Pilot Open Case Series of Voice over Internet Protocol-Delivered Assessment and Behavior Therapy for Chronic Tic Disorders

Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics (CBIT) is an efficacious treatment for children with chronic tic disorders (CTDs). Nevertheless, many families of children with CTDs are unable to access CBIT due to a lack of adequately trained treatment providers, time commitment, and travel distance. This study established the interrater reliability between in-person and Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) administrations of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS), and examined the preliminary efficacy, feasibility, and acceptability of VoIP-delivered CBIT for reducing tics in children with CTDs in an open case series. Across in-person and VoIP administrations of the YGTSS, results showed mean agreement of 91%, 96%, and 95% for motor, phonic, and total tic severity subscales. In the pilot feasibility study, 4 children received 8 weekly sessions of CBIT via VoIP and were assessed at pre- and posttreatment by an independent evaluator. Results showed a 29.44% decrease in clinician-rated tic severity from pre- to posttreatment on the YGTSS. Two of the 4 patients were considered treatment responders at posttreatment, using Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement ratings. Therapeutic alliance, parent and child treatment satisfaction, and videoconferencing satisfaction ratings were high. CBIT was considered feasible to implement via VoIP, although further testing is recommended

Pilot Testing Behavior Therapy for Chronic Tic Disorders in Neurology and Developmental Pediatrics Clinics

Comprehensive Behavioral Intervention for Tics (CBIT) is an efficacious treatment with limited regional availability. As neurology and pediatric clinics are often the first point of therapeutic contact for individuals with tics, the present study assessed preliminary treatment response, acceptability, and feasibility of an abbreviated version, modified for child neurology and developmental pediatrics clinics. Fourteen youth (9-17) with Tourette disorder across 2 child neurology clinics and one developmental pediatrics clinic participated in a small case series. Clinician-rated tic severity (Yale Global Tic Severity Scale) decreased from pre- to posttreatment, z = –2.0, P \u3c .05, r = –.48, as did tic-related impairment, z = –2.4, P \u3c .05, r = –.57. Five of the 9 completers (56%) were classified as treatment responders. Satisfaction ratings were high, and therapeutic alliance ratings were moderately high. Results provide guidance for refinement of this modified CBIT protocol

A Multicenter Examination and Strategic Revisions of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale

Objective To examine the internal consistency and distribution of the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS) scores to inform modification of the measure. Methods This cross-sectional study included 617 participants with a tic disorder (516 children and 101 adults), who completed an age-appropriate diagnostic interview and the YGTSS to evaluate tic symptom severity. The distributions of scores on YGTSS dimensions were evaluated for normality and skewness. For dimensions that were skewed across motor and phonic tics, a modified Delphi consensus process was used to revise selected anchor points. Results Children and adults had similar clinical characteristics, including tic symptom severity. All participants were examined together. Strong internal consistency was identified for the YGTSS Motor Tic score (α = 0.80), YGTSS Phonic Tic score (α = 0.87), and YGTSS Total Tic score (α = 0.82). The YGTSS Total Tic and Impairment scores exhibited relatively normal distributions. Several subscales and individual item scales departed from a normal distribution. Higher scores were more often used on the Motor Tic Number, Frequency, and Intensity dimensions and the Phonic Tic Frequency dimension. By contrast, lower scores were more often used on Motor Tic Complexity and Interference, and Phonic Tic Number, Intensity, Complexity, and Interference. Conclusions The YGTSS exhibits good internal consistency across children and adults. The parallel findings across Motor and Phonic Frequency, Complexity, and Interference dimensions prompted minor revisions to the anchor point description to promote use of the full range of scores in each dimension. Specific minor revisions to the YGTSS Phonic Tic Symptom Checklist were also proposed

