Tech

Family courts are misunderstanding and misusing research around how children form close relationships with their caregivers, say an international group of experts.

Seventy experts from across the globe argue that widespread misunderstandings around attachment research have hampered its accurate implementation, with potentially negative consequences for decisions in family courts.

In response, they have published an international consensus statement in Attachment & Human Development that aims "to counter misinformation and help steer family court applications of attachment theory in a supportive, evidence-based direction on matters related to child protection and custody decisions".

In the statement, the group sets out three principles from attachment research which they say should guide decision-making: the child's need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers; the value of continuity of good-enough care; and the benefits of networks of familiar relationships.

Attachment research investigates the strong affectional bonds - 'attachments' - that individuals form to others in order to achieve comfort and protection. Children are born with a predisposition to develop these bonds with 'attachment figures' in their lives. This often includes the child's parents, but many children develop attachment relationships with additional caregivers, such as grandparents. Children wish to turn to their attachment figures when upset.

The quality of an attachment relationship - how readily a child will turn to their caregiver and accept comfort - is indicated by behaviour suggestive of whether or not they expect their attachment figures to respond sensitively to their signals in times of need. Indeed, the most important predictor of children's attachment quality is caregiver 'sensitivity': the ability to perceive, interpret and respond in a timely manner and appropriately to children's signals.

Attachment research is applied in many settings, including in family court decision-making regarding child custody and child protection. Court practice needs to follow the best interests of the child, but this can be difficult to determine. There is an increasing focus on the interactions and relationships between children and their caregivers, which in turn has led to interest in using attachment theory and measures to help guide decision-making.

Dr Robbie Duschinsky from the University of Cambridge, said: "The decisions reached by family courts can have a major impact on a child's life, but as we've seen, these decisions may be based on incorrect understanding and assumptions. By outlining potential issues and presenting principles to guide the decision-making process, we hope to better inform and hence empower courts to act in a child's best interests."

One example is the mistaken assumption that attachment quality equals relationship quality, and that it is possible to judge attachment quality by looking at isolated behaviours. In fact, there are many other important aspects of child-caregiver relationships, such as play, supervision and teaching, and specific behaviours such as crying can depend on largely constitutional factors such as temperament.

There are also misunderstandings regarding the importance of developing attachment to one particular caregiver rather than to more than one, with the theory misinterpreted as placing an emphasis on one 'psychological parent', typically the mother. In this line of reasoning, it is often assumed that an attachment relationship with one person is at the expense of other attachment relationships, and that best-interest decisions should maximise the likelihood of secure attachment with one primary caregiver. However, children can develop and maintain secure attachment relationships to multiple caregivers simultaneously, and a network of attachment relationships may well constitute a protective factor in child development.

In other cases, attachment theory has been held to categorically prescribe joint physical custody, with equal time allocation regardless of child age, including overnights and transitions between family homes every day or every other day. Yet, there is a notable scarcity of empirical research on attachment in relation to child custody, time allocation, and overnight arrangements.

Dr Tommie Forslund from Stockholm University said: "Misunderstandings can have important consequences for children and their caregivers. In some cases, they can lead to an ill-informed dismissal of the relevance of attachment by court professionals or, conversely, to the overuse of attachment ideas and measures, with practice unmoored from evidence.

"We need to make sure that courts are aware of the limits of current understanding as well as the nuances of attachment theory and research before seeking to apply it to their decision-making."

The researchers have also advised caution in using assessments of attachment quality in the family courts.

Professor Pehr Granqvist from Stockholm University added: "Courts need to bear in mind that while assessments of attachment quality may be suitable for helping target supportive interventions, there are different opinions even among those of us who specialise in attachment research regarding the potential usefulness of these assessments when it comes to decision-making regarding child protection.

"Validated in group-level research, attachment measures have insufficient precision for individual level prediction. If used at all, assessments of attachment quality should never be used in isolation but only as part of a larger assessment battery that assigns more weight to direct assessments of caregiving behaviour. Importantly, attachment assessments must only be used by formally trained observers who follow standardised protocols."

The experts propose three fundamental principles, based on more than half a century of research, which they argue can be used as a basis for court practitioners:

The need for familiar, non-abusive caregivers - For child protection practice, for example, this implies that all non-abusive and non-neglecting family-based care is likely to be better than institutional care.

The value of continuity of good-enough care - 'Good-enough' care signifies an adequate level of meeting the child's needs over time. The group urges family courts to examine and support caregivers' abilities to provide 'good-enough' caregiving, rather than placing children in out-of-home custody with the hope of 'optimal' care. Major separations from caregivers constitute risk factors in child development that should be prevented whenever possible.

