The mental wellbeing of engineering students: a scoping review protool. [Protocol]

The mental wellbeing (MW) of higher education students is a subject that has increased in visibility in recent years. In 2010, a systematic review looking at mental health in students worldwide highlighted that student mental health is poorer than the general population. In a UK survey, 20% of students considered themselves to have poor MW with 13% reporting suicidal thoughts, and 92% identifying as having had feelings of mental distress. The survey also highlighted that students generally do not disclose mental health issues with their institutions with 80% reporting stigma as a barrier. Engineering degree programmes are challenging and competitive in nature with a male-skewed gender balance. The majority of engineering students are young adult males with nearly 85% of engineering undergraduates identified as men in the UK. In Australia, it is 84.4%, Canada 86.3%, USA 81.3%. and EU 72.6%. Before carrying out a systematic review to identify the effectiveness of interventions for mental well being in engineering students, it is important to identify existing research in this area. A scoping review to map the available evidence of mental well being in engineering students should therefore be carried out. An initial search of the JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, Prospero and Cochrane Library have not identified any systematic reviews or protocols on this topic area. Considering the lack of mapping of existing research, it is appropriate that a systematic scoping review is conducted on this topic. A systematic scoping review would potentially highlight key themes relating to the mental well being of engineering students

Interventions to support the mental health and wellbeing of engineering students: a scoping review.

Engineering students enter a challenging and competitive sector in higher education and are potentially at risk of poor mental health and or mental wellbeing. It is important to raise awareness of and support good mental health and wellbeing for engineering students. We carried out a scoping review using Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review methodology. Published sources of evidence were searched for this review via: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycInfo, Compendex, Web of Science, Emerald, Epistemonikos and Business Source Complete. Searches were conducted in January 2019 and updated in January 2020, and March 2022. Two reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts, full text sources and extracted data using a form developed by the authors. Results: Searches identified 191 sources of evidence after title screening and 33 sources of evidence were included for final extraction following full-text screening. This represented over 4000 engineering students from 10 countries. Included studies were predominantly pilots, which suggests a lack of diverse research methods in the existing research base. Studies also varied in approaches to reporting. Interventions included training, relaxation, technology use, alternative teaching models, support services and a study break witha range of outcome measures used to evaluate intervention effects. Results of included studies noted reduced stress and anxiety, improved academic achievement, improved communication, motivation, physiological responses, attitude, and increased physical activity, health awareness and confidence. Mindfulness activities appear to be accepted by and helpful to engineering students. Conclusions: This review mapped interventions to support mental health and wellbeing in engineering students but identifies a need for further high-quality robust studies that are transparently reported using reporting guidelines

Uptake of infant and preschool immunisations in Scotland and England during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study of routinely collected data

Funding: This analysis was part of the EAVE II project. EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MC_PC_19075), https://mrc.ukri.org/, with the support of BREATHE: the Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004), https://www.hdruk.ac.uk/helping-with-health-data/health-data-research-hubs/breathe, which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK.Background In 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic and lockdown control measures threatened to disrupt routine childhood immunisation programmes with early reports suggesting uptake would fall. In response, public health bodies in Scotland and England collected national data for childhood immunisations on a weekly or monthly basis to allow for rapid analysis of trends. The aim of this study was to use these data to assess the impact of different phases of the pandemic on infant and preschool immunisation uptake rates. Methods and findings We conducted an observational study using routinely collected data for the year prior to the pandemic (2019) and immediately before (22 January to March 2020), during (23 March to 26 July), and after (27 July to 4 October) the first UK “lockdown”. Data were obtained for Scotland from the Public Health Scotland “COVID19 wider impacts on the health care system” dashboard and for England from ImmForm. Five vaccinations delivered at different ages were evaluated; 3 doses of “6-in-1” diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b, and hepatitis B vaccine (DTaP/IPV/Hib/HepB) and 2 doses of measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. This represented 439,754 invitations to be vaccinated in Scotland and 4.1 million for England. Uptake during the 2020 periods was compared to the previous year (2019) using binary logistic regression analysis. For Scotland, uptake within 4 weeks of a child becoming eligible by age was analysed along with geographical region and indices of deprivation. For Scotland and England, we assessed whether immunisations were up-to-date at approximately 6 months (all doses 6-in-1) and 16 to 18 months (first MMR) of age. We found that uptake within 4 weeks of eligibility in Scotland for all the 5 vaccines was higher during lockdown than in 2019. Differences ranged from 1.3% for first dose 6-in-1 vaccine (95.3 versus 94%, odds ratio [OR] compared to 2019 1.28, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 1.18 to 1.39) to 14.3% for second MMR dose (66.1 versus 51.8%, OR compared to 2019 1.8, 95% CI 1.74 to 1.87). Significant increases in uptake were seen across all deprivation levels. In England, fewer children due to receive their immunisations during the lockdown period were up to date at 6 months (6-in-1) or 18 months (first dose MMR). The fall in percentage uptake ranged from 0.5% for first 6-in-1 (95.8 versus 96.3%, OR compared to 2019 0.89, 95% CI 0.86– to 0.91) to 2.1% for third 6-in-1 (86.6 versus 88.7%, OR compared to 2019 0.82, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.83). The use of routinely collected data used in this study was a limiting factor as detailed information on potential confounding factors were not available and we were unable to eliminate the possibility of seasonal trends in immunisation uptake. Conclusions In this study, we observed that the national lockdown in Scotland was associated with an increase in timely childhood immunisation uptake; however, in England, uptake fell slightly. Reasons for the improved uptake in Scotland may include active measures taken to promote immunisation at local and national levels during this period and should be explored further. Promoting immunisation uptake and addressing potential vaccine hesitancy is particularly important given the ongoing pandemic and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Perceiving Pain in Others: Automatic and Controlled Mechanisms

