Avaliação de preditores do óbito neonatal em uma série histórica de nascidos vivos no Nordeste brasileiro An evaluation of the predictors of neonatal death in a time series of live births in the Northeast Region of Brazil

OBJETIVOS: avaliar tendência dos preditores do óbito neonatal entre os nascidos vivos e qualidade do preenchimento do Sistema de Informações para Nascidos Vivos (Sinasc) institucional. MÉTODOS: série histórica do Sinasc do Instituto de Medicina Integral Prof. Fernando Figueira (1995-2006) em Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. Foram avaliadas: completitude de preenchimento das variáveis e tendência dos indicadores de risco para mortalidade infantil (baixo peso ao nascer; anóxia; prematuridade; cesariana; ausência de pré-natal; mãe adolescente; analfabetismo e nenhum filho nascido vivo e morto). Significância estatística para teste t de Student foi de 5% em um modelo de regressão linear. RESULTADOS: 58.689 nascidos vivos com contínuo incremento a partir de 2002; baixo peso ao nascer, 22,8%; Apgar <7 1º minuto 15,3%; prematuros 22,4%; parto cesáreo 38,2%; mães adolescentes 27,2%; analfabetas 2,7% e 89% sem filho nascido morto. Prevaleceu 1% de variáveis ignoradas. Tendência de aumento (p<0,05): Apgar no 1º minuto, baixo peso ao nascer, prematuridade e parto cesáreo; tendência de declínio(p<0,05): nenhuma consulta de pré-natal, mães adolescentes, analfabetismo e nenhum filho nascido morto. CONCLUSÕES: valores progressivos dos preditores do óbito infantil sugerem problemas na qualidade do pré-natal. Predomínio de 1% de informação ignorada, excelente qualidade de preenchimento do Sinasc institucional. Avaliação rotineira dos nascimentos promove agilidade da informação e intervenções oportunas na prevenção dos óbitos neonatais no nível local.<br>OBJECTVES: to evaluate predictors of neonatal death among live births and the quality of use of the institutional Live Birth Information System register (Sinasc). METHODS: a time serie based on data from the Sinasc of the Instituto de Medicina Integral Prof. Fernando Figueira (1995-2006) in the city Recife, Pernambuco, Brazil. The following were evaluated: the completeness of the forms and the tendency regarding risk factors for infant mortality (low birth weight; anoxia; premature birth; caesarian birth; lack of prenatal care; adolescent pregnancy; illiteracy; and having had no live or still born child). Statistical significance was tested using Student's t test with p<0.05 in a linear regression model. RESULTS: 58,689 live births occurred with a continued rise from 2002 onwards; low birth weight, 22.8%; Apgar <7 1º minute 15.3%; premature 22.4%; Caesarian birth 38,2%; adolescent mothers 27.2%; illiteracy 2.7% and 89% with no live or still born child. One percent of variables were not recorded. The following variables increased (p<0.05): Apgar in the 1st minute, low birth weight, premature birth and caesarian birth; and the following decreased (p<0,05): no pre-natal consultation, adolescent pregnancy, illiteracy and having had no live or still born child. CONCLUSIONS: increasing percentages for the predictors of infant mortality suggest problems with the quality of pre-natal care. With only 1% of information overlooked, the quality of the keeping of SINASC records at the institution was found to be excellent. Routine evaluation of births allows for agility of information and appropriate intervention to prevent neonatal mortality at local level

