Explore the vast range of titles available.

In 2002, the National Institutes of Health sponsored a meeting concerning methodological challenges of research in psychosocial interventions in Autism Spectrum Disorders. This paper provides a summary of the presentations and the discussions that occurred during this meeting. Recommendations to federal and private agencies included the need for randomized clinical trials of comprehensive interventions for autism as the highest, but not the sole priority. Ongoing working groups were proposed to address psychosocial interventions with a focus on relevant statistics, standardized documentation and methods of diagnosis, development of outcome measures, establishment of standards in research; and the need for innovative treatment designs, including application of designs from other research areas to the study of interventions in ASD.

Importance Little is known about the risk factors for, and the risk of, developing post–COVID-19 conditions (PCCs) among children. Objectives To estimate the proportion of SARS-CoV-2–positive children with PCCs 90 days after a positive test result, to compare this proportion with SARS-CoV-2–negative children, and to assess factors associated with PCCs. Design, Setting, and Participants This prospective cohort study, conducted in 36 emergency departments (EDs) in 8 countries between March 7, 2020, and January 20, 2021, included 1884 SARS-CoV-2–positive children who completed 90-day follow-up; 1686 of these children were frequency matched by hospitalization status, country, and recruitment date with 1701 SARS-CoV-2–negative controls. Exposure SARS-CoV-2 detected via nucleic acid testing. Main Outcomes and Measures Post–COVID-19 conditions, defined as any persistent, new, or recurrent health problems reported in the 90-day follow-up survey. Results Of 8642 enrolled children, 2368 (27.4%) were SARS-CoV-2 positive, among whom 2365 (99.9%) had index ED visit disposition data available; among the 1884 children (79.7%) who completed follow-up, the median age was 3 years (IQR, 0-10 years) and 994 (52.8%) were boys. A total of 110 SARS-CoV-2–positive children (5.8%; 95% CI, 4.8%-7.0%) reported PCCs, including 44 of 447 children (9.8%; 95% CI, 7.4%-13.0%) hospitalized during the acute illness and 66 of 1437 children (4.6%; 95% CI, 3.6%-5.8%) not hospitalized during the acute illness (difference, 5.3%; 95% CI, 2.5%-8.5%). Among SARS-CoV-2–positive children, the most common symptom was fatigue or weakness (21 [1.1%]). Characteristics associated with reporting at least 1 PCC at 90 days included being hospitalized 48 hours or more compared with no hospitalization (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.67 [95% CI, 1.63-4.38]); having 4 or more symptoms reported at the index ED visit compared with 1 to 3 symptoms (4-6 symptoms: aOR, 2.35 [95% CI, 1.28-4.31]; ≥7 symptoms: aOR, 4.59 [95% CI, 2.50-8.44]); and being 14 years of age or older compared with younger than 1 year (aOR, 2.67 [95% CI, 1.43-4.99]). SARS-CoV-2–positive children were more likely to report PCCs at 90 days compared with those who tested negative, both among those who were not hospitalized (55 of 1295 [4.2%; 95% CI, 3.2%-5.5%] vs 35 of 1321 [2.7%; 95% CI, 1.9%-3.7%]; difference, 1.6% [95% CI, 0.2%-3.0%]) and those who were hospitalized (40 of 391 [10.2%; 95% CI, 7.4%-13.7%] vs 19 of 380 [5.0%; 95% CI, 3.0%-7.7%]; difference, 5.2% [95% CI, 1.5%-9.1%]). In addition, SARS-CoV-2 positivity was associated with reporting PCCs 90 days after the index ED visit (aOR, 1.63 [95% CI, 1.14-2.35]), specifically systemic health problems (eg, fatigue, weakness, fever; aOR, 2.44 [95% CI, 1.19-5.00]). Conclusions and Relevance In this cohort study, SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with reporting PCCs at 90 days in children. Guidance and follow-up are particularly necessary for hospitalized children who have numerous acute symptoms and are older.

