Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background There are well documented socioeconomic disparities in diet quality and obesity. Menu energy labelling is a public health policy designed to improve diet and reduce obesity. However, it is unclear whether the impact energy labelling has on consumer behaviour is socially equitable or differs based on socioeconomic position (SEP). Methods Systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental (between-subjects) and pre-post implementation field studies examining the impact of menu energy labelling on energy content of food and/or drink selections in higher vs. lower SEP groups. Results Seventeen studies were eligible for inclusion. Meta-analyses of 13 experimental studies that predominantly examined hypothetical food and drink choices showed that energy labelling tended to be associated with a small reduction in energy content of selections that did not differ based on participant SEP (X 2 (1) = 0.26, p  = .610). Effect estimates for higher SEP SMD = 0.067 [95% CI: -0.092 to 0.226] and lower SEP SMD = 0.115 [95% CI: -0.006 to 0.237] were similar. A meta-analysis of 3 pre-post implementation studies of energy labelling in the real world showed that the effect energy labelling had on consumer behaviour did not significantly differ based on SEP (X 2 (1) = 0.22, p  = .636). In higher SEP the effect was SMD = 0.032 [95% CI: -0.053 to 0.117] and in lower SEP the effect was SMD = -0.005 [95% CI: -0.051 to 0.041]. Conclusions Overall there was no convincing evidence that the effect energy labelling has on consumer behaviour significantly differs based on SEP. Further research examining multiple indicators of SEP and quantifying the long-term effects of energy labelling on consumer behaviour in real-world settings is now required. Review registration Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42022312532) and OSF ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/W7RDB ).

To improve recognition of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) and inform clinical and public health guidance, we randomly selected 600 COVID-19 case-patients in Colorado. A telephone questionnaire captured symptoms experienced, when symptoms occurred, and how long each lasted. Among 128 hospitalized patients, commonly reported symptoms included fever (84%), fatigue (83%), cough (73%), and dyspnea (72%). Among 236 nonhospitalized patients, commonly reported symptoms included fatigue (90%), fever (83%), cough (83%), and myalgia (74%). The most commonly reported initial symptoms were cough (21%-25%) and fever (20%-25%). In multivariable analysis, vomiting, dyspnea, altered mental status, dehydration, and wheezing were significantly associated with hospitalization, whereas rhinorrhea, headache, sore throat, and anosmia or ageusia were significantly associated with nonhospitalization. General symptoms and upper respiratory symptoms occurred earlier in disease, and anosmia, ageusia, lower respiratory symptoms, and gastrointestinal symptoms occurred later. Symptoms should be considered alongside other epidemiologic factors in clinical and public health decisions regarding potential COVID-19 cases.

IntroductionCommissioning, calibration, and quality control procedures for nuclear medicine imaging systems are typically performed using hollow containers filled with radionuclide solutions. This leads to multiple sources of uncertainty, many of which can be overcome by using traceable, sealed, long-lived surrogate sources containing a radionuclide of comparable energies and emission probabilities. This study presents the results of a quantitative SPECT/CT imaging comparison exercise performed within the MRTDosimetry consortium to assess the feasibility of using 133Ba as a surrogate for 131I imaging.Materials and methodsTwo sets of four traceable 133Ba sources were produced at two National Metrology Institutes and encapsulated in 3D-printed cylinders (volume range 1.68–107.4 mL). Corresponding hollow cylinders to be filled with liquid 131I and a mounting baseplate for repeatable positioning within a Jaszczak phantom were also produced. A quantitative SPECT/CT imaging comparison exercise was conducted between seven members of the consortium (eight SPECT/CT systems from two major vendors) based on a standardised protocol. Each site had to perform three measurements with the two sets of 133Ba sources and liquid 131I.ResultsAs anticipated, the 131I pseudo-image calibration factors (cps/MBq) were higher than those for 133Ba for all reconstructions and systems. A site-specific cross-calibration reduced the performance differences between both radionuclides with respect to a cross-calibration based on the ratio of emission probabilities from a median of 12–1.5%. The site-specific cross-calibration method also showed agreement between 133Ba and 131I for all cylinder volumes, which highlights the potential use of 133Ba sources to calculate recovery coefficients for partial volume correction.ConclusionThis comparison exercise demonstrated that traceable solid 133Ba sources can be used as surrogate for liquid 131I imaging. The use of solid surrogate sources could solve the radiation protection problem inherent in the preparation of phantoms with 131I liquid activity solutions as well as reduce the measurement uncertainties in the activity. This is particularly relevant for stability measurements, which have to be carried out at regular intervals.

On March 26, 2020, Colorado instituted stay-at-home orders to reduce community transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). To inform public health messaging and measures that could be used after reopening, persons with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during March 9-26 from nine Colorado counties comprising approximately 80% of the state's population (Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Denver, Douglas, El Paso, Jefferson, Larimer, and Weld) were asked about possible exposures to SARS-CoV-2 before implementation of stay-at-home orders. Among 1,738 persons meeting the inclusion criteria in the Colorado Electronic Disease Surveillance System, 600 were randomly selected and interviewed using a standardized questionnaire by telephone. Data collection during April 10-30 included information about demographic characteristics, occupations, and selected activities in the 2 weeks preceding symptom onset. During the period examined, SARS-CoV-2 molecular testing was widely available in Colorado; community transmission was documented before implementation of the stay-at-home order. At least three attempts were made to contact all selected patients or their proxy (for deceased patients, minors, and persons unable to be interviewed [e.g., those with dementia]) on at least 2 separate days, at different times of day. Data were entered into a Research Electronic Data Capture (version 9.5.13; Vanderbilt University) database, and descriptive analyses used R statistical software (version 3.6.3; The R Foundation).

The emerging story was highly embarrassing to the Government. Robinson and his family were the potential beneficiaries of a Guernsey-based trust containing assets worth at least pounds 12.5 million. As experts were quick to point out, the only possible motive for placing assets in a Channel Islands trust is so that it avoids tax in the UK. Robinson has not offered any alternative explanation. And yet as Paymaster-General at the Treasury, Robinson is charged with raising and collecting the nation's taxes. He has personal responsibility for overseeing the windfall tax and reviewing corporation tax. To make matters worse, he is also part of a Labour team pledged to clamp down on the use of tax havens. Gordon Brown made it clear before the election: 'A Labour Chancellor will not permit tax reliefs to millionaires in offshore tax havens.' The story quickly snowballed. Last weekend the Sunday Times alleged that Robinson had links to a series of other offshore trusts set up in the tax haven of Bermuda in the names of some members of his family. The claims concerned a transaction six years ago and were quickly rebuffed by Robinson. But he could not so easily dismiss the Observer's story that same Sunday about the Guernsey trust.