with many causes of morbidity and mortality.However, it is unclear what clinical symptoms, signs and tests may be used to identify early dehydration in older people, so that support can be mobilised to improve hydration before health and well-being are compromised.ObjectivesTo determine the diagnostic accuracy of state (one time), minimally invasive clinical symptoms, signs and tests to be used as screeningtests for detecting water-loss dehydration in older people by systematically reviewing studies that have measured a reference standard and at least one index test in people aged 65 years and over. Water-loss dehydration was defined primarily as including everyone with either impending or current water-loss dehydration (including all those with serum osmolality ≥ 295 mOsm/kg as being dehydrated).Search methodsStructured search strategies were developed for MEDLINE (OvidSP), EMBASE (OvidSP), CINAHL, LILACS, DARE and HTAdatabases (The Cochrane Library), and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). Reference lists of included studiesand identified relevant reviews were checked. Authors of included studies were contacted for details of further studies.Selection criteriaTitles and abstracts were scanned and all potentially relevant studies obtained in full text. Inclusion of full text studies was assessed independently in duplicate, and disagreements resolved by a third author. We wrote to authors of all studies that appeared to have collected data on at least one reference standard and at least one index test, and in at least 10 people aged ≥ 65 years, even where no comparative analysis has been published, requesting original dataset so we could create 2 x 2 tables.Data collection and analysis.Diagnostic accuracy of each test was assessed against the best available reference standard for water-loss dehydration (serum or plasma osmolality cut-off≥295mOsm/kg, serumosmolarity or weight change) within each study. For each index test study data were presented in forest plots of sensitivity and specificity. The primary target condition was water-loss dehydration (including either impending or current water-loss dehydration). Secondary target conditions were intended as current (> 300 mOsm/kg) and impending (295 to 300 mOsm/kg) water-loss dehydration, but restricted to current dehydration in the final review.We conducted bivariate random-effects meta-analyses (Stata/IC, StataCorp) for index tests where there were at least four studies and study datasets could be pooled to construct sensitivity and specificity summary estimates. We assigned the same approach for index tests with continuous outcome data for each of three pre-specified cut-off points investigated.Pre-set minimum sensitivity of a useful test was 60%, minimum specificity 75%. As pre-specifying three cut-offs for each continuoustest may have led to missing a cut-off with useful sensitivity and specificity, we conducted post-hoc exploratory analyses to createreceiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves where there appeared some possibility of a useful cut-off missed by the original three.These analyses enabled assessment of which tests may be worth assessing in further research. A further exploratory analysis assessed the value of combining the best two index tests where each had some individual predictive ability.Main resultsThere were few published studies of the diagnostic accuracy of state (one time), minimally invasive clinical symptoms, signs or tests tobe used as screening tests for detecting water-loss dehydration in older people. Therefore, to complete this review we sought, analysed and included raw datasets that included a reference standard and an index test in people aged ≥ 65 years.We included three studies with published diagnostic accuracy data and a further 21 studies provided datasets that we analysed. Weassessed 67 tests (at three cut-offs for each continuous outcome) for diagnostic accuracy of water-loss dehydration (primary targetcondition) and of current dehydration (secondary target condition).Only three tests showed any ability to diagnose water-loss dehydration (including both impending and current water-loss dehydration) as stand-alone tests: expressing fatigue (sensitivity 0.71 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.96), specificity 0.75 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.85), in one study with 71 participants, but two additional studies had lower sensitivity); missing drinks between meals (sensitivity 1.00 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.00), specificity 0.77 (95% CI 0.64 to 0.86), in one study with 71 participants) and BIA resistance at 50 kHz (sensitivities 1.00 (95% CI 0.48 to 1.00) and 0.71 (95% CI 0.44 to 0.90) and specificities of 1.00 (95% CI 0.69 to 1.00) and 0.80 (95% CI 0.28 to 0.99) in 15 and 22 people respectively for two studies, but with sensitivities of 0.54 (95% CI 0.25 to 0.81) and 0.69 (95% CI 0.56 to 0.79) and specificities of 0.50 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.84) and 0.19 (95% CI 0.17 to 0.21) in 21 and 1947 people respectively in two other studies). In post-hoc ROC plots drinks intake, urine osmolality and axillial moisture also showed limited diagnostic accuracy. No test was consistently useful in more than one study.Combining two tests so that an individual both missed some drinks between meals and expressed fatigue was sensitive at 0.71 (95%CI 0.29 to 0.96) and specific at 0.92 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.97).There was sufficient evidence to suggest that several stand-alone tests often used to assess dehydration in older people (including fluid intake, urine specific gravity, urine colour, urine volume, heart rate, dry mouth, feeling thirsty and BIA assessment of intracellular water or extracellular water) are not useful, and should not be relied on individually as ways of assessing presence or absence of dehydration in older people.No tests were found consistently useful in diagnosing current water-loss dehydration.Authors’ conclusionsThere is limited evidence of the diagnostic utility of any individual clinical symptom, sign or test or combination of tests to indicatewater-loss dehydration in older people. Individual tests should not be used in this population to indicate dehydration; they miss a highproportion of people with dehydration, and wrongly label those who are adequately hydrated.Promising tests identified by this review need to be further assessed, as do new methods in development. Combining several tests may improve diagnostic accuracy