784 research outputs found

    Sources of Nutrition Information in Recreational Ultra-marathon Runners: A Mixed Methods Analysis

    Get PDF
    Ultra-marathon events (i.e., .42.2-km) continue to grow in popularity; however, little is known regarding the sources of nutrition information which inform their beliefs and habits. The objective of this study was to characterize the acquisition of sport-specific nutrition information among ultra-endurance athletes using a mixed methods design. Qualitative data were collected through focus groups and analyzed using thematic analysis. Three primary higher order themes were identified: Optimal Diet for Ultra-Endurance Athletes, Common Sources of Information, and Barriers to Scientific Information. Then, a self-report inventory (Sources of Nutrition Information-SONI questionnaire) was developed to assess common sources of nutrition information and characterize their beliefs about those sources. Likert-type questions were used, and primary sources were scored out of 3, sub-questions out of 5. Differences between sources were assessed using RM-ANOVA. Participants (N = 224) accessed, responded to, and submitted the survey via a secure, study-specific web-based link. Peer reviewed literature was reported as the most frequently used (mean score = 1.64, p \u3c 0.001), credible (3.02, p \u3c 0.001), and interesting (2.62, p \u3c 0.002). Social media was the most accessible (2.81, p \u3c 0.001), but the least credible (1.87, p \u3c 0.001). While social media was perceived less credible than other sources, its accessibility could make it a promising tool to provide evidence-based nutrition information to this population

    Increased Physical Activity and Reduced Pain with Spinal Cord Stimulation: a 12-Month Study

    Get PDF
    International Journal of Exercise Science 13(3): 1583-1594, 2020. The purpose of this study was to assess changes in pain and physical activity after replacing a traditional spinal cord stimulation (SCS) implantable pulse generator with a next generation SCS in patients for whom traditional SCS was no longer providing adequate relief of low back and/or leg pain. Subjects (n = 19) who reported that they were no longer receiving adequate relief from traditional SCS were implanted with a next generation SCS. Eighteen additional patients who were receiving relief from traditional SCS were also followed as a control. Both groups (next generation, traditional) were assessed for low-back and limb pain (visual analog scale) and daily physical activity (wearable accelerometer) at baseline and three, six, nine and 12 months following the SCS implant. Relative to baseline, next generation SCS subjects exhibited reductions (p ≤ 0.05 for all) in low-back pain (average reduction of 22%) at every time point, in leg pain (average reduction of 23%) at every time point except six months and increased physical activity (average increase of 57%) at three, six and nine months. As expected, there were no changes in pain or physical activity in the traditional SCS subjects (p ≥ 0.1). In conclusion, pain decreased, and physical activity increased in patients receiving a next generation SCS. Physical activity may serve as an objectively measured marker of pain

    on Performance

    Get PDF
    Abstract Ultra-marathons (footraces greater than 42.2 km) are increasing in popularity, however little is known about the habitual dietary intake of these runners. The aim of this investigation was to empirically describe the habitual training diet of ultra-marathon runners and determine if macronutrient intake was associated with 161-km race performance. To assess habitual diet, runners recruited from five 161-km ultra-marathons across the U.S. (N = 47) completed a diet and training questionnaire, and a web-based 24-hour dietary recall on three separate days within 1-4 weeks prior to a 161-km race. Multiple linear regression was used to predict finish time with covariates carbohydrate, fat and protein, expressed relative to body weight (g·kg -1 ) and total intake (% of diet). To determine differences in macronutrient intake between finishers and non-finishers, two-sample t-tests were used. Dietary intake was varied among participants; mean carbohydrate intake (5.19±2.62 g·kg ) predicted finish time (R 2 = 0.232, P =0.036), however fat was the only significant covariate (t = -2.90, P =0.007). Relative macronutrient intake (% of diet) did not predict finish time (R 2 =0.145, P =0.155). No significant differences were found in macronutrient intake between finishers (n=36) and non-finishers (n=11). Habitual dietary fat intake in ultra-marathon runners was a significant predictor of 161-km finish time, regardless of carbohydrate or protein intake. Further investigation is warranted to determine the optimal nutrient intake in ultra-marathon runners to maximize performance

    Machine Learning Developments in ROOT

    Get PDF
    ROOT is a software framework for large-scale data analysis that provides basic and advanced statistical methods used by high-energy physics experiments. It includes machine learning tools from the ROOT-integrated Toolkit for Multivariate Analysis (TMVA). We present several recent developments in TMVA, including a new modular design, new algorithms for pre-processing, cross-validation, hyperparameter-tuning, deep-learning and interfaces to other machine-learning software packages. TMVA is additionally integrated with Jupyter, making it accessible with a browser

    Novel three-day, community-based, nonpharmacological group intervention for chronic musculoskeletal pain (COPERS): a randomised clinical trial