The benefits of networks of attachment relationships - Decision-making concerning child custody should assign weight to supporting children's ability to develop and maintain attachment relationships with both their caregivers, except when there is threat to the child's welfare and safety or one of the parents wants to 'opt out'.

Key Takeaways:

Machine learning can be an effective tool to set competitive prices.

Artificial intelligence has its limits on how to set the most effective prices due to variables beyond the seller's control.

Over the long term, supracompetitive pricing can result.

CATONSVILLE, MD, January 12, 2021 - Machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI) are perfectly suited to help companies and marketers monitor and set prices based on real-time dynamic pricing. But new research has identified some possible unintended consequences of AI in this area.

Machine learning algorithms don't always account for factors outside of the seller's control, such as competitor prices. Researchers found that if AI algorithms are setting prices over the long term, a monopolistic price effect is possible, essentially creating a collusive pricing environment in the marketplace. This represents a challenge for policymakers as the researchers show that independent AI pricing algorithms can result in supracompetitive market outcomes.

The research study to be published in the January issue of the INFORMS journal Marketing Science, "Algorithmic Collusion: Supracompetitive Prices via Independent Algorithms," is authored by Karsten Hansen and Kanishka Misra of the University of California, San Diego, and Mallesh Pai from Rice University.

The researchers study a setting where competitive online retailers are using machine learning algorithms to set real-time prices. Researchers add to a growing body of literature that has raised concerns that such algorithms might induce collusive pricing behavior. The authors then contributed to this literature and find that independent algorithms, without observing competitive prices, can result in supracompetitive prices.

Machine learning algorithms automate a pricing experimentation to learn the profit maximizing price. The researchers show the market outcome of independent firms using these algorithms depends on the quality of short pricing experiments. "We were able to show that where our price experiments had high information value (low noise), competitors' prices from independent algorithms inadvertently became correlated, and over time, prices became supracompetitive," said Misra. "This means that a consequence of using AI for pricing could be creating an atmosphere of price collusion in a given marketplace, leading to a monopolistic pricing effect."

"The real-world impacts are quite broad," said Hansen. "The machine learning algorithms rely upon the informational value of the underlying pricing experiment data, and not all of the variables that feed market outcomes, such as competitors' prices, may be accessible to those systems. Our results provide guidance for when machine learning algorithms are less reliable for setting prices."

"We believe the identification of this pattern raises fresh practical concerns for managers and policymakers," said Pai. "The challenge for regulators in the future will be to strike a balance. There are existing antitrust concerns about algorithms that set collusive prices when tracking competitors' prices (e.g., through implicit threats of retaliation)." Pai continued, "Here we show that similar effects can occur even when the algorithms explicitly do not account for competitors' prices. They will need to take into account factors beyond the scope of what algorithms can identify and track, while working to ensure that competitive pricing does not always mean the same, monopolistic pricing structures."

ORLANDO, Fla. -- A new national survey by the Orlando Health Heart & Vascular Institute finds many Americans would delay doctor's appointments and even emergency care when COVID-19 rates are high. The survey found 67 percent of Americans are more concerned about going to medical appointments when COVID-19 rates are high in their area and nearly three in five (57 percent) are hesitant to go to the hospital even for an emergency.

In a time when every trip out of the house and every person we come in contact with poses a threat of contracting COVID-19, it can be difficult to weigh the risks and benefits of venturing out. However, experts say hospitals and doctor's offices are some of the safest public spaces and that delaying medical care can be very dangerous.

"Because of the extensive protocols in place, COVID-19 transmissions in hospitals are very rare," said Joel Garcia, MD, an interventional cardiologist at the Orlando Health Heart & Vascular Institute. "There is more risk in not paying attention to symptoms or medical conditions than the benefit of staying home thinking you will not get exposed to COVID-19."

The survey also found that nearly half (49 percent) of Americans will not reschedule missed in-person medical appointments until COVID-19 concerns are reduced in their area and the same number (49 percent) worry their health will suffer because of in-person appointments missed due to COVID-19.

"I understand their hesitation. But there's no question, across diagnoses, whether for chronic or acute conditions, the later in the disease process that we see people and can intervene, the worse their outcomes." said Steven Hoff, MD, a cardiothoracic surgeon at the Orlando Health Heart & Vascular Institute.

That could have easily been the case for Will Fontaine, who was experiencing fatigue and chest pains, but was hesitant to make an appointment with his doctor.

"At the time, COVID was rampant and I was really trying to limit my exposure," Fontaine said. "Fortunately, one of my co-workers knew Dr. Garcia and we set up a telehealth appointment to talk about my symptoms and the next steps."

