Search

Background: Evidence-informed policymaking is more likely if organisations have cultures that promote research use and invest in resources that facilitate staff engagement with research. Measures of organisations' research use culture and capacity are needed to assess current capacity, identify opportunities for improvement, and examine the impact of capacity-building interventions. The aim of the current study was to develop a comprehensive system to measure and score organisations' capacity to engage with and use research in policymaking, which we entitled ORACLe (Organisational Research Access, Culture, and Leadership).Method: We used a multifaceted approach to develop ORACLe. Firstly, we reviewed the available literature to identify key domains of organisational tools and systems that may facilitate research use by staff. We interviewed senior health policymakers to verify the relevance and applicability of these domains. This information was used to generate an interview schedule that focused on seven key domains of organisational capacity. The interview was pilot-tested within four Australian policy agencies. A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was then undertaken using an expert sample to establish the relative importance of these domains. This data was used to produce a scoring system for ORACLe.Results: The ORACLe interview was developed, comprised of 23 questions addressing seven domains of organisational capacity and tools that support research use, including (1) documented processes for policymaking; (2) leadership training; (3) staff training; (4) research resources (e.g. database access); and systems to (5) generate new research, (6) undertake evaluations, and (7) strengthen relationships with researchers. From the DCE data, a conditional logit model was estimated to calculate total scores that took into account the relative importance of the seven domains. The model indicated that our expert sample placed the greatest importance on domains (2), (3) and (4).Conclusion: We utilised qualitative and quantitative methods to develop a system to assess and score organisations' capacity to engage with and apply research to policy. Our measure assesses a broad range of capacity domains and identifies the relative importance of these capacities. ORACLe data can be used by organisations keen to increase their use of evidence to identify areas for further development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background:Socially anxious individuals are theorized to avoid social cues and engage in safety behaviors to prevent negative evaluation, which prevents disconfirmation of social fears. Cognitive models propose that this avoidance is driven by (1) self-focused attention (SFA) and (2) physiological arousal.Design:To examine these proposed mechanisms, we compared high socially anxious (HSA;n=29) and low socially anxious (LSA;n= 28) participants on a view-time task involving faces.Method:Participants engaged in a task in which they viewed socially threatening (i.e., disgust, anger) and nonthreatening (i.e., happy, neutral) faces.Results:Results revealed that HSA participants endorsed greater SFA during the view-time task and spent less time viewing angry, disgusted, and neutral facial expressions relative to LSA participants. Regression analyses revealed that arousal, as indexed by salivary α-amylase, was a unique predictor of increased face-viewing time among HSA participants. In contrast, arousal predicted decreased face-viewing time among LSA participants.Conclusions:Findings underscore the need for further investigation of avoidance mechanisms in social anxiety. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

A correction to the article "Behavioral and Neural Analysis of GABA in the Acquisition, Consolidation, Reconsolidation, and Extinction of Fear Memory," published in a previous issue of the journal is presented.

Importance: COVID-19 has placed a monumental burden on the health care system globally. Although no longer a public health emergency, there is still a pressing need for effective treatments to prevent hospitalization and death. Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) is a promising and potentially effective antiviral that has received emergency use authorization by the U.S. FDA., Objective: Determine real world effectiveness of Paxlovid nationwide and investigate disparities between treated and untreated eligible patients., Design/setting/participants: Population-based cohort study emulating a target trial, using inverse probability weighted models to balance treated and untreated groups on baseline confounders. Participants were patients with a SARS-CoV-2 positive test or diagnosis (index) date between December 2021 and February 2023 selected from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) database who were eligible for Paxlovid treatment. Namely, adults with at least one risk factor for severe COVID-19 illness, no contraindicated medical conditions, not using one or more strictly contraindicated medications, and not hospitalized within three days of index. From this cohort we identified patients who were treated with Paxlovid within 5 days of positive test or diagnosis (n = 98,060) and patients who either did not receive Paxlovid or were treated outside the 5-day window (n = 913,079 never treated; n = 1,771 treated after 5 days)., Exposures: Treatment with Paxlovid within 5 days of positive COVID-19 test or diagnosis., Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospitalization and death in the 28 days following COVID-19 index date., Results: A total of 1,012,910 COVID-19 positive patients at risk for severe COVID-19 were included, 9.7% of whom were treated with Paxlovid. Uptake varied widely by geographic region and timing, with top adoption areas near 50% and bottom near 0%. Adoption increased rapidly after EUA, reaching steady state by 6/2022. Participants who were treated with Paxlovid had a 26% (RR, 0.742; 95% CI, 0.689-0.812) reduction in hospitalization risk and 73% (RR, 0.269, 95% CI, 0.179-0.370) reduction in mortality risk in the 28 days following COVID-19 index date., Conclusions/relevance: Paxlovid is effective in preventing hospitalization and death in at-risk COVID-19 patients. These results were robust to a large number of sensitivity considerations., Disclosure: The authors report no disclosures., Key Points: Question: Is treatment with Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir/ritonavir) associated with a reduction in 28-day hospitalization and mortality in patients at risk for severe COVID-19? Findings: In this multi-institute retrospective cohort study of 1,012,910 patients, Paxlovid treatment within 5 days after COVID-19 diagnosis reduced 28-day hospitalization and mortality by 26% and 73% respectively, compared to no treatment with Paxlovid within 5 days. Paxlovid uptake was low overall (9.7%) and highly variable. Meaning: In Paxlovid-eligible patients, treatment was associated with decreased risk of hospitalization and death. Results align with prior randomized trials and observational studies, thus supporting the real-world effectiveness of Paxlovid.