Impaired performance of meaningful gestures on command was linked to volume loss predominantly in the praxis network in schizophrenia. Thus, the behavioral similarities between apraxia and schizophrenia are paralleled by structural alterations. However, few associations between behavioral impairment and structural brain alterations appear specific to schizophrenia.
Background/Aim: Gesturing plays an important role in social behavior and social learning. Deficits are frequent in schizophrenia and may contribute to impaired social functioning. Information about deficits during the course of the disease and presence of severity and patterns of impairment in first-episode patients is missing. Hence, we aimed to investigate gesturing in first- compared to multiple-episode schizophrenia patients and healthy controls. Methods: In 14 first-episode patients, 14 multiple-episode patients and 16 healthy controls matched for age, gender and education, gesturing was assessed by the comprehensive Test of Upper Limb Apraxia. Performance in two domains of gesturing - imitation and pantomime - was recorded on video. Raters of gesture performance were blinded. Results: Patients with multiple episodes had severe gestural deficits. For almost all gesture categories, performance was worse in multiple- than in first-episode patients. First-episode patients demonstrated subtle deficits with a comparable pattern. Conclusions: Subjects with multiple psychotic episodes have severe deficits in gesturing, while only mild impairments were found in first-episode patients independent of age, gender, education and negative symptoms. The results indicate that gesturing is impaired at the onset of disease and likely to further deteriorate during its course.
ImportanceSARS-CoV-2 vaccines are authorized for use in most age groups. The safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccines is unknown in children younger than 5 years.ObjectiveTo retrospectively evaluate the safety of the BNT162b2 vaccine used off-label in children younger than 5 years compared with the safety of non–SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in the same sample.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis investigator-initiated retrospective cohort study included parents or caregivers who registered children for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in outpatient care facilities in Germany. The study was performed as an authenticated online survey. A total of 19 000 email addresses were contacted from vaccination registration databases between April 14 and May 9, 2022. Inclusion criteria were child age younger than 5 years at the first BNT162b2 vaccination and use of a correct authentication code to prove invitation.ExposuresOff-label BNT162b2 vaccination and on-label non–SARS-CoV-2 vaccinations.Main Outcomes and MeasuresReported short-term safety data of 1 to 3 doses of 3 to 10 μg BNT162b2 in children from birth to younger than 60 months are presented. Coprimary outcomes were the frequencies of 11 categories of symptoms after vaccination with bivariate analyses and regression models adjusting for age, sex, weight, and height.ResultsThe study included 7806 children (median age, 3 years [IQR, 2-4 years]; 3824 [49.0%] female) who were followed up of for a mean (SD) of 91.4 (38.8) days since first BNT162b2 vaccination (survey response rate, 41.1%). A 10-μg dosage was more frequently associated with local injection-site symptoms compared with lower dosages. In the active-comparator analysis, the probability of any symptoms (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.43-1.84), local symptoms (OR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.38-2.05), musculoskeletal symptoms (OR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.32-4.94), dermatologic symptoms (OR, 2.18; 95% CI, 10.7-4.45), or otolaryngologic symptoms (OR, 6.37; 95% CI, 1.50-27.09) were modestly elevated after BNT162b2 compared with non–SARS-CoV-2 vaccines, whereas the probabilities of general symptoms (OR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.95) and fever (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.32-0.55) were lower after BNT162b2. Symptoms requiring hospitalization (n = 10) were reported only at BNT162b2 dosages above 3 μg.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cohort study, the symptoms reported after BNT162b2 administration were comparable overall to those for on-label non–SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in this cohort of children younger than 5 years. The present data may be used together with prospective licensure studies of BNT162b2 efficacy and safety and could help guide expert recommendations about BNT162b2 vaccinations in this age group.
Background: The 2019 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend evaluation for right ventricular dysfunction in all normotensive patients with acute pulmonary embolism (PE). We compared the predictive performance of the 2019 and 2014 ESC risk stratification algorithms and the Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI). Methods: We performed a post-hoc analysis of normotensive patients aged ≥65 years with acute PE from a prospective cohort. The primary outcome was overall mortality; secondary outcomes were PE-related mortality and adverse outcomes (PE-related death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, intubation, catecholamine use, recurrent venous thromboembolism) at 30 days. We assessed outcomes in intermediate-high, intermediate-low, and low risk groups according to the 2019 and 2014 ESC algorithms and the PESI. Discriminative power was compared using the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Results: Among 419 patients, 14 (3.3%) died (7 from PE) and 16 (3.8%) had adverse outcomes within 30 days. The 2019 ESC algorithm classified more patients as intermediate-high risk (45%) than the 2014 ESC algorithm (24%) or PESI (37%), and only 19% as low risk (32% with 2014 ESC or PESI). Discriminatory power for overall mortality was lower with the 2019 ESC algorithm (AUC 63.6%), compared to the 2014 ESC algorithm (AUC 71.5%) or PESI (AUC 75.2%), although the difference did not reach statistical significance (p=0.063). Discrimination for PE-related mortality and adverse outcomes was similar. Conclusions: While categorizing more patients in higher-risk groups, the 2019 ESC algorithm for PE did not improve prediction of short-term outcomes compared to the 2014 ESC algorithm or the PESI.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.