No abstract

The present study examined associations between physical activity, sleep, and academic outcomes in undergraduate students (N = 52). More consistent sleep throughout the semester (lower sleep variability) was associated with higher homework grades. The interaction between sleep variability and sleep quantity was not significant suggesting that greater sleep overall did not buffer students from the negative effects of sleep variability on grades.

No abstract

Background: Digital cognitive tests offer several potential advantages over established paper-pencil tests but have not yet been fully evaluated for the clinical evaluation of mild cognitive impairment. Objective: The NeuroCognitive Performance Test (NCPT) is a web-based, self-directed, modular battery intended for repeated assessments of multiple cognitive domains. Our objective was to examine its relationship with the Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale-Cognition Subscale (ADAS-Cog) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) as well as with established paper-pencil tests of cognition and daily functioning in mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: We used Spearman correlations, regressions and principal components analysis followed by a factor analysis (varimax rotated) to examine our objectives. Results: In MCI subjects, the NCPT composite is significantly correlated with both a composite measure of established tests (r = 0.77, p <  0.0001) as well as with the ADAS-Cog (r = 0.55, p <  0.0001). Both NCPT and paper-pencil test batteries had a similar factor structure that included a large “g” component with a high eigenvalue. The correlation for the analogous tests (e.g., Trails A and B, learning memory tests) were significant (p <  0.0001). Further, both the NCPT and established tests significantly (p <  0.01) predicted the University of California San Diego Performance-Based Skills Assessment and Functional Activities Questionnaire, measures of daily functioning. Conclusion: The NCPT, a web-based, self-directed, computerized test, shows high concurrent validity with established tests and hence offers promise for use as a research or clinical tool in MCI. Despite limitations such as a relatively small sample, absence of control group and cross-sectional nature, these findings are consistent with the growing literature on the promise of self-directed, web-based cognitive assessments for MCI.

BackgroundCOVID-19 immunity passports could protect the right to free movement but may also critics worry about insufficient evidence, privacy, fraud, and discrimination.ObjectiveTo characterize the global physician community’s opinion regarding immunity passports.DesignCross sectional, random stratified sample of physicians registered with Sermo, a global networking platform open to verified and licensed physicians.Main outcome measuresThe survey asked: “Digital immunity passports, based on antibody testing, are being considered to offer proof (e.g. via an app or QR code) that a person has developed lasting immunity to COVID-19 and hence can return to work or travel freely. In your opinion, do we know enough about COVID-19 immunity and it’s duration to offer such immunity passports at the present time?” Possible answers were YES, NO, and UNCERTAIN.ResultsThe survey was completed by 1004 physicians (67 specialties, 40 countries, 49% frontline specialties) with a mean (SD) age of 49.14 (12) years. Overall, 52% answered NO, 17% were UNCERTAIN, and 31% answered YES (p<0.05). EU physicians were more likely to say YES but even among them it did not exceed 35% approval. US physicians (60%) were more likely to say NO (p<0.05) (Figure).ConclusionsOur findings suggest a current lack of support among physicians for immunity passports. It is hoped that ongoing research and vaccine trials will provide further clarity.

BackgroundRisk perception, influenced and biased by multiple factors, can affect behavior.ObjectiveTo assess the variability of physician perceptions of catching COVID-19.DesignCross sectional, random stratified sample of physicians registered with Sermo, a global networking platform open to verified and licensed physicians.Main outcome measuresThe survey asked: “What is your likelihood of catching COVID-19 in the next three months?” The physicians were asked to give their best estimate as an exact percentage.ResultsThe survey was completed by 1004 physicians (40 countries, 67 specialties, 49% frontline [e.g. ER, infectious disease, internal medicine]) with a mean (SD) age of 49.14 (12) years. Mean (SD) self-risk estimate was 32.3% ± 26% with a range from 0% to 100% (Figure 1a). Risk estimates were higher in younger (<50 years) doctors and in non-US doctors versus their older and US counterparts (p<0.05 for all) (Figure 1b). Risk estimates were higher among front line versus non-frontline doctors (p<0.05). Risk estimates were higher for women than men (p<0.05) among respondents (60%) reporting gender.ConclusionsTo our knowledge, this is the first global study to document physician risk perceptions for catching COVID-19 and how it is impacted by age, gender, practice specialty and geography. Accurate calibration of risk perception is vital since both over- and underestimation of risk could impact physician behavior and have implications for public health.

Background and Purpose: To characterize the global physician community’s opinions on the use of digital tools for COVID-19 public health surveillance and self-surveillance Materials and Methods: Cross-sectional, random, stratified survey done on Sermo, a physician networking platform, between September 9 and 15, 2020. We aimed to sample 1000 physicians divided among the USA, EU, and rest of the world. The survey questioned physicians on the risk-benefit ratio of digital tools, as well as matters of data privacy and trust Statistical Analysis Used: Descriptive statistics examined physicians’ characteristics and opinions by age group, gender, frontline status, and geographic region. ANOVA, t-test, and Chi-square tests with P < 0.05 were viewed as qualitatively different. As this was an exploratory study, we did not adjust for small cell sizes or multiplicity. We used JMP Pro 15 (SAS), as well as Protobi Results: The survey was completed by 1004 physicians with a mean (standard deviation) age of 49.14 (12) years. Enthusiasm was highest for self-monitoring smartwatches (66%) and contact tracing apps (66%) and slightly lower (48–56%) for other tools. Trust was highest for health providers (68%) and lowest for technology companies (30%). Most respondents (69.8%) felt that loosening privacy standards to fight the pandemic would lead to misuse of privacy in the future Conclusion: The survey provides foundational insights into how physicians think of surveillance

Digital cognitive tests offer several potential advantages over established paper-pencil tests but have not yet been fully evaluated for the clinical evaluation of mild cognitive impairment. The NeuroCognitive Performance Test (NCPT) is a web-based, self-directed, modular battery intended for repeated assessments of multiple cognitive domains. Using a sample of 101 MCI subjects, we report in this study that the NCPT composite is significantly correlated with both a composite measure of established tests (r=0.77, p<0.0001) as well as with the ADAS-Cog (r=0.55, p<0.0001). Both test batteries had a similar factor structure that included a large “g” component with a high eigenvalue. Further, both the NCPT and established tests significantly (p< 0.01) predicted the UPSA and FAQ, measures of daily functioning. Despite limitations such as a relatively small sample, absence of control group and cross-sectional nature, these findings are consistent with the growing literature on the promise of self-directed, web-based cognitive assessments for MCI.