Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose Determine whether mirror intracranial aneurysms (MIAs) confer risk beyond aneurysm multiplicity and describe their distribution and longitudinal change. Methods Retrospective two-centre UK cohort of unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIAs) diagnosed 2006–2020; outcomes to 2022. Endpoints: first rupture, SAH-specific/all-cause mortality, time to treatment, and lesion-level growth/morphology change. Rates used Poisson models with person-time offsets; lesion-level risks used GEE (modified Poisson). Rupture-free survival used inverse-probability-weighted Kaplan–Meier. Models adjusted for baseline aneurysm count. Results 1,985 UIAs were identified; 289 (14.6%) were MIAs. MIAs clustered at the MCA bifurcation (57.8%) and ICA terminus (34.6%). First-rupture incidence was higher in MIAs (1.74/100 person-years (PY)) than aMIAs (0.76/100 PY) or SIAs (0.39/100 PY); MIA > SIA IRR 4.46 ( q  = 0.0003), MIA > aMIA IRR 2.29 ( q  = 0.0044). SAH-specific mortality incidence was higher in MIAs (1.21/100 PY) than SIAs (0.36/100 PY; IRR 3.36, q  = 0.0057) and aMIAs (0.19/100 PY; IRR 6.37, q  = 0.0002). IPW survival was poorer for MIAs vs aMIAs (weighted log-rank χ 2  = 9.95, p  = 0.0016) and vs SIAs (χ 2  = 18.09, p  = 2.11 × 10⁻ 5 ). Lesion-level GEE showed no symmetry-specific increase in rupture risk (omnibus p  = 0.72). Lesion-level growth ≥ 1 mm (RR 1.67, q  = 0.0380) and morphology change (RR 2.10, q  = 0.0121) were higher in MIAs. With aneurysm count adjustment, effects attenuated with wide CIs, consistent with limited power. Conclusion MIAs were associated with higher patient-time rupture and SAH-specific mortality and greater lesion-level instability, but not with an independent per-aneurysm rupture hazard. The excess patient-level risk is largely explained by exposure (multiplicity); a symmetry-related effect remains plausible but unconfirmed. Larger, prospectively harmonised datasets are needed.

Hypertension, a major risk factor in the development of cardiovascular disease, accounts for the greatest disparity in mortality between Blacks and Whites in the United States. Psychosocial factors, including responses to stress, are known to influence the development of hypertension. Racism, as a psychosocial stressor, and psychological responses to racism have been linked to physiological responses to stress. Racism has been suspected as one factor in explaining the health status disparities between Whites and minority groups. Responses to racism such as denial, hostility, and a behavioral coping pattern named John Henryism have been associated with elevated blood pressure readings, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease. A correlation between positive racial identity and blood pressure has been reported. This cross-sectional study examined specific responses to racism and racial identity in a convenience sample of 186 hypertensive and normotensive Blacks from an inner city neighborhood. The interactions of race with biological, social, cultural and political factors, and their influence on health outcomes were examined using a modified version of the King and Williams framework. The purpose of the study was to determine whether racial identity and specific psychological responses to racism could predict hypertensive or normotensive status in a sample of Black adults. The study tested the following research questions: (1) Are responses to racism and racial identity correlated? (2) Can responses to racism and racial identity predict normotensive or hypertensive status in Blacks, controlling for known risk factors and demographic variables? This study did not find that responses to racism could predict normotensive or hypertensive status in the sample of Black adults, except for one subscale of racial identity, public regard. Hostility was significantly correlated with several subscales of racial identity and John Henryism. John Henryism was correlated with the private regard subscale of racial identity. Several known hypertensive risk factors did not significantly predict blood pressure status raising issues of sample representativeness. No gender differences related to responses to racism and racial identity were found. Future research should address several methodological concerns including conceptual clarity of variables, psychometric evaluation of instruments, and sample size.

The town that has grown up round one of the more important Rocky Mountain silver camps is no less grimy and unattractive than if it were the scene of mining for baser metal. On every hand can be seen mines and \"prospects\" reaching far up the sides of the canon, so high that to climb to some of them seems almost impossible, to say nothing of bringing the ore from them to the railway station.

IN the first decade of this century, Major Zebulon Pike gazed from afar at the grim slopes of the mountain named in his honor, and doubted if human foot would ever tread its summit; nor did he express this doubt lightly, as might one who had not made the endeavor, but as one who had put forth his best efforts and had been baffled at every turn by frowning steeps, chilling blasts, and fast-falling snow.

Engagement of Indigenous science (Indigenous research, knowledges, and processes) is increasingly recognized within institutions of higher learning, funding bodies, and publication outlets. Respectful and authentic support for Indigenous science requires transformations of Western, colonial-grounded knowledge and knowledge processes, bodies, and institutions to meaningfully and appropriately include Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing. The objective of this study was to identify fundamental changes required to support Indigenous science within Western, colonial-grounded academic institutions focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\". In 2019, a three-day gathering of 18 Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers and trainees, Elder/knowledge helper/knowledge keepers, and community members was held in Treaty 1 territory and birthplace of the Métis Nation. Through talking circles, participants shared their experiences working with Indigenous communities on projects involving Indigenous knowledges. Thematic analysis drew meaning from the talking circles, identifying four main themes: 1) Building Bridges; 2) Institutional Practice; 3) Original Knowledges; and 4) Multifaceted Identity. Focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\" stemming from these themes, recommendations for supporting Indigenous science were identified around four central actions: 1) Embedding respectful and authentic support; 2) Acceptance, endorsement, incorporation, and education among the broader research community; 3) Prioritizing and valuing Indigenous research, knowledges, processes, and contributions; and 4) Privileging of multiple worldviews. Institutions, funding agencies, journals, and all individuals, organizations, and entities involved in research are encouraged to enact these recommendations and take action to support Indigenous science.

Multiple types and classes of medications are administered in the acute management of traumatic spinal cord injury. Prior clinical studies and evidence from animal models suggest that several of these medications could modify (i.e., enhance or impede) neurological recovery. We aimed to systematically determine the types of medications commonly administered, alone or in combination, in the transition from acute to subacute spinal cord injury. For that purpose, type, class, dosage, timing, and reason for administration were extracted from two large spinal cord injury datasets. Descriptive statistics were used to describe the medications administered within the first 60 days after spinal cord injury. Across 2040 individuals with spinal cord injury, 775 unique medications were administered within the two months after injury. On average, patients enrolled in a clinical trial were administered 9.9 ± 4.9 (range 0–34), 14.3 ± 6.3 (range 1–40), 18.6 ± 8.2 (range 0–58), and 21.5 ± 9.7 (range 0–59) medications within the first 7, 14, 30, and 60 days post-injury, respectively. Those enrolled in an observational study were administered on average 1.7 ± 1.7 (range 0–11), 3.7 ± 3.7 (range 0–24), 8.5 ± 6.3 (range 0–42), and 13.5 ± 8.3 (range 0–52) medications within the first 7, 14, 30, and 60 days post-injury, respectively. Polypharmacy was commonplace (up to 43 medications per day per patient). Approximately 10% of medications were administered acutely as prophylaxis (e.g., against the development of pain or infections). To our knowledge, this was the first time acute pharmacological practices have been comprehensively examined after spinal cord injury. Our study revealed a high degree of polypharmacy in the acute stages of spinal cord injury, raising the potential to impact neurological recovery. All results can be interactively explored on the R X SCI web site ( https://jutzelec.shinyapps.io/RxSCI/ ) and GitHub repository ( https://github.com/jutzca/Acute-Pharmacological-Treatment-in-SCI/ ).