Dr. Garcia explained the extensive protocols in place at Orlando Health that made Fontaine comfortable enough to come in for a heart catheterization. The procedure revealed blockages in Fontaine's arteries that would likely lead to a heart attack if left untreated. After successful triple bypass surgery, Fontaine now feels better than he has in years. Five months after surgery, he's down 50 pounds and continues to eat a healthy diet and work hard at his cardiac rehab sessions.

"I promised my doctors that I would change my lifestyle and I have kept that promise," Fontaine said. "I'm just glad I decided to go in for help when I did and that I will be here to spend time with my grandson and to live the life I love."

Experts say telehealth has become an invaluable tool during the pandemic. Not only do virtual appointments allow doctors to make initial contact with patients, they also offer opportunities to explain the safety protocols in place and encourage them to come in if needed, but, in many cases, they can also be used in follow up care and to limit in-person visits.

"We have been fortunate that we've been able to accelerate the development of telehealth services during the COVID era because of the need that was created," Dr. Garcia said. "Being able to actually reach out to the patient in that venue allows us to educate patients better and get them in the door if we need to see them in person."

New research from King's College London shows nearly half of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) staff are likely to meet the threshold for PTSD, severe anxiety or problem drinking during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Results from a study of ICU healthcare workers, published today in Occupational Medicine, shows the stark impact of working in critical care during the COVID-10 pandemic. The researchers found poor mental health was common in many ICU clinicians although they were more pronounced in nurses than in doctors or other healthcare professionals.

Lead author, Professor Neil Greenberg, from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN), King's College London said:

'Our results show a substantial burden of mental health symptoms being reported by ICU staff towards the end of the first wave in July and July 2020. The severity of symptoms we identified are highly likely to impair some ICU staffs ability to provide high quality care as well as negatively impacting on their quality of life.

'The high rate of mortality amongst COVID-19 patients admitted to ICU, coupled with difficulty in communication and providing adequate end-of-life support to patients, and their next of kin because of visiting restrictions, are very likely to have been highly challenging stressors for all staff working in ICUs.'

709 healthcare workers, from nine ICUs in England, completed anonymous web-based surveys in June and July 2020 comprising 291 (41 per cent) doctors, 344 (49 per cent) nurses, and 74 (10 per cent) other healthcare staff.

Over half (59 per cent) reported good wellbeing, however 45 per cent met the threshold for probable clinical significance for at least one of: severe depression (6 per cent), PTSD (40 per cent), severe anxiety (11 per cent) or problem drinking (7 per cent). Worryingly more than one in eight respondents (13 per cent) reported frequent thoughts of being better off dead, or of hurting themselves in the past two weeks.

Professor Greenberg continues 'Whilst these results are in some ways not surprising, they should serve as a stark reminder to NHS managers of the pressing need to protect the mental health of ICU workers now in order to ensure they can deliver vital care to those in need.'

ICU staff have faced a particularly challenging time frequently working in areas where the perceived risk of COVID-19 exposure is high for long periods, wearing PPE, with the challenges of managing staff and equipment shortages on a daily basis especially during the first wave. They have also had to deal with ethically challenging decisions as well as potentially being fearful of catching COVID-19 themselves and potentially passing it on to their loved ones.

Professor Greenberg adds 'Evidence-based mechanisms should be in place so all healthcare workers, including ICU staff, can promptly access treatment for mental health issues. If we protect the mental health of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, staff will be better able to sustainably deliver high quality care to the large numbers of patients seriously unwell with COVID-19.'

Further work is needed to better understand the real level of clinical need amongst ICU staff as self-report questionnaires can overestimate the rate of clinically relevant mental health symptoms.

Professor Greenberg concludes: 'Our results highlight the potential profound impact that COVID-19 has had on the mental health of frontline UK staff and indicate an urgent need for a national strategy to protect staff mental health and decrease the risk of functional impairment of ICU staff while they carry out their essential work during COVID-19 and beyond.'

New Rochelle, NY, January 12, 2021--The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine (ABM) does not recommend cessation of breastfeeding for individuals who are vaccinated against COVID-19. In a new statement, the ABM suggests that lactating women discuss the risks and benefits of vaccination with their health care provider, within the context of their risk of contracting COVID-19 and of developing severe disease, according to the peer-reviewed journal Breastfeeding Medicine. Click here to read the ABM statement now.

This is a challenging topic because the vaccine trials excluded lactating women. Thus, there are no clinical data regarding the safety of the Pfizer/BioNtech or the Moderna vaccine in nursing mothers. According to the ABM statement, "there is little biological plausibility that the vaccine will cause harm, and antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 [the virus that causes COVID-19] in milk may protect the breastfeeding child."

