A three-arm randomized controlled trial of Lidcombe Program and Westmead Program early stuttering interventions

Purpose: To compare two experimental Westmead Program treatments with a control Lidcombe Program treatment for early stuttering. Method: The design was a three-arm randomized controlled trial with blinded outcome assessments 9 months post-randomization. Participants were 91 pre-school children. Results: There was no evidence of difference in percentage syllables stuttered at 9 months among groups. Dropout rates were substantive and may have been connected with novel aspects of the trial design: the use of community clinicians, no exclusion criteria, and randomization of children younger than 3 years of age. Conclusion: The substantive dropout rate for all three arms in this trial means that any conclusions about the 9-month stuttering outcomes must be regarded as tentative. However, continued development of the Westmead Program is warranted, and we are currently constructing an internet version

Can adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes be predicted when blood pressure becomes elevated? Secondary analyses from the CHIPS (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study) randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: For women with chronic or gestational hypertension in CHIPS (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study, NCT01192412), we aimed to examine whether clinical predictors collected at randomization could predict adverse outcomes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This was a planned, secondary analysis of data from the 987 women in the CHIPS Trial. Logistic regression was used to examine the impact of 19 candidate predictors on the probability of adverse perinatal (pregnancy loss or high level neonatal care for >48 h, or birthweight <10th percentile) or maternal outcomes (severe hypertension, preeclampsia, or delivery at <34 or <37 weeks). A model containing all candidate predictors was used to start the stepwise regression process based on goodness of fit as measured by the Akaike information criterion. For face validity, these variables were forced into the model: treatment group ("less tight" or "tight" control), antihypertensive type at randomization, and blood pressure within 1 week before randomization. Continuous variables were represented continuously or dichotomized based on the smaller p-value in univariate analyses. An area-under-the-receiver-operating-curve (AUC ROC) of ≥0.70 was taken to reflect a potentially useful model. RESULTS: Point estimates for AUC ROC were <0.70 for all but severe hypertension (0.70, 95% CI 0.67-0.74) and delivery at <34 weeks (0.71, 95% CI 0.66-0.75). Therefore, no model warranted further assessment of performance. CONCLUSIONS: CHIPS data suggest that when women with chronic hypertension develop an elevated blood pressure in pregnancy, or formerly normotensive women develop new gestational hypertension, maternal and current pregnancy clinical characteristics cannot predict adverse outcomes in the index pregnancy

Less-tight versus tight control of hypertension in pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: The effects of less-tight versus tight control of hypertension on pregnancy complications are unclear. METHODS: We performed an open, international, multicenter trial involving women at 14 weeks 0 days to 33 weeks 6 days of gestation who had nonproteinuric preexisting or gestational hypertension, office diastolic blood pressure of 90 to 105 mm Hg (or 85 to 105 mm Hg if the woman was taking antihypertensive medications), and a live fetus. Women were randomly assigned to less-tight control (target diastolic blood pressure, 100 mm Hg) or tight control (target diastolic blood pressure, 85 mm Hg). The composite primary outcome was pregnancy loss or high-level neonatal care for more than 48 hours during the first 28 postnatal days. The secondary outcome was serious maternal complications occurring up to 6 weeks post partum or until hospital discharge, whichever was later. RESULTS: Included in the analysis were 987 women; 74.6% had preexisting hypertension. The primary-outcome rates were similar among 493 women assigned to less-tight control and 488 women assigned to tight control (31.4% and 30.7%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 1.35), as were the rates of serious maternal complications (3.7% and 2.0%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.79 to 3.84), despite a mean diastolic blood pressure that was higher in the less-tight-control group by 4.6 mm Hg (95% CI, 3.7 to 5.4). Severe hypertension (≥160/110 mm Hg) developed in 40.6% of the women in the less-tight-control group and 27.5% of the women in the tight-control group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant between-group differences in the risk of pregnancy loss, high-level neonatal care, or overall maternal complications, although less-tight control was associated with a significantly higher frequency of severe maternal hypertension. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; CHIPS Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN71416914; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01192412.)

