Search

BackgroundComparative optimism, the belief that negative events are more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself, is well established in health risk research. It is unknown, however, whether comparative optimism also permeates people's health expectations and potentially behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic.ObjectivesData were collected through an international survey (N = 6485) exploring people's thoughts and psychosocial behaviours relating to COVID-19. This paper reports UK data on comparative optimism. In particular, we examine the belief that negative events surrounding risk and recovery from COVID-19 are perceived as more likely to happen to others rather than to oneself.MethodsUsing online snowball sampling through social media, anonymous UK survey data were collected from N = 645 adults during weeks 5-8 of the UK COVID-19 lockdown. The sample was normally distributed in terms of age and reflected the UK ethnic and disability profile.FindingsRespondents demonstrated comparative optimism where they believed that as compared to others of the same age and gender, they were unlikely to experience a range of controllable (eg accidentally infect/ be infected) and uncontrollable (eg need hospitalization/ intensive care treatment if infected) COVID-19-related risks in the short term (P

Importance: Early detection and intervention of hearing loss may mitigate negative effects on children's development. Children who were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) as babies are particularly susceptible to hearing loss and risk factors are vital for surveillance. Design, setting and participants: This single-centre retrospective cohort study included data from 142 inborn infants who had been admitted to the NICU in a tertiary regional referral centre. Data were recorded for 71 infants with confirmed permanent congenital hearing loss hearing loss. To determine impact of NICU admission independently of prematurity, babies were individually matched with 71 inborn infants on gestational age, birthweight, and sex. Main outcomes and measures: Neonatal indicators were recorded for all children with permanent congenital hearing loss. Presence of UK and US risk factors for hearing loss were collected on the neonatal population with hearing loss and for the matched controls. Results: A fifth (21%) of babies with hearing loss had one or more UK risk factors whereas most (86%) had at least one US risk factor. False positives would be evident if US factors were used whereas the matched controls had no UK risk factors. Ten babies who at birth had no UK or US risk factors did not have any significant neonatal indicators identified in their records, one was ventilated for one day and two had a genetic anomaly. Conclusions and relevance: Current risk factors for hearing loss we identified for follow-up in this high-risk group are highly specific for congenital hearing loss. UK risk factors were highly specific for hearing loss but not sensitive and conversely, US risk factors are sensitive but not specific so false positives would be recorded. A national study of neonatal indicators could provide the utility to test which combinations of risk factors provide high sensitivity without losing specificity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The current focus on identifying criteria for academic teaching practice is influencing performance goals for teaching academics. This has produced a strong imperative to engage with the scholarship of teaching and learning; however, it is not always clear how teaching academics continue to build capacity to do this during their academic career. Drawing on the literature, this paper analyses the outcomes from two years of faculty and institutional teaching grants to gauge their role in generating effective engagement in the scholarship of teaching and learning. The paper identifies some improvements to the grants programs which have contributed to quality outcomes.