"Without clinical data, the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine relied on biological plausibility and expert opinion to craft a statement on considerations for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in lactation," says Alison Stuebe, MD, President of ABM. "The available information is reassuring; however, pregnant and lactating people deserve better than plausibility to guide medical decisions. Henceforward, phase 3 clinical trials should routinely include pregnant and lactating participants. It's time to protect pregnant and breastfeeding individuals through research, not from research."

Arthur I. Eidelman, MD, Editor-in-Chief of Breastfeeding Medicine, states: "The publication of the balanced ABM statement will serve as an immediate guide for clinicians and families in deciding to proceed with Covid-19 vaccination of nursing mothers."

The body's immune system is the first line of defense against infections like bacteria, viruses or cancers. Some cancers, however, have developed the art of molecular deception to avoid destruction by the body's immune system. However, a University of Missouri researcher might have found a new way to help the body's immune system get past that deception and destroy the cancer.

"Normally, your body's immune cells are constantly on patrol to identify and destroy foreign entities in the body," said Yves Chabu, an assistant professor in the Division of Biological Sciences. "Normal cells put up a 'don't-eat-me' molecular flag that is recognized by immune cells, thereby preventing destruction of normal tissues. But some cancers have also developed the ability to mimic normal cells and produce this 'don't eat me' signal. As a consequence, the immune system fails to recognize the cancer as a defective tissue and leaves it alone, which is bad news for the patient."

Immunotherapies are cancer drugs that essentially block the "don't-eat-me" signal coming from the cancer and allow the immune system to kill it. Chabu, whose appointment is in the College of Arts and Science, said while these immunotherapies work for certain types of cancers, prostate cancer is highly immunosuppressive, meaning the cancer's physical and molecular environments simply overpower the body's immune system. But Chabu might have unlocked a solution with help from a more than 50-year-old strain of bacteria.

"Cancers are different in one individual to the next, even when they affect the same tissue," Chabu said. "These interpersonal differences contribute to whether or not a particular therapy will effectively kill the cancer and help the patient. The bacteria itself is genetically pliable, therefore it can be genetically modified to overcome patient-specific therapeutic limits. Imagine a patient whose cancer isn't responding to traditional therapies and has no other treatment options. One can envision genetically modifying the bacteria such that it can unload therapeutics that specifically exploit that cancer's unique vulnerabilities and kill it."

In a previous study, scientists at the Cancer Research Center and the University of Missouri developed a genetically distinct and non-toxic strain of salmonella called CRC2631 to select and kill cancer cells. CRC2631 was derived from another strain of salmonella that had been stored at room temperature for more than half a century. Now, scientists like Chabu are demonstrating the ability for CRC2631, which enthusiastically targets cancerous tumors, to be used to unleash the body's immune system against prostate cancer.

"Because CRC2631 preferentially colonizes tumor cells, the effect is mainly localized to the tumor," Chabu said. "The use of CRC2631 to design and deliver patient-tailored therapeutics foretells potential in precision medicine, or the ability to tailor a treatment to a specific patient."

Highlighting the promise of personalized health care and the impact of large-scale interdisciplinary collaboration, the University of Missouri System's NextGen Precision Health initiative is bringing together innovators from across the system's four research universities in pursuit of life-changing precision health advancements. It's a collaborative effort to leverage the strengths of Mizzou and entire UM System toward a better future for Missouri's health. An important part of the initiative is the construction of the new NextGen Precision Health building, which will expand collaboration between researchers, clinicians and industry leaders in a state-of-the-art research facility.

The SARS-CoV-2 virus that is causing the COVID-19 pandemic is just one of many different viruses in the coronavirus family. Many of these are circulating in populations of animals like bats and have the potential to "jump" into the human population, just as SARS-CoV-2 did. Researchers in the laboratory of Pamela Björkman, the David Baltimore Professor of Biology and Bioengineering, are working on developing vaccines for a wide range of related coronaviruses, with the aim of preventing future pandemics.

Now, led by graduate student Alex Cohen, a Caltech team has designed a protein-based 60-subunit nanoparticle onto which pieces of up to eight different types of coronavirus have been attached. When injected into mice, this vaccine induces the production of antibodies that react to a variety of different coronaviruses--including similar viruses that were not presented on the nanoparticle.

The research is described in a paper in the journal Science.

This vaccine platform, called a mosaic nanoparticle, was developed initially by collaborators at the University of Oxford. The nanoparticle is shaped like a cage made up of 60 identical proteins, each of which has a small protein tag that functions like a piece of Velcro. Cohen and his team took fragments of the spike proteins of different coronaviruses (spike proteins play the biggest role in infection) and engineered each to have a protein tag that would bind to those on the cage--the other half of the piece of Velcro. When these viral pieces were mixed together with the nanoparticle cage structure, each virus tag stuck to a tag on the cage, resulting in a nanoparticle presenting spikes representing different coronavirus strains on its surface.

