Search

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) plays a regulatory role in neuronal differentiation and synaptic plasticity and has been linked to glucose regulation and cognition. Associations among plasma BDNF, cognition, and insulin function were explored. Forty-one participants with impaired insulin function (IIF), ranging from insulin resistance to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), were matched with 41 healthy controls on gender, age, education, and IQ. Participants received complete medical, neurological, psychiatric, and neuropsychological evaluations. IIF individuals had significantly lower plasma BDNF levels than controls, particularly females, and higher BDNF levels were associated with poorer explicit memory in IIF females, suggesting that higher levels within this group may reflect the body's efforts to respond to damage. After accounting for age, education, and HbA1c, BDNF significantly predicted 13.1-23.5% of the variance in explicit memory in IIF women. These findings suggest that BDNF elevations within diseased groups may not always be a marker of health. (Contains 5 tables.)

However, supervisees who received LM during supervision were 2.5 times more likely to be arrested (43 percent arrested) than non-LM cases (17 percent arrested). Of the 65,647 supervisees placed on LM, about 60 percent received LM at the time of sentencing, while the remainder were placed on LM during their supervision term. Other key issues this research explored include who on post-conviction supervision receives LM, the characteristics of persons on LM, the different types of LM imposed, and the relationship between LM and recidivism outcomes. The sample included non-LM supervisees (n= 362,793) and LM supervisees (n= 65,647) further categorized by imposition of the condition; LM imposed at sentencing (n= 38,785) and during supervision (n= 26,862). [Extracted from the article]

While some research has focused on the pandemic's effects among state probation and parole agencies, the current research provides a first-time examination into the pandemic's impact on the federal supervision system. Ultimately, the federal supervision system will need to ascertain at a district and national level what aspects of pandemic supervision should be maintained or discarded after the pandemic ends. occurring during this time. Ultimately, the federal supervision system will need to ascertain at a district and national level what aspects of pandemic supervision should be maintained or discarded after the pandemic ends. occurring during this time. As demonstrated in the current research and in other articles published in this issue of Federal Probation, the pandemic has forced the federal probation and pretrial system to substitute in-person for electronic supervision irrespective of a client's risk level or supervision status. [Extracted from the article]

To capture and preserve a record of what it was like for leaders in our system during this unprecedented time, we conducted interviews with several chief U.S. probation officers in the districts that were initially affected by the pandemic. The Eastern District of New York, like the Southern District of New York, was faced early on with the impacts of COVID-19. Approximately 203,000 cases of laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 were reported in NYC during the first three months of the pandemic. [Extracted from the article]

For those persons under federal supervision, Figures 12 and 13 (next page) depict the time frame of January 2017 through February 2020, showing pre-pandemic that there was an average national employment rate of 71.5 percent, with a national unemployment rate of 28.4 percent. Overall, these numbers reflect statements from officers that were interviewed regarding the types of contacts that were occurring during the pandemic, compared to regular supervision practices during pre-COVID supervision. Interviews with officers from across the country revealed that the most significant changes in supervision operations during the pandemic centered around in-person contacts with the person under supervision, as well as collateral contacts. [Extracted from the article]

Effective supervision of sex offenders demands the thoughtful integration of several strategies: ensuring a thorough investigation, facilitating reentry effectively (no small feat for people who often have limited remaining support systems when they release from incarceration), providing appropriate levels of supervision, referring to appropriate types of treatment, and verifying sex offender registration. Although the public tends to view all sex offenders as high risk, the level of risk sex offenders pose is one of the important ways in which sex offenders differ from one another. With or convicted of a sex offense (sex offenders) has long challenged pretrial services and probation officers. Effective supervision also requires ongoing collaboration among those responsible for carrying it out.[1] The supervision of sex offenders is more demanding and intensive than the supervision of most other defendants and persons under supervision. [Extracted from the article]

Objective: The purpose of this article is to review developmental dysplasia of the hip (DDH), a well-described entity previously evaluated with a standard multimodality imaging algorithm, typically consisting of ultrasound and radiography depending on patient age., Conclusion: MRI is increasingly used because it is a noninvasive imaging modality that offers excellent anatomic detail, enabling the differentiation of ossified and unossified components of the hip. The radiologist should be aware of the increasing role of MRI and recognize the critical MRI findings of DDH.