A

Whitefield News

File includes: January 2016 Volume 3, Issue 7 February 2016 Volume 3, Issue 8 March 2016 Volume 3, Issue 9 April 2016 Volume 3, Issue 10 May 2016 Volume 3, Issue 11 June 2016 Volume 3, Issue 12 July 2016 Volume 4, Issue 1 August 2016 Volume 4, Issue 2 September 2016, Volume 4, Issue 3 October 2016, Volume 4, Issue 4 November 2016, Volume 4, Issue 5 December 2016, Volume 4, Issue

Prime Focus Spectrograph (PFS) for the Subaru Telescope: Overview, recent progress, and future perspectives

PFS (Prime Focus Spectrograph), a next generation facility instrument on the 8.2-meter Subaru Telescope, is a very wide-field, massively multiplexed, optical and near-infrared spectrograph. Exploiting the Subaru prime focus, 2394 reconfigurable fibers will be distributed over the 1.3 deg field of view. The spectrograph has been designed with 3 arms of blue, red, and near-infrared cameras to simultaneously observe spectra from 380nm to 1260nm in one exposure at a resolution of ~1.6-2.7A. An international collaboration is developing this instrument under the initiative of Kavli IPMU. The project is now going into the construction phase aiming at undertaking system integration in 2017-2018 and subsequently carrying out engineering operations in 2018-2019. This article gives an overview of the instrument, current project status and future paths forward.Comment: 17 pages, 10 figures. Proceeding of SPIE Astronomical Telescopes and Instrumentation 201

A Polymorphism in the HLA-DPB1 Gene Is Associated with Susceptibility to Multiple Sclerosis

We conducted an association study across the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) complex to identify loci associated with multiple sclerosis (MS). Comparing 1927 SNPs in 1618 MS cases and 3413 controls of European ancestry, we identified seven SNPs that were independently associated with MS conditional on the others (each ). All associations were significant in an independent replication cohort of 2212 cases and 2251 controls () and were highly significant in the combined dataset (). The associated SNPs included proxies for HLA-DRB1*15:01 and HLA-DRB1*03:01, and SNPs in moderate linkage disequilibrium (LD) with HLA-A*02:01, HLA-DRB1*04:01 and HLA-DRB1*13:03. We also found a strong association with rs9277535 in the class II gene HLA-DPB1 (discovery set , replication set , combined ). HLA-DPB1 is located centromeric of the more commonly typed class II genes HLA-DRB1, -DQA1 and -DQB1. It is separated from these genes by a recombination hotspot, and the association is not affected by conditioning on genotypes at DRB1, DQA1 and DQB1. Hence rs9277535 represents an independent MS-susceptibility locus of genome-wide significance. It is correlated with the HLA-DPB1*03:01 allele, which has been implicated previously in MS in smaller studies. Further genotyping in large datasets is required to confirm and resolve this association

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (4th edition)1.

In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field