Search

Introduction Sarcoidosis is a multiorgan inflammatory disease characterized by the formation of granulomas, which are spatially organized clusters of immune cells, in peripheral organs including the lung, skin, and bone [...], Sarcoidosis is an inflammatory disease characterized by immune cell-rich granulomas that form in multiple organs. In this issue of the JCI, Sati and colleagues used scRNA-seq and spatial transcriptomics of skin samples from patients with sarcoidosis and non-sarcoidosis granulomatous disease to identify upregulation of a stromal-immune CXCL12/CXCR4 axis and accumulation of type 1 innate lymphoid cells (ILC1s) in sarcoidosis. The accumulation of ILC1s in skin and blood was specific to patients with sarcoidosis and not observed in other granulomatous diseases. The authors used a mouse model of lung granuloma to show that ILCs contribute to granuloma formation and that blockade of CXCR4 reduced the formation of granulomas, providing a proof of concept that sarcoidosis may be treated by CXCR4 blockade to prevent the progression of disease in patients. These results suggest ILC1s could serve as a diagnostic biomarker in sarcoidosis and a potential therapeutic target.

Skill decay is the decrement in performance on acquired knowledge and skills after a period of nonuse. Although there is a fair amount of work on individual skill decay, the literature on team-level skill decay is very limited. Thus, using a synthetic task environment, the objective of this study was to compare individual and team performance in terms of skill acquisition, retention (decay), and reacquisition. Eighty-one individuals in 27 three-person teams were trained to perform a complex computer-based simulation. The initial acquisition phase comprised a 2-day, 5-hour training protocol. After an average 73.33-day nonuse interval (SD = 30.18), participants returned for a 2-hour reacquisition session. Participants completed the performance task as both individuals and teams. The results indicated that, compared to individual performance, team performance improved faster during the skill acquisition phase. However, unlike individual performance, the amount of decay for team performance was dependent on whether the first retention performance session for team members was performed as individuals—where trainees had the opportunity to perform all components of the task—or as a team, with the latter resulting in the most decay. By extension, these results highlight the impact of a relatively brief individual post-retention (nonuse) interval training to mitigate team skill decay. In short, our results indicate that a little individual practice can go a long way toward maintaining team retention performance, but in contrast, a little team practice does not do the same for individual retention performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a bare‐bones meta‐analysis, the present study examined the effectiveness of the use of commonly considered alternative predictor methods as a means to reduce subgroup differences (i.e., the method‐change approach), taking into account the constructs assessed. With a focus on assessment centers, interviews, situational judgment tests, and work samples as alternative methods, the results indicated that consonant with the construct/method distinction, the effectiveness of a method in reducing subgroup differences is a function of the constructs assessed. Specifically, there are larger White‐African American subgroup differences that favor Whites for cognitive constructs on paper‐and‐pencil tests compared to the alternative methods; and most notably, the opposite result was obtained for noncognitive constructs such that, compared to paper‐and‐pencil assessments, substantially larger White‐African American subgroup differences were observed for alternative methods. A similar pattern of results was obtained for White‐Hispanic comparisons, albeit based on a smaller number of data points. In summary, the study's results indicate that the ubiquitously asserted effectiveness of the method‐change approach for reducing subgroup differences is overstated, with said effectiveness depending on the construct assessed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]