No abstract

Background: Funding organisations and research ethics committees (RECs) should play a part in strengthening attention to gender equality in clinical research. In the research policy of European Union (EU), funding measures have been taken to realise this, but such measures are lacking in the EU policy regarding RECs. Objective: To explore how RECs in Austria, Germany, Ireland, The Netherlands and Sweden deal with gender equality issues by asking two questions: (1) Do existing procedures promote representation of women and gender expertise in the committee? (2) How are sex and gender issues dealt with in protocol evaluation? Methods: Two RECs were selected from each country. Data were obtained through interviews with key informants and content analysis of relevant documents (regulations, guidelines and review tools in use in 2003). Results: All countries have rules (mostly informal) to ensure the presence of women on RECs; gender expertise is not required. Drug study protocols are carefully evaluated, sometimes on a formal basis, as regards the inclusion of women of childbearing age. The reason for excluding either one of the sexes or including specific groups of women or making a gender-specific risk-benefit analysis are investigated by some RECs. Such measures are, however, neither defined in the regulations nor integrated in review tools. Conclusions: The RECs investigated in five European member states are found to pay limited attention to gender equality in their working methods and, in particular in protocol evaluation. Policy and regulations of EU are needed to strengthen attention to gender equality in the work of RECs.

In this study, DAA exert positive and persistent effects on both fatigue and mood in patients with chronic HCV infection. These extrahepatic benefits are, at least in part, related to the modulation of TRP metabolism. The robust elevation of KYN concentrations challenges the current paradigm of low KYN levels as prerequisite for mental health.

Background: Liberal PCR testing for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is key to contain the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Combined multi-sample testing in pools instead of single tests might enhance laboratory capacity and reduce costs, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Objective: The purpose of our study was to assess the value of a simple questionnaire to guide and further improve pooling strategies for SARS-CoV-2 laboratory testing. Methods: Pharyngeal swabs for SARS-CoV-2 testing were obtained from healthcare and police staff, hospital inpatients, and nursing home residents in the southwestern part of Germany. We designed a simple questionnaire, which included questions pertaining to a suggestive clinical symptomatology, recent travel history, and contact with confirmed cases to stratify an individual’s pre-test probability of having contracted COVID-19. The questionnaire was adapted repeatedly in face of the unfolding pandemic in response to the evolving epidemiology and observed clinical symptomatology. Based on the response patterns, samples were either tested individually or in multi-sample pools. We compared the pool positivity rate and the number of total PCR tests required to obtain individual results between this questionnaire-based pooling strategy and randomly assembled pools. Findings: Between March 11 and July 5, 2020, we processed 25,978 samples using random pooling (n = 6,012; 23.1%) or questionnaire-based pooling (n = 19,966; 76.9%). The overall prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 was 0.9% (n = 238). Pool positivity (14.6% vs. 1.2%) and individual SARS-CoV-2 prevalence (3.4% vs. 0.1%) were higher in the random pooling group than in the questionnaire group. The average number of PCR tests needed to obtain the individual result for one participant was 0.27 tests in the random pooling group, as compared to 0.09 in the questionnaire-based pooling group, leading to a laboratory capacity increase of 73% and 91%, respectively, as compared to single PCR testing. Conclusions: Strategies that combine pool testing with a questionnaire-based risk stratification can increase laboratory testing capacities for COVID-19 and might be important tools, particularly in resource-constrained settings.

No abstract