METHODS: Participants (N = 16; 8 boys; age 12.5 ± 0.8 years) performed, on separate days, HIIE cycling consisting of 8 × 1-min work-intervals at 100%-to-70% (HIIEH-L), 70%-to-100% (HIIEL-H) or 85% (HIIECON) peak power separated by 75 s recovery. Affect, enjoyment and cerebral haemodynamics (oxygenation (∆O2Hb), deoxygenation (∆HHb) and tissue oxygenation index (TOI)) were recorded before, during, and after all conditions.
RESULTS: Affect and enjoyment were lower during HIIEH-L compared to HIIEL-H and HIIECON at work-intervals 1 to 3 (all P 0.83) but were greater during HIIEH-L than HIIEL-H and HIIECON at work-interval 8 (all P 0.83). ∆O2Hb was similar across conditions (P = 0.87) but TOI and ∆HHb were significantly greater and lower, respectively during HIIEH-L compared to HIIEL-H and HIIECON at work-interval 8 (all P 0.40). Affect was correlated with TOI (all r > 0.92) and ∆HHb (all r > -0.73) across conditions.
CONCLUSIONS: HIIEH-L offers advancement to the HIIECON and HIIEL-H which bring significant greater affect and enjoyment towards the end HIIE work-interval, implicating the feasibility and adoption of this protocol for health promotion in youth. Also, changes in prefrontal cortex haemodynamics are associated with the affect during HIIE.
METHODS: RPE, heart rate (HR), and oxygen uptake (V˙O2) data were retrospectively extracted from 3 lab-based crossover studies, with a pooled sample size of 45 adolescents, performing either cycling-based or running-based HIIE sessions. Within-participant correlations were calculated for RPE-HR and RPE-V˙O2, and receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was used to establish RPE cut points.
RESULTS: The results showed that RPE-HR demonstrated acceptable criterion validity (r = .53-.74, P < .01), while RPE-V˙O2 had poor validity (r = .40-.48, P < .01), except for HIIE at 100% peak power (r = .59, P < .01). RPE cut points of 4 and 5 were established in corresponding to HR/V˙O2 based thresholds.
CONCLUSION: RPE has some utility in evaluating intensity during lab-based running or cycling HIIE in adolescents. Future studies should expand the validation and calibration of RPE for prescribing and monitoring HIIE in children and adolescents in field-based contexts.
METHODS: From inception to July 24, 2021, relevant records were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. The quality of studies was determined using the QUADAS-2 tool. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curve for NAAT's diagnostic performance were evaluated using an HSROC model.
RESULTS: Eight studies comprising 424 samples evaluated NAAT accuracy for Staphylococcus aureus (SA) identification, while four studies comprising 317 samples evaluated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) identification. The pooled NAAT summary estimates for detection of both SA (sensitivity: 0.35 (95% CI 0.19-0.55), specificity: 0.95 (95% CI 0.92-0.97), PLR: 7.92 (95% CI 4.98-12.59), NLR: 0.44 (95% CI 0.14-1.46), and DOR: 24.0 (95% CI 6.59-87.61) ) and MRSA (sensitivity: 0.45 (95% CI 0.15-0.78), specificity: 0.93 (95% CI 0.89-0.95), PLR: 10.06 (95% CI 1.49-67.69), NLR: 0.69 (95% CI 0.41-1.15), and DOR: 27.18 (95% CI 2.97-248.6) ) were comparable. The I2 statistical scores for MRSA and SA identification sensitivity were 13.7% and 74.9%, respectively, indicating mild to substantial heterogeneity. PCR was frequently used among NAA tests, and its diagnostic accuracy coincided well with the overall summary estimates. A meta-regression and subgroup analysis of country, setting, study design, patient selection, and sample condition could not explain the heterogeneity (meta-regression P = 0.66, P = 0.46, P = 0.98, P = 0.68, and P = 0.79, respectively) in diagnostic effectiveness.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggested that the diagnostic accuracy of NAA tests is currently inadequate to substitute culture as a principal screening test. NAAT could be used in conjunction with microbiological culture due to the advantage of faster results and in situations where culture tests are not doable.
TRIAL DESIGN: The study is a randomized, placebo-controlled, adaptive clinical trial with parallel group design, superiority framework with an allocation ratio of 1:1 among experimental (HNS) and placebo group. An interim analysis will be done when half of the patients have been recruited to evaluate the need to adapt sample size, efficacy, and futility of the trial.
PARTICIPANTS: All asymptomatic patients with hospital or community based COVID-19 exposure will be screened if they have had 4 days exposure to a confirmed case. Non-pregnant adults with significant exposure level will be enrolled in the study High-risk exposure (<6 feet distance for >10min without face protection) Moderate exposure (<6 feet distance for >10min with face protection) Subjects with acute or chronic infection, COVID-19 vaccinated, and allergy to HNS will be excluded from the study. Recruitment will be done at Shaikh Zayed Post-Graduate Medical Institute, Ali Clinic and Doctors Lounge in Lahore (Pakistan).
INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: In this clinical study, patients will receive either raw natural honey (0.5 g) and encapsulated organic Nigella sativa seeds (40 mg) per kg body weight per day or empty capsule with and 30 ml of 5% dextrose water as a placebo for 14 days. Both the natural products will be certified for standardization by Government College University (Botany department). Furthermore, each patient will be given standard care therapy according to version 3.0 of the COVID-19 clinical management guidelines by the Ministry of National Health Services of Pakistan.
