Experiencias acerca del Taller con Docentes de Nivel Medio: "Estrategias de Acercamiento a las Carreras de Educación Superior"

El presente trabajo tiene como propósito compartir la experiencia de acompañamiento a docentes de la materia Formación para la Vida y el Trabajo, de 5º y 6º año de la Escuela Media, y gabinetistas y/o profesores que en sus actividades y/o en su materia orientan a los alumnos en la elección de proyectos educativos. Esta actividad se lleva a cabo como parte de las políticas de Inclusión Social del Departamento de Orientación Vocacional, con la finalidad de potenciar y fortalecer los recursos de apoyo y sostenimiento para aquellos sectores con más dificultades de acceder a las posibilidades educativas de Nivel Superior. Con este propósito se estructuró la actividad en cuatro encuentros presenciales en el año y el acompañamiento permanente a los docentes vía mail, con los objetivos de multiplicar las tareas de orientación a los jóvenes a través de docentes de nivel medio; Generar un espacio de acompañamiento e intercambio para los docentes de nivel medio de las escuelas públicas y ampliar el acceso a la información de la Educación Superior a jóvenes de sectores vulnerables. Se realizó un estudio descriptivo y un análisis de datos cualitativo, con fines no métricos, de análisis de los datos proporcionados por la población. La población son docentes y gabinetistas de nivel medio de la Provincia de Córdoba, la muestra seleccionada son 37 docentes de la materia Formación para la Vida y el Trabajo, de 5º y 6º año de la escuela media públicas, 17 de capital y 20 del interior de la Provincia de Córdoba. El instrumento de recolección de datos es una encuesta semiestructurada, que realizaron los docentes al momento de la inscripción, también se utilizo información de los registros llevados a cabo durante el taller. Las necesidades detectadas en los alumnos en relación al proyecto se las agrupo en categorías: Motivación, Proyecto, Trabajo, Información, Vida Universitaria. En relación a la materia Formación para la Vida y el Trabajo, los docentes consideran como positivo el espacio como acompañamiento gradual y sistemático a los jóvenes en su proyecto futuro y consideran que la dificultad es la falta de conocimiento y herramientas para trabajar los contenidos propuestos en el espacio. El taller se encuentra actualmente en desarrollo por lo que se presentan los avances del mismo.Fil: Clark, Carmen Gloria. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Psicología. Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina.Fil: Nanzer, Ana Carolina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Psicología; Argentina.Otras Psicologí

Inclusión Social de Jóvenes Socialmente Vulnerables en relación al Estudio y el Trabajo

La investigación busca conocer las necesidades y dificultades de los jóvenes de nivel educativo medio perteneciente a sectores socialmente vulnerables en relación a sus proyectos vocacionales ocupacionales. El interés surge en base a que en la realidad institucional de la Universidad, se observa escasa demanda de orientación vocacional de alumnos pertenecientes a estas instituciones educativas, a esto se suma la importancia que el mismo está dirigido a los  “jóvenes”, población en riesgo por ser la franja en que más frecuentemente se manifiestan sintomáticamente las adversidades sociales, como son la violencia, las adicciones, conductas delictivas, deserción escolar, etc. Partimos de las preguntas acerca de ¿Cuál es la realidad de estos jóvenes? ¿Cuáles son sus proyectos personales? ¿Cuáles son sus expectativas, necesidades  y dificultades? Los jóvenes del estudio pertenecen a sectores socialmente vulnerables, entendiendo esto como sectores menos favorecidos desde el plano económico, social que incide y atraviesa la subjetividad de los jóvenes complejizando el desarrollo de los proyectos. Los objetivos son identificar características demográficas de la población, analizar las expectativas en relación al proyecto vocacional ocupacional, detectar necesidades, inferir obstáculos y promover dispositivos de intervención. La metodología utilizada  es un estudio descriptivo, la población se compone de  alumnos escolarizados de 5º y 6º año de Instituciones del Nivel Medio Públicas de la Ciudad de Córdoba. La muestra seleccionada es de tipo accidental y está compuesta por 138 jóvenes  entre  17 y  22 años de edad. La técnica de recolección de datos  es un cuestionario semi-estructurado. Se realizó un análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo de los mismos.A través de esta investigación se logro sistematizar y profundizar datos relevantes acerca de la problemática de estos jóvenes  a los fines  de  re-pensar  estrategias de intervención y prevención  que permitan acompañarlos en sus transiciones. Contribuyendo de esta manera a la inclusión social y a la formación integral de la juventud

Orientar y acompañar a jóvenes en la travesía actual; virtualidad y nuevos desafíos

