Acceptability of a theory-based sedentary behaviour reduction intervention for older adults ('On Your Feet to Earn Your Seat').

Background: Adults aged 60 years and over spend most time sedentary and are the least physically active of all age groups. This early-phase study explored acceptability of a theory-based intervention to reduce sitting time and increase activity in older adults, as part of the intervention development process. Methods: An 8-week uncontrolled trial was run among two independent samples of UK adults aged 60–75 years. Sample 1, recruited from sheltered housing on the assumption that they were sedentary and insufficiently active, participated between December 2013 and March 2014. Sample 2, recruited through community and faith centres and a newsletter, on the basis of self-reported inactivity (<150 weekly minutes of moderate-to-vigorous activity) and sedentary behaviour (≥6 h mean daily sitting), participated between March and August 2014. Participants received a booklet offering 16 tips for displacing sitting with light-intensity activity and forming activity habits, and self-monitoring ‘tick-sheets’. At baseline, 4-week, and 8-week follow-ups, quantitative measures were taken of physical activity, sedentary behaviour, and habit. At 8 weeks, tick-sheets were collected and a semi-structured interview conducted. Acceptability was assessed for each sample separately, through attrition and adherence to tips, ANOVAs for behaviour and habit changes, and, for both samples combined, thematic analysis of interviews. Results: In Sample 1, 12 of 16 intervention recipients completed the study (25 % attrition), mean adherence was 40 % (per-tip range: 15–61 %), and there were no clear patterns of changes in sedentary or physical activity behaviour or habit. In Sample 2, 23 of 27 intervention recipients completed (15 % attrition), and mean adherence was 58 % (per-tip range: 39–82 %). Sample 2 decreased mean sitting time and sitting habit, and increased walking, moderate activity, and activity habit. Qualitative data indicated that both samples viewed the intervention positively, found the tips easy to follow, and reported health and wellbeing gains. Conclusions: Low attrition, moderate adherence, and favourability in both samples, and positive changes in Sample 2, indicate the intervention was acceptable. Higher attrition, lower adherence, and no apparent behavioural impact among Sample 1 could perhaps be attributable to seasonal influences. The intervention has been refined to address emergent acceptability problems. An exploratory controlled trial is underway

Origins Space Telescope: baseline mission concept

The Origins Space Telescope will trace the history of our origins from the time dust and heavy elements permanently altered the cosmic landscape to present-day life. How did galaxies evolve from the earliest galactic systems to those found in the Universe today? How do habitable planets form? How common are life-bearing worlds? To answer these alluring questions, Origins will operate at mid- and far-infrared (IR) wavelengths and offer powerful spectroscopic instruments and sensitivity three orders of magnitude better than that of the Herschel Space Observatory, the largest telescope flown in space to date. We describe the baseline concept for Origins recommended to the 2020 US Decadal Survey in Astronomy and Astrophysics. The baseline design includes a 5.9-m diameter telescope cryocooled to 4.5 K and equipped with three scientific instruments. A mid-infrared instrument (Mid-Infrared Spectrometer and Camera Transit spectrometer) will measure the spectra of transiting exoplanets in the 2.8 to 20  μm wavelength range and offer unprecedented spectrophotometric precision, enabling definitive exoplanet biosignature detections. The far-IR imager polarimeter will be able to survey thousands of square degrees with broadband imaging at 50 and 250  μm. The Origins Survey Spectrometer will cover wavelengths from 25 to 588  μm, making wide-area and deep spectroscopic surveys with spectral resolving power R  ∼  300, and pointed observations at R  ∼  40,000 and 300,000 with selectable instrument modes. Origins was designed to minimize complexity. The architecture is similar to that of the Spitzer Space Telescope and requires very few deployments after launch, while the cryothermal system design leverages James Webb Space Telescope technology and experience. A combination of current-state-of-the-art cryocoolers and next-generation detector technology will enable Origins’ natural background-limited sensitivity

The Culture Houses and the Community Integration of Kópavogur

The Culture Houses of Kópavogur are an association focused on community building through weekly cultural events, including Culture Wednesdays and Family Saturdays. Our project involved surveying event attendees to understand demographics and guests’ experiences. We also interviewed community leaders to assess external perceptions of the Culture Houses. Our data led to recommendations that include enhancing the current events with new topics for underrepresented groups with a deeper consideration of language barriers. Other ideas involve improving promotional strategies and collaborating with community organizations. Our recommendations should help the Culture Houses enhance their vision of being a safe, diverse, and culturally stimulating resource for the community

Formula SAE Electric

The Formula SAE Competition is an international collegiate design competition where teams design and build formula-style race cars. The cars are evaluated by a technical inspection, design and cost judging, a business logic scenario, and a series of driving events ending in an endurance race. During the 2020-21 academic year, the WPI FSAE team made the transition away from the combustion competition to the electric formula competition. The vehicle had to be designed from the ground up to incorporate an accumulator, an electric motor, and other tractive systems. The frame is completely redesigned in order to package all of these new components along with a driver. The team is using a two year build cycle in which the vehicle will be finished by the 2021-22 MQP team

Considerations and recommendations for selection and utilization of upper extremity clinical outcome assessments in human spinal cord injury trials.

Study designThis is a focused review article.ObjectivesThis review presents important features of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) in human spinal cord injury research. Considerations for COAs by trial phase and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health are presented as well as strengths and recommendations for upper extremity COAs for research. Clinical trial tools and designs to address recruitment challenges are identified.MethodsThe methods include a summary of topics discussed during a two-day workshop, conceptual discussion of upper extremity COAs and additional focused literature review.ResultsCOAs must be appropriate to trial phase and particularly in mid-late-phase trials, should reflect recovery vs. compensation, as well as being clinically meaningful. The impact and extent of upper vs. lower motoneuron disease should be considered, as this may affect how an individual may respond to a given therapeutic. For trials with broad inclusion criteria, the content of COAs should cover all severities and levels of SCI. Specific measures to assess upper extremity function as well as more comprehensive COAs are under development. In addition to appropriate use of COAs, methods to increase recruitment, such as adaptive trial designs and prognostic modeling to prospectively stratify heterogeneous populations into appropriate cohorts should be considered.ConclusionsWith an increasing number of clinical trials focusing on improving upper extremity function, it is essential to consider a range of factors when choosing a COA.SponsorsCraig H. Neilsen Foundation, Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor

Considerations and recommendations for selection and utilization of upper extremity clinical outcome assessments in human spinal cord injury trials.

This is a focused review article.This review presents important features of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) in human spinal cord injury research. Considerations for COAs by trial phase and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health are presented as well as strengths and recommendations for upper extremity COAs for research. Clinical trial tools and designs to address recruitment challenges are identified.The methods include a summary of topics discussed during a two-day workshop, conceptual discussion of upper extremity COAs and additional focused literature review.COAs must be appropriate to trial phase and particularly in mid-late-phase trials, should reflect recovery vs. compensation, as well as being clinically meaningful. The impact and extent of upper vs. lower motoneuron disease should be considered, as this may affect how an individual may respond to a given therapeutic. For trials with broad inclusion criteria, the content of COAs should cover all severities and levels of SCI. Specific measures to assess upper extremity function as well as more comprehensive COAs are under development. In addition to appropriate use of COAs, methods to increase recruitment, such as adaptive trial designs and prognostic modeling to prospectively stratify heterogeneous populations into appropriate cohorts should be considered.With an increasing number of clinical trials focusing on improving upper extremity function, it is essential to consider a range of factors when choosing a COA.Craig H. Neilsen Foundation, Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor