Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Discipline
      Discipline
      Clear All
      Discipline
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Series Title
      Series Title
      Clear All
      Series Title
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
      More Filters
      Clear All
      More Filters
      Is Full-Text Available
    • Subject
    • Country Of Publication
    • Publisher
    • Source
    • Language
    • Place of Publication
    • Contributors
    • Location
1,636 result(s) for "Robinson, Eric"
Sort by:
Brill's companion to the reception of Senecan tragedy : scholarly, theatrical and literary receptions
\"In Brill's Companion to the Reception of Senecan Tragedy, Eric Dodson-Robinson incorporates essays by specialists working across disciplines and national literatures into a subtle narrative tracing the diverse scholarly, literary and theatrical receptions of Seneca's tragedies. The tragedies, influential throughout the Roman world well beyond Seneca's time, plunge into obscurity in Late Antiquity and nearly disappear during the Middle Ages. Profound consequences follow from the rediscovery of a dusty manuscript containing nine plays attributed to Seneca: it is seminal to both the renaissance of tragedy and the birth of Humanism. Canonical Western writers from Antiquity to the present have revisited, transformed, and eviscerated Senecan precedents to develop, in Dodson-Robinson's words, \"competing tragic visions of agency and the human place in the universe.\" Contributors are: Florence de Caigny, Francesco Citti, Peter J. Davis, Eric Dodson-Robinson, Patrick Gray, Joachim Harst, Siobhâan McElduff, Tomلas Martâinez Romero, Ralf Remshardt, Helen Slaney, Christopher Star, Christopher Trinacty, and Jessica Winston\"-- Provided by publisher
International estimates of intended uptake and refusal of COVID-19 vaccines: A rapid systematic review and meta-analysis of large nationally representative samples
Widespread uptake of COVID-19 vaccines will be essential to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines have been developed in unprecedented time and quantifying levels of hesitancy towards vaccination among the general population is of importance. Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using large nationally representative samples (n ≥ 1000) to examine the percentage of the population intending to vaccinate, unsure, or intending to refuse a COVID-19 vaccine when available. Generic inverse meta-analysis and meta-regression were used to pool estimates and examine time trends. PubMed, Scopus and pre-printer servers were searched from January-November 2020. Registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020223132). Twenty-eight nationally representative samples (n = 58,656) from 13 countries indicate that as the pandemic has progressed, the percentage of people intending to vaccinate decreased and the percentage of people intending to refuse vaccination increased. Pooled data from surveys conducted during June-October suggest that 60% (95% CI: 49% to 69%) intend to vaccinate and 20% (95% CI: 13% to 29%) intend to refuse vaccination, although intentions vary substantially between samples and countries (I2 > 90%). Being female, younger, of lower income or education level and belonging to an ethnic minority group were consistently associated with being less likely to intend to vaccinate. Findings were consistent across higher vs. lower quality studies. Intentions to be vaccinated when a COVID-19 vaccine becomes available have been declining across countries and there is an urgent need to address social inequalities in vaccine hesitancy and promote widespread uptake of vaccines as they become available. N/A.
Longitudinal changes in mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from the UK Household Longitudinal Study
The COVID-19 pandemic has had a range of negative social and economic effects that may contribute to a rise in mental health problems. In this observational population-based study, we examined longitudinal changes in the prevalence of mental health problems from before to during the COVID-19 crisis and identified subgroups that are psychologically vulnerable during the pandemic. Participants ( = 14 393; observations = 48 486) were adults drawn from wave 9 (2017-2019) of the nationally representative United Kingdom Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) and followed-up across three waves of assessment in April, May, and June 2020. Mental health problems were assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12). The population prevalence of mental health problems (GHQ-12 score ⩾3) increased by 13.5 percentage points from 24.3% in 2017-2019 to 37.8% in April 2020 and remained elevated in May (34.7%) and June (31.9%) 2020. All sociodemographic groups examined showed statistically significant increases in mental health problems in April 2020. The increase was largest among those aged 18-34 years (18.6 percentage points, 95% CI 14.3-22.9%), followed by females and high-income and education groups. Levels of mental health problems subsequently declined between April and June 2020 but remained significantly above pre-COVID-19 levels. Additional analyses showed that the rise in mental health problems observed throughout the COVID-19 pandemic was unlikely to be due to seasonality or year-to-year variation. This study suggests that a pronounced and prolonged deterioration in mental health occurred as the COVID-19 pandemic emerged in the UK between April and June 2020.
Interoception and obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relationship between interoception and BMI
BackgroundInteroception refers to the processes by which we sense, interpret and integrate signals originating from within the body. Deficits in interoception have been linked to higher BMI and may contribute to weight gain. However, there have been conflicting findings and it is not clear how higher BMI is associated with different facets of interoception, such as interoceptive accuracy (the ability to detect internal signals) and sensibility (the tendency to attend to internal signals).MethodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies that measured interoception and BMI. We examined relationships between interoception and BMI in children and adults separately and as a function of interoceptive facet and measure. In sensitivity analyses, we tested for evidence of publication bias and whether the results were consistent when studies with a high risk of bias were excluded.ResultsA total of 87 articles were eligible for inclusion. In adults (121 effects, 10,425 participants), there was cross-sectional evidence of higher BMI being associated with overall deficits in interoception (r = −0.054, 95% CI: −0.084 to −0.025) and this was consistent across sensitivity analyses. There was no statistically significant evidence of moderation by interoceptive facet or measure, although there was some variability in effect size estimates based on interoceptive facet and measures. A smaller meta-analysis limited to studies that compared participants with normal weight vs. overweight/obesity indicated poorer interoception in participants with overweight/obesity (SMD = −0.39, 95% CI −0.60 to −0.18).ConclusionsIn cross-sectional studies, deficits in interoception are associated with higher BMI. However, it remains unclear whether deficits in interoception contribute to or are a consequence of weight gain and obesity.