Background COVID-19 is a new multi-organ disease causing considerable worldwide morbidity and mortality. While many recognized pathophysiological mechanisms are involved, their exact causal relationships remain opaque. Better understanding is needed for predicting their progression, targeting therapeutic approaches, and improving patient outcomes. While many mathematical causal models describe COVID-19 epidemiology, none have described its pathophysiology. Methods In early 2020, we began developing such causal models. The SARS-CoV-2 virus’s rapid and extensive spread made this particularly difficult: no large patient datasets were publicly available; the medical literature was flooded with sometimes conflicting pre-review reports; and clinicians in many countries had little time for academic consultations. We used Bayesian network (BN) models, which provide powerful calculation tools and directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) as comprehensible causal maps. Hence, they can incorporate both expert opinion and numerical data, and produce explainable, updatable results. To obtain the DAGs, we used extensive expert elicitation (exploiting Australia’s exceptionally low COVID-19 burden) in structured online sessions. Groups of clinical and other specialists were enlisted to filter, interpret and discuss the literature and develop a current consensus. We encouraged inclusion of theoretically salient latent (unobservable) variables, likely mechanisms by extrapolation from other diseases, and documented supporting literature while noting controversies. Our method was iterative and incremental: systematically refining and validating the group output using one-on-one follow-up meetings with original and new experts. 35 experts contributed 126 hours face-to-face, and could review our products. Results We present two key models, for the initial infection of the respiratory tract and the possible progression to complications, as causal DAGs and BNs with corresponding verbal descriptions, dictionaries and sources. These are the first published causal models of COVID-19 pathophysiology. Conclusions Our method demonstrates an improved procedure for developing BNs via expert elicitation, which other teams can implement to model emergent complex phenomena. Our results have three anticipated applications: (i) freely disseminating updatable expert knowledge; (ii) guiding design and analysis of observational and clinical studies; (iii) developing and validating automated tools for causal reasoning and decision support. We are developing such tools for the initial diagnosis, resource management, and prognosis of COVID-19, parameterized using the ISARIC and LEOSS databases.

Regret may be a key variable in understanding the experience of smokers, the vast majority of whom continue to smoke while desiring to quit. We present data from the baseline wave (October–December 2002) of the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey, a random-digit-dialed telephone survey of a cohort of over 8,000 adult smokers across four countries—Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia—to estimate the prevalence of regret and to identify its predictors. The proportion of smokers who agreed or agreed strongly with the statement \"If you had to do it over again, you would not have started smoking\" was extremely high—about 90%—and nearly identical across the four countries. Regret was more likely to be experienced by older smokers, women, those who had tried to quit more often, those who perceived quitting as conferring benefits, those with higher levels of perceived addiction, those who worried about future damage to health, those who perceived smoking as lowering their quality of life, those who perceived higher monetary costs of smoking, and those who believed that smoking is not socially acceptable. This predictive model was the same in all four countries. Regret is thus a near-universal experience among smokers in all four countries, and the factors that predict regret are universal across these four countries. Among other implications for cessation treatment and smoking prevention, this near universality of regret casts doubt on the view of some policy analysts and economists that the decisions to take up and continue smoking are welfare-maximizing for the consumer.

Severe outcomes among youths with SARS-CoV-2 infections are poorly characterized. To estimate the proportion of children with severe outcomes within 14 days of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 in an emergency department (ED). This prospective cohort study with 14-day follow-up enrolled participants between March 2020 and June 2021. Participants were youths aged younger than 18 years who were tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection at one of 41 EDs across 10 countries including Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Italy, New Zealand, Paraguay, Singapore, Spain, and the United States. Statistical analysis was performed from September to October 2021. Acute SARS-CoV-2 infection was determined by nucleic acid (eg, polymerase chain reaction) testing. Severe outcomes, a composite measure defined as intensive interventions during hospitalization (eg, inotropic support, positive pressure ventilation), diagnoses indicating severe organ impairment, or death. Among 3222 enrolled youths who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection, 3221 (>99.9%) had index visit outcome data available, 2007 (62.3%) were from the United States, 1694 (52.6%) were male, and 484 (15.0%) had a self-reported chronic illness; the median (IQR) age was 3 (0-10) years. After 14 days of follow-up, 735 children (22.8% [95% CI, 21.4%-24.3%]) were hospitalized, 107 (3.3% [95% CI, 2.7%-4.0%]) had severe outcomes, and 4 children (0.12% [95% CI, 0.03%-0.32%]) died. Characteristics associated with severe outcomes included being aged 5 to 18 years (age 5 to <10 years vs <1 year: odds ratio [OR], 1.60 [95% CI, 1.09-2.34]; age 10 to <18 years vs <1 year: OR, 2.39 [95% CI 1.38-4.14]), having a self-reported chronic illness (OR, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.59-3.44]), prior episode of pneumonia (OR, 3.15 [95% CI, 1.83-5.42]), symptoms starting 4 to 7 days prior to seeking ED care (vs starting 0-3 days before seeking care: OR, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.29-3.82]), and country (eg, Canada vs US: OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.05-0.23]; Costa Rica vs US: OR, 1.76 [95% CI, 1.05-2.96]; Spain vs US: OR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.27-0.98]). Among a subgroup of 2510 participants discharged home from the ED after initial testing and who had complete follow-up, 50 (2.0%; 95% CI, 1.5%-2.6%) were eventually hospitalized and 12 (0.5%; 95% CI, 0.3%-0.8%) had severe outcomes. Compared with hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-negative youths, the risk of severe outcomes was higher among hospitalized SARS-CoV-2-positive youths (risk difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, 1.1%-6.9%). In this study, approximately 3% of SARS-CoV-2-positive youths tested in EDs experienced severe outcomes within 2 weeks of their ED visit. Among children discharged home from the ED, the risk was much lower. Risk factors such as age, underlying chronic illness, and symptom duration may be useful to consider when making clinical care decisions.