Displaying eight different coronavirus spike fragments (known as receptor binding domains or RBDs) with this particle platform generated a diverse antibody response, which is an advantage over traditional vaccine methods that present pieces from only a single type of virus. After inoculation, the antibodies subsequently produced by mice were able to react to many different strains of coronavirus. Importantly, the antibodies were reactive to related strains of coronavirus that were not present on the nanoparticle. This suggests that, by presenting the immune system with multiple different coronavirus variants, the immune system learns to recognize common features of coronaviruses and thus could potentially react to a newly emerging coronavirus--not just a SARS-CoV-2 variant--that might cause another pandemic.

Although the team is still studying the mechanism underlying this phenomenon, the results are promising. The next step is to examine whether immunization prevents viral infection and/or infection symptoms in animals making these antibodies.

"If we can show that the immune response induced by our nanoparticle technology indeed protects against illness resulting from infection, then we hope that we could move this technology forward into human clinical trials, though there are a lot of steps that need to happen between now and then," says Cohen. "We don't envision that this methodology would replace any existing vaccines, but it's good to have many tools on hand when facing future emerging viral threats."

"Unfortunately SARS-CoV-2 is unlikely to be the last coronavirus to cause a pandemic," says Björkman. "Alex's results show that it is possible to raise diverse neutralizing antibody responses, even against coronavirus strains that were not represented on the injected nanoparticle. So we are hopeful that this technology could be used to protect against future animal coronaviruses that cross into humans. In addition, the nanoparticles elicit neutralizing responses against SARS-CoV-2, so it could be possible to use them now to protect against COVID-19 as well as other coronaviruses with pandemic potential."

Berkeley -- Each year, thousands of migratory mule deer and pronghorn antelope journey northwest from their winter homes in the Green River Basin, a grassland valley in western Wyoming, to their summer homes in the mountainous landscape near Grand Teton National Park.

But to reach their destination, these ungulates must successfully navigate the more than 6,000 kilometers (3,728 miles) of fencing that crisscrosses the region. That's enough distance to span nearly twice the length of the U.S.-Mexico border.

In a new study, wildlife biologists at the University of California, Berkeley, combined GPS location data of tagged mule deer and pronghorn with satellite imagery of fences to find out just how often these animals encounter fences, and what happens when they do. The results, published on Jan. 7 in the Journal of Applied Ecology, help pinpoint which fences pose the biggest barrier to ungulates trying to access their ideal habitat.

Along with the study, the team is also publishing a software package that will help wildlife managers around the world quickly analyze GPS tracking data to identify fences and other barriers that might be impeding the vital movements of animals.

"We need fences -- they help keep livestock safe, can help keep livestock and wildlife separate, and mark property boundaries," said Arthur Middleton, an assistant professor of wildlife management and policy at UC Berkeley and senior author of the paper. "So, the question becomes, how do you identify which fences are really important, and which are problematic from a wildlife standpoint, and then seek some way to mitigate the impacts?"

Fences don't always pose an insurmountable barrier to wildlife, and different species find different ways to get around them. Mule deer are willing to jump over fences that are low enough. Pronghorn antelope, however, are reluctant to jump over fences and instead must seek out areas where they can move underneath.

Wenjing Xu, a Ph.D. student at UC Berkeley and lead author of the paper, took these different behaviors into account when creating the software package that compares animal tracking data with fence maps. The program can categorize different types of behaviors that animals might engage in when they encounter a fence, such as quickly crossing over the fence, pacing back and forth along the fence, or turning around and walking away from the fence.

To understand how fences are impacting mule deer and pronghorn, Xu started by painstakingly comparing fencing maps from the federal Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. Forest Service with satellite imagery, adding in fences that were not included in the government surveys. When all the fences were accounted for, Xu was surprised at the sheer amount of fencing in the region.

"The total length of fences is really, really striking, especially with what we know about the different types of wide-ranging animals that live in that area," Xu said.

Xu then compared these maps to GPS tracking data that collected locations every two hours for 24 tagged female mule deer and 24 pronghorn antelope.

Each year, mule deer encountered fences an average of 119 times, Xu found. Pronghorn antelope encountered fences at more than twice that rate, about 248 times per year. About 40% of these fence encounters resulted in a change in the animals' behavior.

"Anybody who's spent time in the West knows you'll find a lot of fences. But, seeing such frequent encounters, 40% of which result in a failure to cross, is kind of mind-blowing -- especially when you multiply those numbers across whole populations and landscapes," Middleton said.