Negotiating queer and religious identities in higher education: queering ‘progression’ in the ‘university experience’

This article addresses the negotiation of ‘queer religious’ student identities in UK higher education. The ‘university experience’ has generally been characterised as a period of intense transformation and self-exploration, with complex and overlapping personal and social influences significantly shaping educational spaces, subjects and subjectivities. Engaging with ideas about progressive tolerance and becoming, often contrasted against ‘backwards’ religious homophobia as a sentiment/space/subject ‘outside’ education, this article follows the experiences and expectations of queer Christian students. In asking whether notions of ‘queering higher education’ (Rumens 2014 Rumens, N. 2014. “Queer Business: Towards Queering the Purpose of the Business School.” In The Entrepreneurial University: Public Engagements, Intersecting Impacts, edited by Y. Taylor, 82–104. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.) ‘fit’ with queer-identifying religious youth, the article explores how educational experiences are narrated and made sense of as ‘progressive’. Educational transitions allow (some) sexual-religious subjects to negotiate identities more freely, albeit with ongoing constraints. Yet perceptions of what, where and who is deemed ‘progressive’ and ‘backwards’ with regard to sexuality and religion need to be met with caution, where the ‘university experience’ can shape and shake sexual-religious identity

The Cost Implications of Less Tight Versus Tight Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy (CHIPS Trial).

The CHIPS randomized controlled trial (Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study) found no difference in the primary perinatal or secondary maternal outcomes between planned "less tight" (target diastolic 100 mm Hg) and "tight" (target diastolic 85 mm Hg) blood pressure management strategies among women with chronic or gestational hypertension. This study examined which of these management strategies is more or less costly from a third-party payer perspective. A total of 981 women with singleton pregnancies and nonsevere, nonproteinuric chronic or gestational hypertension were randomized at 14 to 33 weeks to less tight or tight control. Resources used were collected from 94 centers in 15 countries and costed as if the trial took place in each of 3 Canadian provinces as a cost-sensitivity analysis. Eleven hospital ward and 24 health service costs were obtained from a similar trial and provincial government health insurance schedules of medical benefits. The mean total cost per woman-infant dyad was higher in less tight versus tight control, but the difference in mean total cost (DM) was not statistically significant in any province: Ontario ($30 191.62 versus$24 469.06; DM $5723, 95$296 to $12 272; P=0.0725); British Columbia ($30 593.69 versus $24 776.51; DM$5817; 95% confidence interval, -$385 to$12 349; P=0.0725); or Alberta ($31 510.72 versus$25 510.49; DM $6000.23; 95$154 to $12 781; P=0.0637). Tight control may benefit women without increasing risk to neonates (as shown in the main CHIPS trial), without additional (and possibly lower) cost to the healthcare system. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01192412

Quantifying the economic impact of soil constraints on Australian agriculture: a case study of wheat

Soil sodicity, acidity, and salinity are important soil constraints to wheat production in many cropping regions across Australia, and the Australian agricultural industry needs accurate information on their economic impacts to guide investment decisions on remediation and minimize productivity losses. We present a modelling framework that maps the effects of soil constraints on wheat yield, quantifying forfeited wheat yields due to specific soil constraints at a broad spatial scale and assessing the economic benefit of managing these constraints. Of the three soil constraints considered (sodicity, acidity, and salinity), sodicity caused the largest magnitude of yield gaps across most of the wheat-cropping areas of Australia, with an average yield gap of 0.13\ua0t hayr. Yield gaps due to acidity were more concentrated spatially in the high-rainfall regions of Western Australia, Victoria, and New South Wales, and averaged 0.04\ua0t hayr across the wheat-cropping areas of Australia, whereas the yield gap due to salinity was estimated to be 0.02\ua0t hayr. The lost opportunity associated with soil sodicity for wheat production was estimated to be worth A$1,300 million per annum, for soil acidity, A$400 million per annum, and for salinity, A$200 million per annum. The results of this work should prove useful to guide national investment decisions on the allocation of resources and to target areas where more detailed information would be required in order to reduce the yield gap associated with soil constraints on wheat yields in Australia

Women's views and postpartum follow-up in the CHIPS Trial (Control of Hypertension in Pregnancy Study).

