ObjectivesTo identify what is known empirically about the screening, treatment and harm of exposure to neonatal hypoglycaemia.DesignScoping review that applied a preregistered protocol based on established frameworks.Data sourcesMedline and Embase, up to 12 May 2020.Study selectionComparative and case-series studies, as well as guidelines, published in English or French, on the topic of immediate inpatient postnatal glucose screening in newborns.Data gatheringArticle selection and characterisation were performed in duplicate using predefined data extraction forms specific to primary studies and guidelines.Results12 guidelines and 74 primary studies were included. A neurodevelopmental outcome was primary in 32 studies: 30 observational studies followed up posthypoglycaemic, and the 2 intervention studies included 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT) about treatment thresholds. Three other RCTs assessed dextrose gel (two) and oral sucrose (one). 12 of 30 studies that evaluated non-neurodevelopmental primary outcomes were intervention studies. Only one cohort study compared outcomes in screened vs unscreened newborns. The guidelines did not arrive at a consensus definition of postnatal hypoglycaemic, and addressed potential harms of screening more often than primary studies.ConclusionsThe primary literature that informs hypoglycaemia screening is a series of studies that relate neurodevelopmental outcomes to postnatal hypoglycaemia. Further research is needed to better define an optimal threshold for hypoglycaemia that warrants intervention, based on long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes and a better delineation of potential screening harms.

ImportanceFrailty is associated with severe morbidity and mortality among people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Interventions such as pulmonary rehabilitation can treat and reverse frailty, yet frailty is not routinely measured in pulmonary clinical practice. It is unclear how population-based administrative data tools to screen for frailty compare with standard bedside assessments in this population.ObjectiveTo determine the agreement between the Hospital Frailty Risk Score (HFRS) and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) among hospitalized individuals with COPD and to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the HFRS (vs CFS) to detect frailty.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsA cross-sectional study was conducted among hospitalized patients with COPD exacerbation. The study was conducted in the respiratory ward of a single tertiary care academic hospital (The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada). Participants included consenting adult inpatients who were admitted with a diagnosis of acute COPD exacerbation from December 2016 to June 2019 and who used a clinical care pathway for COPD. There were no specific exclusion criteria. Data analysis was performed in March 2022.ExposureDegree of frailty measured by the CFS.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe HFRS was calculated using hospital administrative data. Primary outcomes were the sensitivity and specificity of the HFRS to detect frail and nonfrail individuals according to CFS assessments of frailty, and the secondary outcome was the optimal probability threshold of the HFRS to discriminate frail and nonfrail individuals.ResultsAmong 99 patients with COPD exacerbation (mean [SD] age, 70.6 [9.5] years; 56 women [57%]), 14 (14%) were not frail, 33 (33%) were vulnerable, 18 (18%) were mildly frail, and 34 (34%) were moderately to severely frail by the CFS. The HFRS (vs CFS) had a sensitivity of 27% and specificity of 93% to detect frail vs nonfrail individuals. The optimal probability threshold for the HFRS was 1.4 points or higher. The corresponding sensitivity to detect frailty was 69%, and the specificity was 57%.Conclusions and RelevanceIn this cross-sectional study, using the population-based HFRS to screen for frailty yielded poor detection of frailty among hospitalized patients with COPD compared with the bedside CFS. These findings suggest that use of the HFRS in this population may result in important missed opportunities to identify and provide early intervention for frailty, such as pulmonary rehabilitation.

No abstract

The Scinapse Undergraduate Science Case Competition (USCC) provides an opportunity for undergraduate students to experience the development of a novel research proposal. A case is presented to all participants and, using in-depth literature search (publications, reports, studies and published writings), students connect and pinpoint key elements allowing them to develop a hypothesis in support of the case in question. Participants also develop a methodology which will test the validity of their hypothesis. This year's case topic focused on antimicrobial resistance as a major threat to global health that requires a complex, multifaceted response. In teams of 2-4, undergraduate students tackled the case and provided novel research ideas that may hold the key to combating the global spread of antimicrobial resistance. In total, the 2019-2020 USCC attracted 694 undergraduate students from 19 universities across Canada and the United States. The top 10% of written submissions are highlighted in this abstract booklet.

The Scinapse Undergraduate Science Case Competition (USCC) provides an opportunity for undergraduate students to experience the development of a novel research proposal. A case is presented to all participants and, using in-depth literature search (publications, reports, studies and published writings), students connect and pinpoint key elements allowing them to develop a hypothesis in support of the case in question. Participants also develop a methodology which will test the validity of their hypothesis. This year's case topic was inspired by recent scientific advances in the field of biological augmentation. This topic provided an opportunity for participants to create research proposals exploring potential applications of gene editing, biomedical engineering, virtual reality, and more. In teams of 2-4, undergraduate students tackled the case and provided novel research ideas that may hold the key to addressing current global issues, such as those relating to health care, climate change, and food security. In total, the 2019-2020 USCC attracted 731 undergraduate students from 11 universities across Canada and the United States. The top 10% of written submissions are highlighted in this abstract booklet.