MAIN OUTCOMES: Primary outcome will be Incidence of COVID-19 cases within 14 days of randomisation. Secondary endpoints include incidence of COVID-19-related symptoms, hospitalizations, and deaths along with the severity of COVID-19-related symptoms till 14th day of randomization.
RANDOMISATION: Participants will be randomized into experimental and control groups (1:1 allocation ratio) via the lottery method. There will be stratification based on high risk and moderate risk exposure.
BLINDING (MASKING): Quadruple blinding will be ensured for the participants, care providers and outcome accessors. Data analysts will also be blinded to avoid conflict of interest. Site principal investigator will be responsible for ensuring masking.
NUMBERS TO BE RANDOMISED (SAMPLE SIZE): 1000 participants will be enrolled in the study with 1:1 allocation.
TRIAL STATUS: The final protocol version 1.4 was approved by institutional review board of Shaikh Zayed Post-Graduate Medical Complex on February 15, 2021. The trial recruitment was started on March 05, 2021, with a trial completion date of February 15, 2022.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial was registered on February 23, 2021, www.clinicaltrials.gov with registration ID NCT04767087 .
FULL PROTOCOL: The full protocol is attached as an additional file, accessible from the Trials website (Additional file 1). With the intention of expediting dissemination of this trial, the conventional formatting has been eliminated; this Letter serves as a summary of the key elements of the full protocol. The study protocol has been reported in accordance with the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Clinical Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) guidelines.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze the total and risk-attributable burden of lip and oral cavity cancer (LOC) and other pharyngeal cancer (OPC) for 204 countries and territories and by Socio-demographic Index (SDI) using 2019 Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors (GBD) Study estimates.
EVIDENCE REVIEW: The incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) due to LOC and OPC from 1990 to 2019 were estimated using GBD 2019 methods. The GBD 2019 comparative risk assessment framework was used to estimate the proportion of deaths and DALYs for LOC and OPC attributable to smoking, tobacco, and alcohol consumption in 2019.
FINDINGS: In 2019, 370 000 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 338 000-401 000) cases and 199 000 (95% UI, 181 000-217 000) deaths for LOC and 167 000 (95% UI, 153 000-180 000) cases and 114 000 (95% UI, 103 000-126 000) deaths for OPC were estimated to occur globally, contributing 5.5 million (95% UI, 5.0-6.0 million) and 3.2 million (95% UI, 2.9-3.6 million) DALYs, respectively. From 1990 to 2019, low-middle and low SDI regions consistently showed the highest age-standardized mortality rates due to LOC and OPC, while the high SDI strata exhibited age-standardized incidence rates decreasing for LOC and increasing for OPC. Globally in 2019, smoking had the greatest contribution to risk-attributable OPC deaths for both sexes (55.8% [95% UI, 49.2%-62.0%] of all OPC deaths in male individuals and 17.4% [95% UI, 13.8%-21.2%] of all OPC deaths in female individuals). Smoking and alcohol both contributed to substantial LOC deaths globally among male individuals (42.3% [95% UI, 35.2%-48.6%] and 40.2% [95% UI, 33.3%-46.8%] of all risk-attributable cancer deaths, respectively), while chewing tobacco contributed to the greatest attributable LOC deaths among female individuals (27.6% [95% UI, 21.5%-33.8%]), driven by high risk-attributable burden in South and Southeast Asia.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this systematic analysis, disparities in LOC and OPC burden existed across the SDI spectrum, and a considerable percentage of burden was attributable to tobacco and alcohol use. These estimates can contribute to an understanding of the distribution and disparities in LOC and OPC burden globally and support cancer control planning efforts.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate cancer burden and trends globally for 204 countries and territories and by Sociodemographic Index (SDI) quintiles from 2010 to 2019.
EVIDENCE REVIEW: The GBD 2019 estimation methods were used to describe cancer incidence, mortality, years lived with disability, years of life lost, and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) in 2019 and over the past decade. Estimates are also provided by quintiles of the SDI, a composite measure of educational attainment, income per capita, and total fertility rate for those younger than 25 years. Estimates include 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs).
FINDINGS: In 2019, there were an estimated 23.6 million (95% UI, 22.2-24.9 million) new cancer cases (17.2 million when excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 10.0 million (95% UI, 9.36-10.6 million) cancer deaths globally, with an estimated 250 million (235-264 million) DALYs due to cancer. Since 2010, these represented a 26.3% (95% UI, 20.3%-32.3%) increase in new cases, a 20.9% (95% UI, 14.2%-27.6%) increase in deaths, and a 16.0% (95% UI, 9.3%-22.8%) increase in DALYs. Among 22 groups of diseases and injuries in the GBD 2019 study, cancer was second only to cardiovascular diseases for the number of deaths, years of life lost, and DALYs globally in 2019. Cancer burden differed across SDI quintiles. The proportion of years lived with disability that contributed to DALYs increased with SDI, ranging from 1.4% (1.1%-1.8%) in the low SDI quintile to 5.7% (4.2%-7.1%) in the high SDI quintile. While the high SDI quintile had the highest number of new cases in 2019, the middle SDI quintile had the highest number of cancer deaths and DALYs. From 2010 to 2019, the largest percentage increase in the numbers of cases and deaths occurred in the low and low-middle SDI quintiles.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The results of this systematic analysis suggest that the global burden of cancer is substantial and growing, with burden differing by SDI. These results provide comprehensive and comparable estimates that can potentially inform efforts toward equitable cancer control around the world.