OBJECTIVE: To compare women's views about blood pressure (BP) control in CHIPS (Control of Hypertension In Pregnancy Study) (NCT01192412). DESIGN: Quantitative and qualitative analysis of questionnaire responses. SETTING: International randomised trial (94 sites, 15 countries). POPULATION/SAMPLE: 911 (92.9%) women randomised to 'tight' (target diastolic blood pressure, 85mmHg) or 'less tight' (target diastolic blood pressure, 100mmHg) who completed questionnaires. METHODS: A questionnaire was administered at ∼6-12 weeks postpartum regarding post-discharge morbidity and views about trial participation. Questionnaires were administered by the site co-ordinator, and contact was made by phone, home or clinic visit; rarely, data was collected from medical records. Quantitative analyses were Chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, mixed effects multinomial logistic regression to adjust for confounders, and p<0.001 for statistical significance. NVivo software was used for thematic analysis of women's views. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Satisfaction, measured as willingness to have the same treatment in another pregnancy or recommend that treatment to a friend. RESULTS: Among the 533 women in 'tight' (N=265) vs. 'less tight' (N=268) control who provided comments for qualitative analysis, women in 'tight' (vs. 'less tight') control made fewer positive comments about the amount of medication taken (5 vs. 28 women, respectively) and intensity of BP monitoring (7 vs. 17, respectively). However, this did not translate into less willingness to either have the same treatment in another pregnancy (434, 95.8% vs. 423, 92.4%, respectively; p=0.14) or recommend that treatment to a friend (435, 96.0% and 428, 93.4%, respectively; p=0.17). Importantly, although satisfaction remained high among women with an adverse outcome, those in 'tight' control who suffered an adverse outcome (vs. those who did not) were not consistently less satisfied, whereas this was not the case among women in 'less tight' control among whom satisfaction was consistently lower for the CHIPS primary outcome (p<0.001), severe hypertension (p≤0.01), and pre-eclampsia (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Women in 'tight' (vs. 'less tight') control were equally satisfied with their care, and more so in the face of adverse perinatal or maternal outcomes

Systematic review with meta-analysis: cytokines in fibromyalgia syndrome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on cytokine levels in patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Through December 2010 we systematically reviewed the databases PubMed, MEDLINE, and PsycINFO and screened the reference lists of 22 review articles for suitable original articles. Original articles investigating cytokines in patients with FMS were included. Data were extracted by two independent authors. Differences of the cytokine levels of FMS patients and controls were summarized by standardized mean differences (SMD) using a random effects model. Study quality was assessed applying methodological scores: modified Center of Evidence Based Medicine, Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale, and Würzburg Methodological Quality Score.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Twenty-five articles were included investigating 1255 FMS patients and 800 healthy controls. Data of 13/25 studies entered meta-analysis. The overall methodological quality of studies was low. The results of the majority of studies were not comparable because methods, investigated material, and investigated target cytokines differed. Systematic review of the selected 25 articles revealed that FMS patients had higher serum levels of interleukin (IL)-1 receptor antagonist, IL-6, and IL-8, and higher plasma levels of IL-8. Meta-analysis of eligible studies showed that FMS patients had higher plasma IL-6 levels compared to controls (SMD = -0.34 [-0.64, -0.03] 95% CI; p = 0.03). The majority of investigated cytokines were not different between patients and controls.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The pathophysiological role of cytokines in FMS is still unclear. Studies of higher quality and with higher numbers of subjects are needed.</p

The twilight of the Liberal Social Contract? On the Reception of Rawlsian Political Liberalism

This chapter discusses the Rawlsian project of public reason, or public justification-based 'political' liberalism, and its reception. After a brief philosophical rather than philological reconstruction of the project, the chapter revolves around a distinction between idealist and realist responses to it. Focusing on political liberalism’s critical reception illuminates an overarching question: was Rawls’s revival of a contractualist approach to liberal legitimacy a fruitful move for liberalism and/or the social contract tradition? The last section contains a largely negative answer to that question. Nonetheless the chapter's conclusion shows that the research programme of political liberalism provided and continues to provide illuminating insights into the limitations of liberal contractualism, especially under conditions of persistent and radical diversity. The programme is, however, less receptive to challenges to do with the relative decline of the power of modern states