Cerebrospinal Fluid NLRP3 is Increased After Severe Traumatic Brain Injury in Infants and Children

Background: Inflammasome-mediated neuroinflammation may cause secondary injury following traumatic brain injury (TBI) in children. The pattern recognition receptors NACHT domain-, Leucine-rich repeat-, and PYD-containing Protein 1 (NLRP1) and NLRP3 are essential components of their respective inflammasome complexes. We sought to investigate whether NLRP1 and/or NLRP3 abundance is altered in children with severe TBI. Methods: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from children (n = 34) with severe TBI (Glasgow coma scale score [GCS] ≤8) who had externalized ventricular drains (EVD) placed for routine care was evaluated for NLRP1 and NLRP3 at 0-24, 25-48, 49-72, and >72 h post-TBI and was compared to infection-free controls that underwent lumbar puncture to rule out CNS infection (n = 8). Patient age, sex, initial GCS, mechanism of injury, treatment with therapeutic hypothermia, and 6-month Glasgow outcome score were collected. Results: CSF NLRP1 was undetectable in controls and detected in 2 TBI patients at only 4 (15.50 [3.65-25.71] vs. 3.04 [1.52-8.87] ng/mL, respectively; p = 0.048). Controlling for initial GCS in multivariate analysis, peak NLRP3 >6.63 ng/mL was independently associated with poor outcome at 6 months. Conclusions: In the first report of NLRP1 and NLRP3 in childhood neurotrauma, we found that CSF NLRP3 is elevated in children with severe TBI and independently associated with younger age and poor outcome. Future studies correlating NLRP3 with other markers of inflammation and response to therapy are warranted

Prediction models for diagnosis and prognosis of covid-19: : systematic review and critical appraisal

Readers’ note This article is a living systematic review that will be updated to reflect emerging evidence. Updates may occur for up to two years from the date of original publication. This version is update 3 of the original article published on 7 April 2020 (BMJ 2020;369:m1328). Previous updates can be found as data supplements (https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1328/related#datasupp). When citing this paper please consider adding the update number and date of access for clarity. Funding: LW, BVC, LH, and MDV acknowledge specific funding for this work from Internal Funds KU Leuven, KOOR, and the COVID-19 Fund. LW is a postdoctoral fellow of Research Foundation-Flanders (FWO) and receives support from ZonMw (grant 10430012010001). BVC received support from FWO (grant G0B4716N) and Internal Funds KU Leuven (grant C24/15/037). TPAD acknowledges financial support from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development (grant 91617050). VMTdJ was supported by the European Union Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme under ReCoDID grant agreement 825746. KGMM and JAAD acknowledge financial support from Cochrane Collaboration (SMF 2018). KIES is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. GSC was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford, and Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). JM was supported by the Cancer Research UK (programme grant C49297/A27294). PD was supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Oxford. MOH is supported by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the United States National Institutes of Health (grant R00 HL141678). ICCvDH and BCTvB received funding from Euregio Meuse-Rhine (grant Covid Data Platform (coDaP) interref EMR187). The funders played no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or reporting.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Neuromatch Academy: a 3-week, online summer school in computational neuroscience

Neuromatch Academy (https://academy.neuromatch.io; (van Viegen et al., 2021)) was designed as an online summer school to cover the basics of computational neuroscience in three weeks. The materials cover dominant and emerging computational neuroscience tools, how they complement one another, and specifically focus on how they can help us to better understand how the brain functions. An original component of the materials is its focus on modeling choices, i.e. how do we choose the right approach, how do we build models, and how can we evaluate models to determine if they provide real (meaningful) insight. This meta-modeling component of the instructional materials asks what questions can be answered by different techniques, and how to apply them meaningfully to get insight about brain function

CMB-S4: Forecasting Constraints on Primordial Gravitational Waves

CMB-S4---the next-generation ground-based cosmic microwave background (CMB) experiment---is set to significantly advance the sensitivity of CMB measurements and enhance our understanding of the origin and evolution of the Universe, from the highest energies at the dawn of time through the growth of structure to the present day. Among the science cases pursued with CMB-S4, the quest for detecting primordial gravitational waves is a central driver of the experimental design. This work details the development of a forecasting framework that includes a power-spectrum-based semi-analytic projection tool, targeted explicitly towards optimizing constraints on the tensor-to-scalar ratio, $r$, in the presence of Galactic foregrounds and gravitational lensing of the CMB. This framework is unique in its direct use of information from the achieved performance of current Stage 2--3 CMB experiments to robustly forecast the science reach of upcoming CMB-polarization endeavors. The methodology allows for rapid iteration over experimental configurations and offers a flexible way to optimize the design of future experiments given a desired scientific goal. To form a closed-loop process, we couple this semi-analytic tool with map-based validation studies, which allow for the injection of additional complexity and verification of our forecasts with several independent analysis methods. We document multiple rounds of forecasts for CMB-S4 using this process and the resulting establishment of the current reference design of the primordial gravitational-wave component of the Stage-4 experiment, optimized to achieve our science goals of detecting primordial gravitational waves for $r > 0.003$ at greater than $5\sigma$, or, in the absence of a detection, of reaching an upper limit of $r < 0.001$ at $95\%$ CL.Comment: 24 pages, 8 figures, 9 tables, submitted to ApJ. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1907.0447

Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div