OBJECTIVES: This study estimates the contribution of smoke-free workplaces to the recent national declines in cigarette consumption in Australia and the United States. METHODS: Nineteen studies of the impact of smoke-free workplaces on workday cigarette consumption were reviewed. The number and cost of cigarettes forgone were calculated and extrapolated to a scenario in which all indoor work areas were smoke-free. RESULTS: Of the 19 studies, 18 reported declines in daily smoking rates, and 17 reported declines in smoking prevalence. Smoke-free workplaces are currently responsible for an annual reduction of some 602 million cigarettes, or 1.8% of all cigarettes that might otherwise be consumed, in Australia, and an annual reduction of 9.7 billion cigarettes (2%) in the United States. Approximately 22.3% of the 2.7 billion decrease in cigarette consumption in Australia between 1988 and 1995 can be attributed to smoke-free workplaces, as can 12.7% of the 76.5 billion decrease in the United States between 1988 and 1994. CONCLUSIONS: If workplaces were universally smoke-free, the number of cigarettes forgone annually would increase to 1.14 billion (3.4%) in Australia and 20.9 billion (4.1%) in the United States.

Roll-your-own (RYO) cigarette use has been subject to relatively limited research, particularly in developing countries. This paper seeks to describe RYO use in Thailand and Malaysia and relate RYO use to smokers' knowledge of the harmfulness of tobacco. Data come from face-to-face surveys with 4,004 adult smokers from Malaysia (N=2,004) and Thailand (N=2000), collected between January and March 2005. The prevalence of any use of RYO cigarettes varied greatly between Malaysia (17%) and Thailand (58%). In both countries, any RYO use was associated with living in rural areas, older average age, lower level of education, male gender, not being in paid work, slightly lower consumption of cigarettes, higher social acceptability of smoking, and positive attitudes toward tobacco regulation. Among RYO users, exclusive use of RYO cigarettes (compared with mixed use) was associated with older age, female gender (relatively), thinking about the enjoyment of smoking, and not making a special effort to buy cheaper cigarettes if the price goes up. Finally, exclusive RYO smokers were less aware of health warnings (RYO tobacco carriers no health warnings), but even so, knowledge of the health effects of tobacco was equivalent.

Examines demand for sport, sport as business, contest theory, organization of sports leagues, broadcasting, competition law, subsidies for professional sports in the US, gambling, and cheating in contests; 10 articles. Contents: The assessment: the economics of sport, by Stefan Szymanski; Demand for sport, by Jeffery Borland and Robert Macdonald; Sport as business, by Andrew Zimbalist; Contest theory and sport, by Bernd Frick; The organization of sports leagues, by Roger G. Noll; Broadcasting and sport, by Tom Hoehn and David Lancefield; Competition law as a constraint on monopolistic exploitation by sports leagues and clubs, by Stephen F. Ross; Evaluating subsidies for professional sports in the United States and Europe: a public-sector primer, by Robert A. Baade; Sports and gambling, by David Forrest and Robert SImmons; Cheating in contests, by Ian Preston and Stefan Szymanski.