34 research outputs found

    The Importance of Partnerships in State Financial Aid Research

    Get PDF
    In this essay, we explore the importance of state financial aid programs for both states and the students they serve. Effective state financial aid policy benefits from rigorous research that engages partners from a variety of roles, such as state agencies, legislative staff, and intermediary organizations. It also benefits from the engagement of financial aid professionals. This essay supports the key role played by each of these stakeholders in the execution and dissemination of research projects related to state aid programs

    Panel IV Discussion: The Future of 1st Amendment Protections: Examining the Use of Brutality on those Fighting Against Violence

    Get PDF
    The 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”. 35 Texas Constitution, Article I, Section 27, states, “The citizens shall have the right, in a peaceable manner, to assemble together for their common good.’’ What constitutes peaceful protest and limitations on such speech has been questioned for decades. Law enforcement agencies have, over the years, used various means of restricting free speech and peaceful assembly. Recall, during the civil rights movement of the 1960s, snarling dogs and high-powered water hoses were used in addition to other brutal physical attacks and excessive use of force on adults and children alike. This presentation examined current jurisprudence surrounding these issues. It questions what the future of the First Amendment right to protest does and should looks like while affirming the need to defend this critical right in protecting democracy. It further demonstrates the need to expand the constitutional protection for peaceful protestors as it relates to racial and social justice

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions 1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process 2. In April 2020, an influential paper 3 proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization

    Post-COVID-19 illness trajectory: a multisystem investigation [Pre-print]

    Get PDF
    Background: The pathophysiology and trajectory of multiorgan involvement in post-COVID-19 syndrome is uncertain. Methods: A prospective, multicenter, longitudinal, cohort study involving post-COVID-19 patients enrolled in-hospital or early post-discharge (visit 1) and re-evaluated 28-60 days post-discharge (visit 2). Multisystem investigations included chest computed tomography with pulmonary and coronary angiography, cardiovascular and renal magnetic resonance imaging, digital electrocardiography, and multisystem biomarkers. The primary outcome was the adjudicated likelihood of myocarditis. Results: 161 patients (mean age 55 years, 43% female) and 27 controls with similar age, sex, ethnicity, and vascular risk factors were enrolled from 22 May 2020 to 2 July 2021 and had a primary outcome evaluation. Compared to controls, at 28-60 days post-discharge, patients with COVID-19 had persisting evidence of cardio-renal involvement, systemic inflammation, and hemostasis pathway activation. Myocarditis was adjudicated as being not likely (n=17; 10%), unlikely (n=56; 35%), probable (n=67; 42%) or very likely (n=21; 13%). Acute kidney injury (odds ratio, 95% confidence interval: 3.40 (1.13, 11.84); p=0.038) and low hemoglobin A1c (0.26 (0.07, 0.87); p=0.035) were multivariable associates of adjudicated myocarditis. During convalescence, compared to controls, COVID-19 was associated with worse health-related quality of life (EQ5D-5L) (p<0.001), illness perception (p<0.001), anxiety and depression (p<0.001), physical activity (p<0.001) and predicted maximal oxygen utilization (ml/kg/min) (p<0.001). These measures were associated with adjudicated myocarditis. Conclusions: The illness trajectory of COVID-19 includes persisting cardio-renal inflammation, lung damage and hemostasis activation. Adjudicated myocarditis occurred in one in eight hospitalized patients and was associated with impairments in health status, physical and psychological wellbeing during community convalescence. Public registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT04403607

    Socioeconomic deprivation and illness trajectory in the Scottish population after COVID-19 hospitalization

    Get PDF
    Background The associations between deprivation and illness trajectory after hospitalisation for coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) are uncertain. Methods A prospective, multicentre cohort study was conducted on post-COVID-19 patients, enrolled either in-hospital or shortly post-discharge. Two evaluations were carried out: an initial assessment and a follow-up at 28–60 days post-discharge. The study encompassed research blood tests, patient-reported outcome measures, and multisystem imaging (including chest computed tomography (CT) with pulmonary and coronary angiography, cardiovascular and renal magnetic resonance imaging). Primary and secondary outcomes were analysed in relation to socioeconomic status, using the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation (SIMD). The EQ-5D-5L, Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), Patient Health Questionnaire-4 (PHQ-4) for Anxiety and Depression, and the Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) were used to assess health status. Results Of the 252 enrolled patients (mean age 55.0 ± 12.0 years; 40% female; 23% with diabetes), deprivation status was linked with increased BMI and diabetes prevalence. 186 (74%) returned for the follow-up. Within this group, findings indicated associations between deprivation and lung abnormalities (p = 0.0085), coronary artery disease (p = 0.0128), and renal inflammation (p = 0.0421). Furthermore, patients with higher deprivation exhibited worse scores in health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, p = 0.0084), illness perception (BIPQ, p = 0.0004), anxiety and depression levels (PHQ-4, p = 0.0038), and diminished physical activity (DASI, p = 0.002). At the 3-month mark, those with greater deprivation showed a higher frequency of referrals to secondary care due to ongoing COVID-19 symptoms (p = 0.0438). However, clinical outcomes were not influenced by deprivation. Conclusions In a post-hospital COVID-19 population, socioeconomic deprivation was associated with impaired health status and secondary care episodes. Deprivation influences illness trajectory after COVID-19