Some of these fences are currently being used by ranchers to protect livestock or mark property lines. Others are relics of a bygone era when sheep farming was popular in the state, Middleton said.

The best way to mitigate the impact of these fences on animal migration is to remove them, or to replace them with more "wildlife-friendly" fences that mule deer can jump over or that pronghorn can duck under. However, both of these options require money and labor. According to Xu, a recent fencing modification project in Wyoming spent more than $10,000 per mile of fencing to make the fences more permeable to pronghorn.

The software package developed by Xu is able to create maps that highlight the fences that pose the greatest impediment to animal movement, helping to prioritize fences to be modified or removed.

"There is such a strong need for this kind of data," Xu said. "Modifying fences is really, really expensive, and the amount of fencing that might need to be fixed is just so large. [Wildlife managers] really want to find ways to prioritize their resources."

Brandon Scurlock, a wildlife management coordinator for the Pinedale region of the Wyoming Game and Fish Department, is working to designate a protected migration "corridor" that connects the summer and winter ranges of pronghorn antelope in western Wyoming. Similar migration corridors for mule deer were established by the state earlier this year.

Scurlock's team is already using the study results to identify fences that might create barriers along these routes, and prioritize those for modification.

"It's been interesting noticing the characteristics of some of these fences that this study has pointed out as being not very permeable for Pronghorn," said Scurlock, who was not a member of the study team. "We recommend the bottom wire of a fence be at least 18 inches above the ground. And, when looking at some of the particularly bad fences that that these methods highlight, we almost invariably see that they have barbed wires that are too close to the ground."

One option for offsetting the cost of fence mitigation throughout this region, which is part of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, could consist of imposing a small "conservation fee" on visitors to the area's parks, which include the extremely popular Yellowstone National Park and Grand Teton National Park. Middleton and co-authors, including Berkeley Law professor Holly Doremus, explored the feasibility of this approach in a study published last month in the journal Conservation Science and Practice.

"Fine-scale movement data has helped us see much further into animals' lives, including the challenges we've imposed," Middleton said. "I hope this work helps open people's eyes to the scale of fence effects. Our next steps are to better understand the actual biological cost that all these fence-related behavioral changes have on wildlife populations, and find ways to mitigate those effects at a really large scale."

A lurking threat that has stymied US corn growers for decades is now returning to the forefront: western corn rootworm. Sometimes referred to as the "billion-dollar bug," the species' tiny larvae chew through the roots of corn plants, causing devastating yield losses. In 2003, farmers began planting a genetically engineered variety of corn known as "Bt," which produces a protein toxic to the pest species - but by 2009, the billion-dollar bug had already evolved adaptations for resistance to the toxin.

A new study suggests that slowing the resurgence of western corn rootworm may require a larger-scale strategy than previously thought. The findings, which were published in the Ecological Society of America's journal Ecological Applications, show that when farmers do not follow best management practices for mitigating corn rootworm within a field, they also jeopardize surrounding fields.

Primary author Coy St. Clair and his colleague Aaron Gassmann pinpointed 64 "problem fields" across Iowa, where western corn rootworm had caused greater-than-expected levels of injury to corn between 2009 and 2013 in two varieties of Bt maize: Cry3Bb1 and mCry3A. Compared to fields where rootworm had not damaged Bt maize, the problem fields had higher levels of continuous maize cultivation in surrounding buffer areas.

Corn rows as far as the eye can see in Buchanan County, Iowa. Original image from Carol M. Highsmith's America, Library of Congress collection. Digitally enhanced by rawpixel.

Regular crop rotation is a key strategy for interfering with rootworm's life cycle: when rootworm eggs hatch in a field without corn, the larvae starve before they have a chance to mature and lay eggs. However, continuous planting of corn tends to be more profitable in the short term, leaving corn growers with difficult decisions about how to manage risks.

St. Clair, now a research entomologist for Genective (Champaign, Ill.) who conducted the research as a Ph.D. student at Iowa State University, says that the story of western corn rootworm resistance to Bt illustrates that pest mitigation is a shared responsibility. "If the pest remains susceptible, everyone benefits. If resistance develops, everyone suffers."

Continuous maize cultivation gives nascent rootworm populations a chance to evolve resistance to the Bt toxin - and for those newly resistant offspring to travel to other fields.

"The takeaway here is that a farmer who is employing best management practices - such as frequent crop rotation, or planting of non-Bt maize - will effectively manage rootworm and delay resistance in their own field firstly, while simultaneously helping to delay resistance development in surrounding populations secondly," explained St. Clair. "Conversely, a farmer who is planting multiple years of the same trait will risk resistance in their own field, while contributing to the depletion of the shared resource of trait susceptibility."