Brazilian Flora 2020: Leveraging the power of a collaborative scientific network

International audienceThe shortage of reliable primary taxonomic data limits the description of biological taxa and the understanding of biodiversity patterns and processes, complicating biogeographical, ecological, and evolutionary studies. This deficit creates a significant taxonomic impediment to biodiversity research and conservation planning. The taxonomic impediment and the biodiversity crisis are widely recognized, highlighting the urgent need for reliable taxonomic data. Over the past decade, numerous countries worldwide have devoted considerable effort to Target 1 of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC), which called for the preparation of a working list of all known plant species by 2010 and an online world Flora by 2020. Brazil is a megadiverse country, home to more of the world's known plant species than any other country. Despite that, Flora Brasiliensis, concluded in 1906, was the last comprehensive treatment of the Brazilian flora. The lack of accurate estimates of the number of species of algae, fungi, and plants occurring in Brazil contributes to the prevailing taxonomic impediment and delays progress towards the GSPC targets. Over the past 12 years, a legion of taxonomists motivated to meet Target 1 of the GSPC, worked together to gather and integrate knowledge on the algal, plant, and fungal diversity of Brazil. Overall, a team of about 980 taxonomists joined efforts in a highly collaborative project that used cybertaxonomy to prepare an updated Flora of Brazil, showing the power of scientific collaboration to reach ambitious goals. This paper presents an overview of the Brazilian Flora 2020 and provides taxonomic and spatial updates on the algae, fungi, and plants found in one of the world's most biodiverse countries. We further identify collection gaps and summarize future goals that extend beyond 2020. Our results show that Brazil is home to 46,975 native species of algae, fungi, and plants, of which 19,669 are endemic to the country. The data compiled to date suggests that the Atlantic Rainforest might be the most diverse Brazilian domain for all plant groups except gymnosperms, which are most diverse in the Amazon. However, scientific knowledge of Brazilian diversity is still unequally distributed, with the Atlantic Rainforest and the Cerrado being the most intensively sampled and studied biomes in the country. In times of “scientific reductionism”, with botanical and mycological sciences suffering pervasive depreciation in recent decades, the first online Flora of Brazil 2020 significantly enhanced the quality and quantity of taxonomic data available for algae, fungi, and plants from Brazil. This project also made all the information freely available online, providing a firm foundation for future research and for the management, conservation, and sustainable use of the Brazilian funga and flora

Health-status outcomes with invasive or conservative care in coronary disease

BACKGROUND In the ISCHEMIA trial, an invasive strategy with angiographic assessment and revascularization did not reduce clinical events among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and moderate or severe ischemia. A secondary objective of the trial was to assess angina-related health status among these patients. METHODS We assessed angina-related symptoms, function, and quality of life with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) at randomization, at months 1.5, 3, and 6, and every 6 months thereafter in participants who had been randomly assigned to an invasive treatment strategy (2295 participants) or a conservative strategy (2322). Mixed-effects cumulative probability models within a Bayesian framework were used to estimate differences between the treatment groups. The primary outcome of this health-status analysis was the SAQ summary score (scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status). All analyses were performed in the overall population and according to baseline angina frequency. RESULTS At baseline, 35% of patients reported having no angina in the previous month. SAQ summary scores increased in both treatment groups, with increases at 3, 12, and 36 months that were 4.1 points (95% credible interval, 3.2 to 5.0), 4.2 points (95% credible interval, 3.3 to 5.1), and 2.9 points (95% credible interval, 2.2 to 3.7) higher with the invasive strategy than with the conservative strategy. Differences were larger among participants who had more frequent angina at baseline (8.5 vs. 0.1 points at 3 months and 5.3 vs. 1.2 points at 36 months among participants with daily or weekly angina as compared with no angina). CONCLUSIONS In the overall trial population with moderate or severe ischemia, which included 35% of participants without angina at baseline, patients randomly assigned to the invasive strategy had greater improvement in angina-related health status than those assigned to the conservative strategy. The modest mean differences favoring the invasive strategy in the overall group reflected minimal differences among asymptomatic patients and larger differences among patients who had had angina at baseline

Initial invasive or conservative strategy for stable coronary disease

BACKGROUND Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, whether clinical outcomes are better in those who receive an invasive intervention plus medical therapy than in those who receive medical therapy alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia to an initial invasive strategy (angiography and revascularization when feasible) and medical therapy or to an initial conservative strategy of medical therapy alone and angiography if medical therapy failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. A key secondary outcome was death from cardiovascular causes or myocardial infarction. RESULTS Over a median of 3.2 years, 318 primary outcome events occurred in the invasive-strategy group and 352 occurred in the conservative-strategy group. At 6 months, the cumulative event rate was 5.3% in the invasive-strategy group and 3.4% in the conservative-strategy group (difference, 1.9 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 3.0); at 5 years, the cumulative event rate was 16.4% and 18.2%, respectively (difference, 121.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 124.7 to 1.0). Results were similar with respect to the key secondary outcome. The incidence of the primary outcome was sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction; a secondary analysis yielded more procedural myocardial infarctions of uncertain clinical importance. There were 145 deaths in the invasive-strategy group and 144 deaths in the conservative-strategy group (hazard ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.32). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with stable coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death from any cause over a median of 3.2 years. The trial findings were sensitive to the definition of myocardial infarction that was used