    A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

    Get PDF
    DATA AVAILABILITY : All data and study material are provided either in the Supplementary information or through the two online repositories (OSF and Tableau Public, both accessible via https://psyarxiv.com/58udn). No code was used for analyses in this work.Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process. In April 2020, an influential paper proposed 19 policy recommendations (‘claims’) detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms ‘physical distancing’ and ‘social distancing’. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.The National Science Foundation; Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education); Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (Brazilian Federal Agency for the Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education); the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation | Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (National Council for Scientific and Technological Development); National Science Foundation grants; the European Research Council; the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.http://www.nature.com/naturehj2024Gordon Institute of Business Science (GIBS)Non

    The evolution of lung cancer and impact of subclonal selection in TRACERx

    Get PDF
    Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-associated mortality worldwide. Here we analysed 1,644 tumour regions sampled at surgery or during follow-up from the first 421 patients with non-small cell lung cancer prospectively enrolled into the TRACERx study. This project aims to decipher lung cancer evolution and address the primary study endpoint: determining the relationship between intratumour heterogeneity and clinical outcome. In lung adenocarcinoma, mutations in 22 out of 40 common cancer genes were under significant subclonal selection, including classical tumour initiators such as TP53 and KRAS. We defined evolutionary dependencies between drivers, mutational processes and whole genome doubling (WGD) events. Despite patients having a history of smoking, 8% of lung adenocarcinomas lacked evidence of tobacco-induced mutagenesis. These tumours also had similar detection rates for EGFR mutations and for RET, ROS1, ALK and MET oncogenic isoforms compared with tumours in never-smokers, which suggests that they have a similar aetiology and pathogenesis. Large subclonal expansions were associated with positive subclonal selection. Patients with tumours harbouring recent subclonal expansions, on the terminus of a phylogenetic branch, had significantly shorter disease-free survival. Subclonal WGD was detected in 19% of tumours, and 10% of tumours harboured multiple subclonal WGDs in parallel. Subclonal, but not truncal, WGD was associated with shorter disease-free survival. Copy number heterogeneity was associated with extrathoracic relapse within 1 year after surgery. These data demonstrate the importance of clonal expansion, WGD and copy number instability in determining the timing and patterns of relapse in non-small cell lung cancer and provide a comprehensive clinical cancer evolutionary data resource

    The evolution of non-small cell lung cancer metastases in TRACERx

    Get PDF
    Metastatic disease is responsible for the majority of cancer-related deaths. We report the longitudinal evolutionary analysis of 126 non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tumours from 421 prospectively recruited patients in TRACERx who developed metastatic disease, compared with a control cohort of 144 non-metastatic tumours. In 25% of cases, metastases diverged early, before the last clonal sweep in the primary tumour, and early divergence was enriched for patients who were smokers at the time of initial diagnosis. Simulations suggested that early metastatic divergence more frequently occurred at smaller tumour diameters (less than 8 mm). Single-region primary tumour sampling resulted in 83% of late divergence cases being misclassified as early, highlighting the importance of extensive primary tumour sampling. Polyclonal dissemination, which was associated with extrathoracic disease recurrence, was found in 32% of cases. Primary lymph node disease contributed to metastatic relapse in less than 20% of cases, representing a hallmark of metastatic potential rather than a route to subsequent recurrences/disease progression. Metastasis-seeding subclones exhibited subclonal expansions within primary tumours, probably reflecting positive selection. Our findings highlight the importance of selection in metastatic clone evolution within untreated primary tumours, the distinction between monoclonal versus polyclonal seeding in dictating site of recurrence, the limitations of current radiological screening approaches for early diverging tumours and the need to develop strategies to target metastasis-seeding subclones before relapse
    corecore