En el escenario actual, producto de la virtualidad disruptiva, desde el Servicio de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional abierto a la Comunidad, nos vimos interpelados a repensar nuestras intervenciones y dispositivos para acompañar la transición a los estudios de nivel superior de los y las estudiantes de educación secundaria que solicitaron guía y apoyo ya sea personalmente, como a través de sus docentes. Este trabajo, de tipo descriptivo, se propone reflexionar sobre la experiencia de intervención de orientación vocacional en el contexto actual de virtualidad, en el marco del Servicio de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional. Se analizan cuestionarios creados ad hoc, consultas recibidas y se recupera las observaciones de charlas y talleres. Entre los resultados identificamos, que posibilitar procesos de reflexión e intercambio con pares, a través de encuentros virtuales, resultaron continentes para los y las jóvenes y adolescentes, quienes producto del ASPO, fueron interpelados/as a construir sus itinerarios vitales, al tiempo que debieron reconfigurar sus formas de vinculación, de participación y afiliación institucional en su último año de educación formal obligatoria, en un contexto de permanente y creciente incertidumbre. A su vez, los factores de orden socio-económico y la falta de políticas públicas, pusieron en tensión el acceso a gran parte de las propuestas mediadas por las TICs y conectividad, elementos que se tornan indispensables para formar parte de este nuevo escenario virtual. Los avances que se comparten, forman parte de la experiencia y análisis realizado hasta el momento, es una invitación para debatir acerca de la participación de orientadores/as en el escenario actual y reflexionar sobre las propuestas de intervención y abordaje que se venían llevando a cabo desde hace algún tiempo a esta parte.publishedVersionFil: Hernández, Ricardo Matías. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología, Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina.Fil: Zurita, Vanina Elizabeth. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología, Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina.Fil: Stabile, Carmen Alicia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología, Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina.Fil: Clark, Carmen Gloria. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología, Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina.Fil: Oviedo, Marisabel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Facultad de Psicología, Cátedra de Orientación Vocacional y Ocupacional; Argentina

Inclusión Social

La Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles (SAE) de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba se propone en este proyecto brindar las herramientas necesarias para garantizar a la sociedad en general el acceso a la educación superior. Mediante los distintos ejes del proyecto, la SAE pretende acompañar a quienes estudian a lo largo de su vida universitaria, y mejorar los índices de ingreso, permanencia y egreso de la UNC.Fil: González, Milagros. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Clark, Carmen Gloria. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Funes, Francisco Daniel . Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: De Peralta, Sergio Porcel. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Martínez, Rosa Marcela. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Archilla, Victoria Candela. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Hernández, Ricardo Matías . Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Laumann, Camila. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Rosso, Maira. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Zurita, Vanina Elizabeth. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina.Fil: Stabile, Carmen Alicia. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Secretaría de Asuntos Estudiantiles, Argentina

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707

Robust estimation of bacterial cell count from optical density

Optical density (OD) is widely used to estimate the density of cells in liquid culture, but cannot be compared between instruments without a standardized calibration protocol and is challenging to relate to actual cell count. We address this with an interlaboratory study comparing three simple, low-cost, and highly accessible OD calibration protocols across 244 laboratories, applied to eight strains of constitutive GFP-expressing E. coli. Based on our results, we recommend calibrating OD to estimated cell count using serial dilution of silica microspheres, which produces highly precise calibration (95.5% of residuals <1.2-fold), is easily assessed for quality control, also assesses instrument effective linear range, and can be combined with fluorescence calibration to obtain units of Molecules of Equivalent Fluorescein (MEFL) per cell, allowing direct comparison and data fusion with flow cytometry measurements: in our study, fluorescence per cell measurements showed only a 1.07-fold mean difference between plate reader and flow cytometry data

GWAS meta-analysis of over 29,000 people with epilepsy identifies 26 risk loci and subtype-specific genetic architecture

Epilepsy is a highly heritable disorder affecting over 50 million people worldwide, of which about one-third are resistant to current treatments. Here we report a multi-ancestry genome-wide association study including 29,944 cases, stratified into three broad categories and seven subtypes of epilepsy, and 52,538 controls. We identify 26 genome-wide significant loci, 19 of which are specific to genetic generalized epilepsy (GGE). We implicate 29 likely causal genes underlying these 26 loci. SNP-based heritability analyses show that common variants explain between 39.6% and 90% of genetic risk for GGE and its subtypes. Subtype analysis revealed markedly different genetic architectures between focal and generalized epilepsies. Gene-set analyses of GGE signals implicate synaptic processes in both excitatory and inhibitory neurons in the brain. Prioritized candidate genes overlap with monogenic epilepsy genes and with targets of current antiseizure medications. Finally, we leverage our results to identify alternate drugs with predicted efficacy if repurposed for epilepsy treatment

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

COVID-19 symptoms at hospital admission vary with age and sex: results from the ISARIC prospective multinational observational study

Background: The ISARIC prospective multinational observational study is the largest cohort of hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We present relationships of age, sex, and nationality to presenting symptoms. Methods: International, prospective observational study of 60 109 hospitalized symptomatic patients with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 recruited from 43 countries between 30 January and 3 August 2020. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate relationships of age and sex to published COVID-19 case definitions and the most commonly reported symptoms. Results: ‘Typical’ symptoms of fever (69%), cough (68%) and shortness of breath (66%) were the most commonly reported. 92% of patients experienced at least one of these. Prevalence of typical symptoms was greatest in 30- to 60-year-olds (respectively 80, 79, 69%; at least one 95%). They were reported less frequently in children (≤ 18 years: 69, 48, 23; 85%), older adults (≥ 70 years: 61, 62, 65; 90%), and women (66, 66, 64; 90%; vs. men 71, 70, 67; 93%, each P < 0.001). The most common atypical presentations under 60 years of age were nausea and vomiting and abdominal pain, and over 60 years was confusion. Regression models showed significant differences in symptoms with sex, age and country. Interpretation: This international collaboration has allowed us to report reliable symptom data from the largest cohort of patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Adults over 60 and children admitted to hospital with COVID-19 are less likely to present with typical symptoms. Nausea and vomiting are common atypical presentations under 30 years. Confusion is a frequent atypical presentation of COVID-19 in adults over 60 years. Women are less likely to experience typical symptoms than men