This study represents one of the largest and most clinically diverse investigations of the ACE-III. Our results demonstrate that the ACE-III is an acceptable alternative to the ACE-R. In addition, ACE-III performance has broader clinical implications in that it relates to carer reports of functional impairment in most common dementias. (JINS, 2018, 24, 854-863).
Normative word frequency has played a key role in the study of human memory, but there is little agreement as to the mechanism responsible for its effects. To determine whether word frequency affects binding probability or memory precision, we examined working memory for spatial positions of words. Each of three experiments included 300 trials in which five words were presented sequentially around an invisible circle followed by one of those words shown in the middle of the circle as a probe to test its location. Participants had to click on the associated location and the degree of error around the circle was the dependent measure. Across experiments we varied word frequency, presentation rate and the proportion of low frequency words on each trial. A mixture model dissociated memory precision, binding failure and guessing rates from the continuous distribution of errors. On trials that contained only low- or high-frequency words, low-frequency words lead to a greater degree of error in recalling the associated location. This was due to a higher word-location binding failure and not due to differences in memory precision or guessing rates. Slowing down the presentation rate eliminated the word frequency effect by reducing binding failures for low-frequency words. Mixing frequencies in a single trial hurt high-frequency and helped low-frequency words, but frequency composition and presentation rate did not interact. These findings support the idea that low-frequency words require more resources for binding and that the binding fails when these resources are insufficient.
Normative word frequency has played a key role in the study of human memory, but there is little agreement as to the mechanism responsible for its effects. To determine whether word frequency affects binding probability or memory precision, we used a continuous reproduction task to examine working memory for spatial positions of words. In three experiments, after studying a list of five words, participants had to report the spatial location of one of them on a circle. Across experiments we varied word frequency, presentation rate and the proportion of low frequency words on each trial. A mixture model dissociated memory precision, binding failure and guessing rate parameters from the continuous distribution of errors. On trials that contained only low-or only high-frequency words, low-frequency words lead to a greater degree of error in recalling the associated location. This was due to a higher word-location binding failure and not due to differences in memory precision or guessing rates. Slowing down the presentation rate eliminated the word frequency effect by reducing binding failures for low-frequency words.Mixing frequencies in a single trial hurt high-frequency and helped low-frequency words. These findings support the idea that word frequency can lead to both positive and negative mnemonic effects depending on a trade-off between a HF encoding advantage and a LF retrieval cue advantage. We suggest that 1) low-frequency words require more resources for binding, 2) that these resources recover gradually over time, and that 3) binding fails when these resources are insufficient.
BackgroundGuidelines on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reassessment intervals are unclear, potentially leading to detrimental practice variation: too frequent can result in overtreatment and greater strain on the healthcare system; too infrequent could result in the neglect of high risk patients who require medication. This study aimed to understand the different factors that general practitioners (GPs) consider when deciding on the reassessment interval for patients previously assessed for primary CVD risk.MethodsThis paper combines quantitative and qualitative data regarding reassessment intervals from two separate studies of CVD risk management. Experimental study: 144 Australian GPs viewed a random selection of hypothetical cases via a paper-based questionnaire, in which blood pressure, cholesterol and 5-year absolute risk (AR) were systematically varied to appear lower or higher. GPs were asked how they would manage each case, including an open-ended response for when they would reassess the patient. Interview study: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 25 Australian GPs, recruited separately from the GPs in the experimental study. Transcribed audio-recordings were thematically coded, using the Framework Analysis method.ResultsExperiment: GPs stated that they would reassess the majority of patients across all absolute risk categories in 6 months or less (low AR = 52 % [CI95% = 47–57 %], moderate AR = 82 % [CI95% = 76–86 %], high AR = 87 % [CI95% = 82–90 %], total = 71 % [CI95% = 67–75 %]), with 48 % (CI95% = 43–53 %) of patients reassessed in under 3 months. The majority (75 % [CI95% = 70–79 %]) of patients with low-moderate AR (≤15 %) and an elevated risk factor would be reassessed in under 6 months.Interviews: GPs identified different functions for reassessment and risk factor monitoring, which affected recommended intervals. These included perceived psychosocial benefits to patients, preparing the patient for medication, and identifying barriers to lifestyle change and medication adherence. Reassessment and monitoring intervals were driven by patient motivation to change lifestyle, patient demand, individual risk factors, and GP attitudes.ConclusionsThere is substantial variation in reassessment intervals for patients with the same risk profile. This suggests that GPs are not following reassessment recommendations in the Australian guidelines. The use of shorter intervals for low-moderate AR contradicts research on optimal monitoring intervals, and may result in unnecessary costs and over-treatment.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-016-0499-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Some individuals do not return to baseline health following SARS-CoV-2 infection, leading to a condition known as Long COVID. The underlying pathophysiology of Long COVID remains unknown. Given that autoantibodies have been found to play a role in severity of COVID infection and certain other post-COVID sequelae, their potential role in Long COVID is important to investigate. Here we apply a well-established, unbiased, proteome-wide autoantibody detection technology (PhIP-Seq) to a robustly phenotyped cohort of 121 individuals with Long COVID, 64 individuals with prior COVID-19 who reported full recovery, and 57 pre-COVID controls. While a distinct autoreactive signature was detected which separates individuals with prior COVID infection from those never exposed to COVID, we did not detect patterns of autoreactivity that separate individuals with Long COVID relative to individuals fully recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. These data suggest that there are robust alterations in autoreactive antibody profiles due to infection; however, no association of autoreactive antibodies and Long COVID was apparent by this assay.
Objective The COVID-19 pandemic is the first pandemic where social media platforms relayed information on a large scale, enabling an “infodemic” of conflicting information which undermined the global response to the pandemic. Understanding how the information circulated and evolved on social media platforms is essential for planning future public health campaigns. This study investigated what types of themes about COVID-19 were most viewed on YouTube during the first 8 months of the pandemic, and how COVID-19 themes progressed over this period. Methods We analyzed top-viewed YouTube COVID-19-related videos in English from December 1, 2019 to August 16, 2020 with an open inductive content analysis. We coded 536 videos associated with 1.1 billion views across the study period. East Asian countries were the first to report the virus, while most of the top-viewed videos in English were from the US. Videos from straight news outlets dominated the top-viewed videos throughout the outbreak, and public health authorities contributed the fewest. Although straight news was the dominant COVID-19 video source with various types of themes, its viewership per video was similar to that for entertainment news and YouTubers after March. Results We found, first, that collective public attention to the COVID-19 pandemic on YouTube peaked around March 2020, before the outbreak peaked, and flattened afterwards despite a spike in worldwide cases. Second, more videos focused on prevention early on, but videos with political themes increased through time. Third, regarding prevention and control measures, masking received much less attention than lockdown and social distancing in the study period. Conclusion Our study suggests that a transition of focus from science to politics on social media intensified the COVID-19 infodemic and may have weakened mitigation measures during the first waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. It is recommended that authorities should consider co-operating with reputable social media influencers to promote health campaigns and improve health literacy. In addition, given high levels of globalization of social platforms and polarization of users, tailoring communication towards different digital communities is likely to be essential.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.