65 research outputs found

    Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

    Get PDF
    Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

    Dimethyl fumarate in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised, controlled, open-label, platform trial

    Get PDF
    Dimethyl fumarate (DMF) inhibits inflammasome-mediated inflammation and has been proposed as a treatment for patients hospitalised with COVID-19. This randomised, controlled, open-label platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19 Therapy [RECOVERY]), is assessing multiple treatments in patients hospitalised for COVID-19 (NCT04381936, ISRCTN50189673). In this assessment of DMF performed at 27 UK hospitals, adults were randomly allocated (1:1) to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus DMF. The primary outcome was clinical status on day 5 measured on a seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes were time to sustained improvement in clinical status, time to discharge, day 5 peripheral blood oxygenation, day 5 C-reactive protein, and improvement in day 10 clinical status. Between 2 March 2021 and 18 November 2021, 713 patients were enroled in the DMF evaluation, of whom 356 were randomly allocated to receive usual care plus DMF, and 357 to usual care alone. 95% of patients received corticosteroids as part of routine care. There was no evidence of a beneficial effect of DMF on clinical status at day 5 (common odds ratio of unfavourable outcome 1.12; 95% CI 0.86-1.47; p = 0.40). There was no significant effect of DMF on any secondary outcome

    Oak canopy arthropod communities: which factors shape its structure?

    Full text link

    Size fractionated zooplankton, C:N, d13C, and d15N from RRS James Cook cruise JC214

    No full text
    Dataset: Size fractionated zooplankton, C:N, d13C, and d15N from JC214This dataset includes size fractionated zooplankton, C:N, d13C, and d15N from EXPORTS cruise JC214 on RRS James Cook from May to June 2021. For a complete list of measurements, refer to the full dataset description in the supplemental file 'Dataset_description.pdf'. The most current version of this dataset is available at: https://www.bco-dmo.org/dataset/880448NSF Division of Ocean Sciences (NSF OCE) OCE-2124416, NSF Division of Ocean Sciences (NSF OCE) OCE-212441

    The Medical Home and Mental Health Services in Children and Youth with Special Health Care Needs.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Children and youth with special health care needs (CYSHCN) commonly experience mental health concerns, but conditions are often not identified or treated within primary care. Mental health care is often not a primary focus of pediatric primary care, but the medical home model has potential to address these concerns more adequately. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between the medical home and use of mental health services in CYSHCN. METHODS: Data came from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey years 2015-2017, a nationally representative survey of health and healthcare in US families. The study included CYSHCN ages 6-17. We compared the use of mental health services, expenditures, and psychotropic medications across CYSHCN with and without a medical home using multivariable regression. RESULTS: 45% of CYSHCN received care within a medical home. CYSHCN with and without a medical home reported similar frequency of office-based mental health visits (21.2% versus 25.2%), average expenditures for visits (147versus147 versus 128), and psychotropic medications (11.9% versus 15.1%). Medical home status was not associated with office-based mental health visits, use of psychotropic medications, or cost for either. CONCLUSIONS: CYSHCN with mental health care needs face barriers to satisfactory care. Creating better connections between primary and mental health care could help to ameliorate this problem. Findings suggest the medical home, a more comprehensive primary care model, may not address mental health care needs of CYSHCN
    corecore