To develop and test the psychometric properties of a self-administered scale to assess the knowledge, skills, attitudes and behaviour of nurses to support the self-management of patients living with indwelling urinary catheters. Nurses are pivotal in supporting patients with urinary catheter self-management to prevent potentially avoidable hospital presentations. However, no validated scale is available to assess nurses’ attitudes and readiness for this task. A quasi-experimental design was used to collect survey data both at baseline and after the completion of the intervention. A total of 128 participants were recruited from the Western Sydney region (New South Wales, Australia), who were working in community healthcare settings. Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap™) database was used to manage the survey data collected for data analysis purposes. This study has been registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN126210 0 0683831) Using a three-stage process of concept identification, item construction and pilot testing to develop the Catheter Assessment, Management and Performance (CAMP) scale, followed by factorial and discriminant validity and reliability testing. This 23-item CAMP scale is theoretically informed by the COM-B (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour) model, recognised for its effectiveness in understanding and influencing behaviour change. The scale was distributed to nurses working in three community health care settings to assess their knowledge, attitude and behaviour regarding catheter management and performance. Four factors were identified using scree plot, accounting for 63.36 % of total explained variance, which reflected the four dimensions of the COM-B model. Cronbach's alpha of the overall CAMP scale (0.93) and subscales (0.92, 0.87, 0.85 and 0.86) indicate good internal consistencies. The CAMP scale was able to detect changes in nurses’ self-reported behaviour change following educational intervention (85.53 versus 95.98, p < 0.001). The CAMP scale is valid and reliable scale, capable of assessing nurses’ capability, opportunity and motivation to support patients, through delivery of catheter self-management education that can potentially prevent catheter-related complications and avoid hospital presentations. Future research could explore using CAMP scale among non-specialist nurses and in various clinical settings to enhance its effectiveness and generalisability.

Engagement of Indigenous science (Indigenous research, knowledges, and processes) is increasingly recognized within institutions of higher learning, funding bodies, and publication outlets. Respectful and authentic support for Indigenous science requires transformations of Western, colonial-grounded knowledge and knowledge processes, bodies, and institutions to meaningfully and appropriately include Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing. The objective of this study was to identify fundamental changes required to support Indigenous science within Western, colonial-grounded academic institutions focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\". In 2019, a three-day gathering of 18 Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers and trainees, Elder/knowledge helper/knowledge keepers, and community members was held in Treaty 1 territory and birthplace of the Métis Nation. Through talking circles, participants shared their experiences working with Indigenous communities on projects involving Indigenous knowledges. Thematic analysis drew meaning from the talking circles, identifying four main themes: 1) Building Bridges; 2) Institutional Practice; 3) Original Knowledges; and 4) Multifaceted Identity. Focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\" stemming from these themes, recommendations for supporting Indigenous science were identified around four central actions: 1) Embedding respectful and authentic support; 2) Acceptance, endorsement, incorporation, and education among the broader research community; 3) Prioritizing and valuing Indigenous research, knowledges, processes, and contributions; and 4) Privileging of multiple worldviews. Institutions, funding agencies, journals, and all individuals, organizations, and entities involved in research are encouraged to enact these recommendations and take action to support Indigenous science.

Engagement of Indigenous science (Indigenous research, knowledges, and processes) is increasingly recognized within institutions of higher learning, funding bodies, and publication outlets. Respectful and authentic support for Indigenous science requires transformations of Western, colonial-grounded knowledge and knowledge processes, bodies, and institutions to meaningfully and appropriately include Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and doing. The objective of this study was to identify fundamental changes required to support Indigenous science within Western, colonial-grounded academic institutions focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\". In 2019, a three-day gathering of 18 Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers and trainees, Elder/knowledge helper/knowledge keepers, and community members was held in Treaty 1 territory and birthplace of the Métis Nation. Through talking circles, participants shared their experiences working with Indigenous communities on projects involving Indigenous knowledges. Thematic analysis drew meaning from the talking circles, identifying four main themes: 1) Building Bridges; 2) Institutional Practice; 3) Original Knowledges; and 4) Multifaceted Identity. Focusing on \"Identity and Colonial Institutions\" stemming from these themes, recommendations for supporting Indigenous science were identified around four central actions: 1) Embedding respectful and authentic support; 2) Acceptance, endorsement, incorporation, and education among the broader research community; 3) Prioritizing and valuing Indigenous research, knowledges, processes, and contributions; and 4) Privileging of multiple worldviews. Institutions, funding agencies, journals, and all individuals, organizations, and entities involved in research are encouraged to enact these recommendations and take action to support Indigenous science.