As of 2020, agronomists have confirmed that populations of western corn rootworm resistant to the two Bt traits examined in the study are present across the US corn belt, along with two additional Bt traits.  

At the start of the pandemic, many doctors on the front lines turned to Twitter and other social media platforms to find guidance and solace directly from their peers. In early 2020, information on COVID-19 had yet to be studied and published in peer-reviewed journals or printed in medical textbooks. Since then, social media has been characterized as both a boon to medical communities seeking real time information and a major driver of misinformation on the virus and its spread. A new study from researchers at the University of Paris provides support for social media as a potentially useful tool in the doctor's diagnostic toolkit and a way for general practitioners with questions to connect to specialists who may have the answers.

In France, some general practitioners have turned to social media for help diagnosing common dermatological conditions. They post a deidentified photo of a skin condition to Twitter or MedPics, a private social networking site for doctors, and other clinicians can respond with their diagnosis. In a retrospective observational study, researchers compared the accuracy of using social media to crowdsource a dermatological diagnosis to the accuracy of asking a dermatologist using more traditional telemedicine methods. Researchers found that diagnoses suggested by doctors on social media generally agreed with teledermatology results, and diagnoses were even more strongly aligned when dermatologists were active in the crowdsourced response. When the images posted to social media were reviewed by an expert committee of dermatologists, the researcher found that primary diagnoses from social media were accurate about 60% of the time, whereas teledermatology consultations were correct about 55% of the time, with no significant difference between the two studied methods.

These results suggest that social media can be as useful as teledermatology services for doctors when diagnosing common and minor dermatological conditions, but consultation with an expert dermatologist may still be necessary. The authors acknowledge that social media is less secure than standard medical communications technologies and that Twitter and other public platforms do not take the same measures to protect patients' privacy.

A study of biomass burning aerosols led by University of Wyoming researchers revealed that smoke from wildfires has more of a cooling effect on the atmosphere than computer models assume.

"The study addresses the impact of wildfires on global climate, and we extensively used the NCAR-Wyoming supercomputer (Cheyenne)," says Shane Murphy, a UW associate professor of atmospheric science. "Also, the paper used observations from UW and other teams around the world to compare to the climate model results. The main conclusion of the work is that wildfire smoke is more cooling than current models assume."

Murphy was a contributing author of a paper, titled "Biomass Burning Aerosols in Most Climate Models Are Too Absorbing," that was published Jan. 12 (today) in Nature Communications, an open-access journal that publishes high-quality research from all areas of the natural sciences. Papers published by the journal represent important advances of significance to specialists within each field.

Hunter Brown, who graduated from UW in fall 2020 with a Ph.D. in atmospheric science, was the paper's lead author. Other contributors to the paper included researchers from Texas A&M University; North Carolina A&T State University; the University of Georgia; the Finnish Meteorological Institute; the Center for International Climate and Environmental Science, and Norwegian Meteorological Institute, both in Oslo, Norway; the University of Reading in the United Kingdom; North-West University in South Africa; the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei, China; and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Wash.

The composition, size and mixing state of biomass burning aerosols determine the optical properties of smoke plumes in the atmosphere which, in turn, are a major factor in dictating how these aerosols perturb the energy balance in the atmosphere.

"We found that many of the most advanced climate models simulate biomass burning aerosols or smoke that is darker, or more light absorbing, than what we see in observations," says Brown, of Juneau, Alaska. "This has implications for the climate predictions made by these models."

Observations and models used in the study covered a wide temporal range. Africa, South America and Southeastern Asia, in addition to boreal fire regions, were chosen because these are the largest contributors to biomass burning smoke emissions in the world, Brown says.

The National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR)-Wyoming Supercomputing Center (NWSC) in Cheyenne was used for all of the data processing and the model sensitivity simulations, Brown says. Some of the other model data used for comparison in this study were generated elsewhere.

"When we compare global observations of wildfire smoke to simulated wildfire smoke from a collection of climate models, the vast majority of the models have smoke that is more light absorbing than the observations," Brown explains. "This means that more energy from the sun is going toward warming the atmosphere in these models, as opposed to what we see in these field campaigns and laboratory studies, which report less absorbing smoke that has more of a cooling effect by scattering light away from the Earth and back to space."

How absorbing these aerosols are in the atmosphere depends on the type of fuel that is burning, as well as the climate of the fire region. Generally, hot, dry grassland fires in Africa and Australia tend to have much darker smoke, which is more absorbing, while cooler, wetter boreal forest fires in North America and Northern Asia tend to have much brighter smoke, which is less absorbing.

