50 research outputs found
2000 Survey of Rhode Island Law: Legislation: Motor Vehicles: An Act Relating to Motor Vehicles, An Act Relating to Motor & Other Vehicles
Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome
The sequence of the human genome encodes the genetic instructions for human physiology, as well as rich information about human evolution. In 2001, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium reported a draft sequence of the euchromatic portion of the human genome. Since then, the international collaboration has worked to convert this draft into a genome sequence with high accuracy and nearly complete coverage. Here, we report the result of this finishing process. The current genome sequence (Build 35) contains 2.85 billion nucleotides interrupted by only 341 gaps. It covers ∼99% of the euchromatic genome and is accurate to an error rate of ∼1 event per 100,000 bases. Many of the remaining euchromatic gaps are associated with segmental duplications and will require focused work with new methods. The near-complete sequence, the first for a vertebrate, greatly improves the precision of biological analyses of the human genome including studies of gene number, birth and death. Notably, the human enome seems to encode only 20,000-25,000 protein-coding genes. The genome sequence reported here should serve as a firm foundation for biomedical research in the decades ahead
COVID-19 vaccination, risk-compensatory behaviours, and contacts in the UK
The physiological effects of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) are well documented, yet the behavioural effects not well known. Risk compensation suggests that gains in personal safety, as a result of vaccination, are offset by increases in risky behaviour, such as socialising, commuting and working outside the home. This is potentially important because transmission of SARS-CoV-2 is driven by contacts, which could be amplified by vaccine-related risk compensation. Here, we show that behaviours were overall unrelated to personal vaccination, but—adjusting for variation in mitigation policies—were responsive to the level of vaccination in the wider population: individuals in the UK were risk compensating when rates of vaccination were rising. This effect was observed across four nations of the UK, each of which varied policies autonomously
Community prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in England from April to November, 2020: results from the ONS Coronavirus Infection Survey
Background: Decisions about the continued need for control measures to contain the spread of severe acute respiratory
syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) rely on accurate and up-to-date information about the number of people
testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 and risk factors for testing positive. Existing surveillance systems are generally not
based on population samples and are not longitudinal in design.
Methods: Samples were collected from individuals aged 2 years and older living in private households in England that
were randomly selected from address lists and previous Office for National Statistics surveys in repeated crosssectional household surveys with additional serial sampling and longitudinal follow-up. Participants completed a
questionnaire and did nose and throat self-swabs. The percentage of individuals testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 RNA
was estimated over time by use of dynamic multilevel regression and poststratification, to account for potential
residual non-representativeness. Potential changes in risk factors for testing positive over time were also assessed.
The study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN21086382.
Findings: Between April 26 and Nov 1, 2020, results were available from 1 191 170 samples from 280327 individuals; 5231
samples were positive overall, from 3923 individuals. The percentage of people testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 changed
substantially over time, with an initial decrease between April 26 and June 28, 2020, from 0·40% (95% credible interval
0·29–0·54) to 0·06% (0·04–0·07), followed by low levels during July and August, 2020, before substantial increases at
the end of August, 2020, with percentages testing positive above 1% from the end of October, 2020. Having a patient facing role and working outside your home were important risk factors for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 at the end of
the first wave (April 26 to June 28, 2020), but not in the second wave (from the end of August to Nov 1, 2020). Age (young
adults, particularly those aged 17–24 years) was an important initial driver of increased positivity rates in the second
wave. For example, the estimated percentage of individuals testing positive was more than six times higher in those
aged 17–24 years than in those aged 70 years or older at the end of September, 2020. A substantial proportion of
infections were in individuals not reporting symptoms around their positive test (45–68%, dependent on calendar time.
Interpretation: Important risk factors for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 varied substantially between the part of the
first wave that was captured by the study (April to June, 2020) and the first part of the second wave of increased
positivity rates (end of August to Nov 1, 2020), and a substantial proportion of infections were in individuals not
reporting symptoms, indicating that continued monitoring for SARS-CoV-2 in the community will be important for
managing the COVID-19 pandemic moving forwards
Recommended from our members
Primary care cancer control interventions including Latinos: A review
Even though 86% of adult Latinos have a usual source of care, there is a paucity of literature on primary care–based interventions to promote cancer prevention and control in this population. This systematic review examines published primary care–based cancer control interventions that included Latinos.
MEDLINE, the Cochrane Registry, and EMBASE were searched from January 1985 to January 2003. Any primary care–based intervention using a controlled trial, quasi-experimental, or pre–post design that targeted breast, cervical, or colorectal cancer was included if at least 5% of the sample was Latino.
A total of 14 intervention studies met inclusion criteria. Seven of the 14 studies described patient or provider reminder interventions. Other interventions incorporated into the primary care setting one of the following: community health educators, culturally sensitive videos, audit with feedback, materials from the “Put Prevention Into Practice” campaign, and vouchers for free screenings. The heterogeneity of designs and outcome variables and the low number of Latinos presented obstacles to combining data to estimate the overall effectiveness of primary care interventions for this population. Qualitatively, patient and physician reminders and management systems strategies including audit with feedback for providers appear to result in improved screening utilization.
There is a paucity of data on the effectiveness of primary care cancer control interventions directed at Latinos. Primary care–based interventions that have been effective in non-Latinos could incorporate culturally appropriate elements and lessons from community-based research and could be applied to Latinos so that their effectiveness can be assessed in this group