A Latent Profile Analysis of Age of Onset in Pathological Skin Picking

Background Pathological Skin Picking (PSP) may begin at any age, but the most common age of onset is during adolescence. Age of onset is a potentially useful clinical marker to delineate subtypes of psychiatric disorders. The present study sought to examine empirically defined age of onset groups in adults with PSP and assess whether groups differed on clinical characteristics. Method Participants were 701 adult respondents to an internet survey, who endorsed recurrent skin picking with tissue damage and impairment. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was conducted to identify subtypes of PSP based on age of onset. Then subgroups were compared on demographic and clinical characteristics. Results The best fitting LPA model was a two-class solution comprised of a large group with average age of onset in adolescence (n = 650; 92.9% of the sample; Mean age of onset = 13.6 years) and a small group with average onset in middle adulthood (n = 50; 7.1% of the sample; Mean age of onset = 42.8 years). Relative to the early onset group, the late onset group reported significantly less focused picking, less skin picking-related impairment, lower rates of co-occurring body-focused repetitive behaviors, and trends towards reduced family history of PSP. Individuals in the late onset group also reported increased rates of comorbid depression, anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder, and were more likely to report that initial picking onset seemed related to or followed depression/anxiety and physical illness. Conclusion Findings suggest the presence of two distinct PSP age of onset groups: (1) an early onset group with average onset in adolescence, clinical characteristics suggestive of greater picking-related burden and familiality, and a profile more representative of the general PSP population; and (2) a late onset group with average onset in middle adulthood, increased co-occurring affective and trauma conditions, and initial onset associated with or following other mental health and physical problems. Future replication is needed to assess the validity and clinical utility of these subgroups

Natural capital informing decisions: from promise to practice

This is the accepted manuscript of a paper that will be published in PNAS. It is currently under an infinite embargo.The central challenge of the 21st century is to develop economic, social, and governance systems capable of ending poverty and achieving sustainable levels of population and consumption while securing the life-support systems underpinning current and future human well-being. Essential to meeting this challenge is the incorporation of natural capital and the ecosystem services it provides into decision-making. Here, we explore progress and crucial gaps at this frontier, reflecting upon the 10 years since the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. We focus on three key dimensions of progress and ongoing challenges: raising awareness of the interdependence of ecosystems and human well-being; advancing the fundamental, interdisciplinary science of ecosystem services; and implementing this science in decisions to restore natural capital and use it sustainably. Awareness of human dependence on nature is at an all-time high, the science of ecosystem services is rapidly advancing, and talk of natural capital is now common from governments to corporate boardrooms. However, successful implementation is still in early stages. We explore why ecosystem service information has yet to fundamentally change decision-making and suggest a path forward that emphasizes: 1) developing solid evidence linking decisions to impacts on natural capital and ecosystem services, and then to human well-being, 2) working closely with leaders in government, business, and civil society to develop the knowledge, tools, and practices necessary to integrate natural capital and ecosystem services into everyday decision-making; and 3) reforming institutions to change policy and practices to better align private short-term goals with societal long-term goals.http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.150375111

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Delivery of crop pollination services is an insufficient argument for wild pollinator conservation

There is compelling evidence that more diverse ecosystems deliver greater benefits to people, and these ecosystem services have become a key argument for biodiversity conservation. However, it is unclear how much biodiversity is needed to deliver ecosystem services in a cost-effective way. Here we show that, while the contribution of wild bees to crop production is significant, service delivery is restricted to a limited subset of all known bee species. Across crops, years and biogeographical regions, crop-visiting wild bee communities are dominated by a small number of common species, and threatened species are rarely observed on crops. Dominant crop pollinators persist under agricultural expansion and many are easily enhanced by simple conservation measures, suggesting that cost-effective management strategies to promote crop pollination should target a different set of species than management strategies to promote threatened bees. Conserving the biological diversity of bees therefore requires more than just ecosystem-service-based arguments

Genomic Dissection of Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia, Including 28 Subphenotypes

publisher: Elsevier articletitle: Genomic Dissection of Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia, Including 28 Subphenotypes journaltitle: Cell articlelink: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.05.046 content_type: article copyright: © 2018 Elsevier Inc

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