    Get PDF
    Background Chronic musculoskeletal pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. The effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for chronic pain is often limited, and there is growing concern about the adverse effects of these treatments, including opioid dependence. Nonpharmacological approaches to chronic pain may be an attractive alternative or adjunctive treatment. We describe the effectiveness of a novel, theoretically based group pain management support intervention for chronic musculoskeletal pain. Methods and Findings We conducted a multi-centre, pragmatic, randomised, controlled effectiveness and cost-effectiveness (cost–utility) trial across 27 general practices and community musculoskeletal services in the UK. We recruited 703 adults with musculoskeletal pain of at least 3 mo duration between August 1, 2011, and July 31, 2012, and randomised participants 1.33:1 to intervention (403) or control (300). Intervention participants were offered a participative group intervention (COPERS) delivered over three alternate days with a follow-up session at 2 wk. The intervention introduced cognitive behavioural approaches and was designed to promote self-efficacy to manage chronic pain. Controls received usual care and a relaxation CD. The primary outcome was pain-related disability at 12 mo (Chronic Pain Grade [CPG] disability subscale); secondary outcomes included the CPG disability subscale at 6 mo and the following measured at 6 and 12 mo: anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), pain acceptance (Chronic Pain Acceptance Questionnaire), social integration (Health Education Impact Questionnaire social integration and support subscale), pain-related self-efficacy (Pain Self-Efficacy Questionnaire), pain intensity (CPG pain intensity subscale), the census global health question (2011 census for England and Wales), health utility (EQ-5D-3L), and health care resource use. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle, accounted for clustering by course in the intervention arm, and used multiple imputation for missing or incomplete primary outcome data. The mean age of participants was 59.9 y, with 81% white, 67% female, 23% employed, 85% with pain for at least 3 y, and 23% on strong opioids. Symptoms of depression and anxiety were common (baseline mean HADS scores 7.4 [standard deviation 4.1] and 9.2 [4.6], respectively). Overall, 282 (70%) intervention participants met the predefined intervention adherence criterion. Primary outcome data were obtained from 88% of participants. There was no significant difference between groups in pain-related disability at 6 or 12 mo (12 mo: difference −1.0, intervention versus control, 95% CI −4.9 to 3.0), pain intensity, or the census global health question. Anxiety, depression, pain-related self-efficacy, pain acceptance, and social integration were better in the intervention group at 6 mo; at 12 mo, these differences remained statistically significant only for depression (−0.7, 95% CI −1.2 to −0.2) and social integration (0.8, 95% CI 0.4 to 1.2). Intervention participants received more analgesics than the controls across the 12 mo. The total cost of the course per person was £145 (US214).Thecost–utilityanalysisshowedtheretobeasmallbenefitintermsofquality−adjustedlifeyears(QALYs)(0.0325,95214). The cost–utility analysis showed there to be a small benefit in terms of quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (0.0325, 95% CI −0.0074 to 0.0724), and on the cost side the intervention was a little more expensive than usual care (i.e., £188 [US277], 95% CI −£125 [−US184]to£501[US184] to £501 [US738]), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of £5,786 (US$8,521) per QALY. Limitations include the fact that the intervention was relatively brief and did not include any physical activity components. Conclusions While the COPERS intervention was brief, safe, and inexpensive, with a low attrition rate, it was not effective for reducing pain-related disability over 12 mo (primary outcome). For secondary outcomes, we found sustained benefits on depression and social integration at 6 and 12 mo, but there was no effect on anxiety, pain-related self-efficacy, pain acceptance, pain intensity, or the census global health question at 12 mo. There was some evidence that the intervention may be cost-effective based on a modest difference in QALYs between groups. Trial registration ISRCTN Registry 2442673

    Lifespan extension and the doctrine of double effect

    Get PDF
    Recent developments in biogerontology—the study of the biology of ageing—suggest that it may eventually be possible to intervene in the human ageing process. This, in turn, offers the prospect of significantly postponing the onset of age-related diseases. The biogerontological project, however, has met with strong resistance, especially by deontologists. They consider the act of intervening in the ageing process impermissible on the grounds that it would (most probably) bring about an extended maximum lifespan—a state of affairs that they deem intrinsically bad. In a bid to convince their deontological opponents of the permissibility of this act, proponents of biogerontology invoke an argument which is grounded in the doctrine of double effect. Surprisingly, their argument, which we refer to as the ‘double effect argument’, has gone unnoticed. This article exposes and critically evaluates this ‘double effect argument’. To this end, we first review a series of excerpts from the ethical debate on biogerontology in order to substantiate the presence of double effect reasoning. Next, we attempt to determine the role that the ‘double effect argument’ is meant to fulfil within this debate. Finally, we assess whether the act of intervening in ageing actually can be justified using double effect reasoning

    Proceedings of Patient Reported Outcome Measure’s (PROMs) Conference Oxford 2017: Advances in Patient Reported Outcomes Research

    Get PDF
    A33-Effects of Out-of-Pocket (OOP) Payments and Financial Distress on Quality of Life (QoL) of People with Parkinson’s (PwP) and their Carer
    • …