Ultraprocessed food (UPF), health, and mechanistic uncertainty: What should we be advising the public to do about UPFs?
In this perspective, we discuss why current mechanistic uncertainty on ultraprocessed foods (UPFs) and health acts as a major challenge to providing informed dietary guidelines and public advice on UPFs. Based on the balance of current evidence, we do not believe it is appropriate to be advising consumers to avoid all UPFs and we await further evidence to inform consumer guidance on the need to limit consumption of specifics foods based on their degree or type of processing.
Downsizing food: a systematic review and meta-analysis examining the effect of reducing served food portion sizes on daily energy intake and body weight
Portion sizes of many foods have increased over time. However, the size of effect that reducing food portion sizes has on daily energy intake and body weight is less clear. We used a systematic review methodology to identify eligible articles that used an experimental design to manipulate portion size served to human participants and measured energy intake for a minimum of 1 d. Searches were conducted in September 2020 and again in October 2021. Fourteen eligible studies contributing eighty-five effects were included in the primary meta-analysis. There was a moderate-to-large reduction in daily energy intake when comparing smaller v. larger portions (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD) = –0·709 (95 % CI: –0·956, –0·461), approximately 235 kcal (983·24 kJ)). Larger reductions to portion size resulted in larger decreases in daily energy intake. There was evidence of a curvilinear relationship between portion size and daily energy intake; reductions to daily energy intake were markedly smaller when reducing portion size from very large portions. In a subset of studies that measured body weight (four studies contributing five comparisons), being served smaller v. larger portions was associated with less weight gain (0·58 kg). Reducing food portion sizes may be an effective population-level strategy to prevent weight gain.
Weight‐related lifestyle behaviours and the COVID‐19 crisis: An online survey study of UK adults during social lockdown
Summary Background The COVID‐19 crisis is likely to have had wide‐ranging consequences on lifestyle behaviours and may have affected weight management. The objective of the present study was to examine perceptions of how weight‐related lifestyle changed in social lockdown among UK adults compared with before the emergence of the COVID‐19 crisis. Methods As part of an online cross‐sectional survey conducted during social lockdown in the United Kingdom, 723 UK adults reported on the extent to which their eating (healthiness of diet, frequency of bingeing on food), physical activity, sleep and alcohol consumption had changed since the emergence of the COVID‐19 crisis and completed measures of current psychological well‐being. Results Although both improvements and declines in weight gain protective behaviours were reported, 79% of participants reported a decline in one or more weight gain protective behaviours. Both participants with a diagnosis of psychiatric illness or obesity (body mass index [BMI] ≥ 30) were most likely to report declines in weight gain protective behaviours and show an overall profile of weight management behaviours worsening. Participants experiencing high levels of stress also reported reductions in more weight gain protective behaviours. Conclusions Lifestyle behaviours associated with weight gain are likely to have been affected by the COVID‐19 crisis. Reductions to the perceived frequency by which people engage in behaviours usually associated with successful weight management appear to be common, and people living with obesity and mental health problems may be at increased risk.
How and why weight stigma drives the obesity ‘epidemic’ and harms health
Background In an era when obesity prevalence is high throughout much of the world, there is a correspondingly pervasive and strong culture of weight stigma. For example, representative studies show that some forms of weight discrimination are more prevalent even than discrimination based on race or ethnicity. Discussion In this Opinion article, we review compelling evidence that weight stigma is harmful to health, over and above objective body mass index. Weight stigma is prospectively related to heightened mortality and other chronic diseases and conditions. Most ironically, it actually begets heightened risk of obesity through multiple obesogenic pathways. Weight stigma is particularly prevalent and detrimental in healthcare settings, with documented high levels of ‘anti-fat’ bias in healthcare providers, patients with obesity receiving poorer care and having worse outcomes, and medical students with obesity reporting high levels of alcohol and substance use to cope with internalized weight stigma. In terms of solutions, the most effective and ethical approaches should be aimed at changing the behaviors and attitudes of those who stigmatize, rather than towards the targets of weight stigma. Medical training must address weight bias, training healthcare professionals about how it is perpetuated and on its potentially harmful effects on their patients. Conclusion Weight stigma is likely to drive weight gain and poor health and thus should be eradicated. This effort can begin by training compassionate and knowledgeable healthcare providers who will deliver better care and ultimately lessen the negative effects of weight stigma.
(Over)eating out at major UK restaurant chains: observational study of energy content of main meals
To examine the energy content of main meals served in major UK restaurant chains and compare the energy content of meals in fast food and \"full service\" restaurant chains. Observational study. Menu and nutritional information provided by major UK restaurant chains. Mean energy content of meals, proportion of meals meeting public health recommendations for energy consumption (≤600 kcal), and proportion of meals with excessive energy content (≥1000 kcal). Main meals from 27 restaurant chains (21 full service; 6 fast food) were sampled. The mean energy content of all eligible restaurant meals (13 396 in total) was 977 (95% confidence interval 973 to 983) kcal. The percentage of all meals that met public health recommendations for energy content was low (9%; n=1226) and smaller than the percentage of meals with an excessive energy content (47%; 6251). Compared with fast food restaurants, full service restaurants offered significantly more excessively calorific main meals, fewer main meals meeting public health recommendations, and on average 268 (103 to 433) kcal more in main meals. The energy content of a large number of main meals in major UK restaurant chains is excessive, and only a minority meet public health recommendations. Although the poor nutritional quality of fast food meals has been well documented, the energy content of full service restaurant meals in the UK tends to be higher and is a cause for concern. Study protocol and analysis strategy pre-registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/w5h8q/).