After researchers made aerosol improvements to the model, African wildfire smoke still tended to be more absorbing than observations. This might be explained by simplifications in how aerosols evolve over time in the model, or it may be due to a lack of observations from this part of the world biasing the results toward the boreal fire regime, Brown explains.

"We were able to trace the disagreement between the model and observations to how the models represented the individual smoke particles, or aerosols, in the model," Brown says. "This came down to how the model characterized their makeup, their size and the mixtures of different types of biomass burning aerosol. When we changed these variables in one of the models, we saw considerable improvement in the simulated smoke."

This comparison of computer models and global observations is valuable for model development groups and may help reduce uncertainty in biomass burning aerosol climate impacts in models, Brown says.

BOSTON - New research from Boston Medical Center finds that using clear, unambiguous language when recommending HPV vaccination both increases vaccine acceptance and increases conversation efficiency while preserving patient satisfaction. Published in Vaccine, the new research findings show that adolescents are nine times more likely to receive a vaccine when providers introduce the topic to parents with a simple statement like "your child is due for vaccines today." It also results in a shorter vaccine discussion.

In this study, the acceptance of the HPV vaccine and the meningococcal vaccine were compared. The indicated style of language, for example saying "you are due for a vaccine" was compared to the elective style of language, for example saying "would you like to vaccinate?" The indicated style was associated with more efficient visits, allowing for more time for patients to discuss other health concerns with their provider. Neither indicative nor elective styles compromised patient satisfaction with the interaction.

"Patients look to their provider as a source of education on vaccinations, so as providers, we must approach the discussion in a way that most effectively addresses their goals and prioritizes their most pressing health concerns," says Rebecca Perkins, MD, obstetrician and gynecologist at Boston Medical Center and lead author on this study. "At a time where vaccination hesitancy is at an all-time high, these findings can offer further insight into best approaches for discussing vaccination, whether it be for HPV or the more recent COVID-19 vaccines."

The indicated presentation of the vaccine is a normal communication tactic for providers, but it is not normal for all vaccines. It is less frequently used for the HPV vaccine than for the meningococcal vaccination, which may lower vaccine acceptance and lead to parental confusion. Parents of children who need vaccinations look to providers for guidance, and the disparity in communication suggests parents may not receive equally clear messaging on all vaccines. The indicated recommendation style is associated with lower rates of cumulative under-immunization over time and this style is associated with better vaccine uptake and efficiency of conversation. Primary care providers face great time pressure, an often-cited reason for not providing certain aspects of care, including HPV vaccinations. The elective style led to longer discussions due to the framing of a question and the patients need to probe more to learn about the provider's view and recommendations. 

The observational study included 106 conversations between parents, providers, and adolescent patients between January 2016 and March 2018 across five sites that were participating in DOSE-HPV, a multi-component intervention to improve HPV vaccination rates. The clinical encounters were audio-recorded and vaccination discussions transcribed to capture natural patient-provider interactions. 

"We are at a time where educating people on vaccines and the process of vaccination is so important for both individual health and the greater public good," says Perkins, also an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at Boston University School of Medicine. "The use of language can make a difference in how likely patients are to accept vaccination, and also how much time providers have to address other health concerns."

Professional organizations including the Center for Disease Control and the American Academy of Pediatrics recommend using clear, unambiguous language to recommend vaccines following studies that suggest strong recommendations increase the likelihood of vaccination. 

Physical pain and social pain may be more closely related than previously thought. Social pain, which typically results from interpersonal rejection or abuse, has been viewed as a non-medical response to external factors. However, recent research suggests that some physical and social stress responses may arise because of shared processing in the brain. Long-term usage of opioid medications could perpetuate a cycle of experiencing both physical and social pain and may increase risk of addiction. The authors, both of whom prescribe opioid medications, caution, "We must recognize that when physical and social pain coexist, long-term opioid therapy is more likely to harm than help." They advocate a move "toward chronic pain care models that do not separate physical pain (as a medical issue) from social pain (as a non-medical issue)."

Patients are sometimes asked to share their personal health information for research purposes. Informed consent and trust are critical components in a patient's decision to participate in research. Researchers at the University of Florida conducted a three-arm randomized controlled trial to compare the effects on patient experiences of three electronic consent (e-consent) designs that asked them to share PHI for research purposes. Participants were randomized to a standard e-consent form (standard); an e-consent that contained standard information plus hyperlinks to additional interactive details (interactive); or an e-consent that contained standard information, interactive hyperlinks, and factual messages about data protections and researcher training (trust-enhanced). Researchers found no differences in preferences at one-week follow up. However, after six months, participants expressed the most satisfaction and subjective understanding with the trust-enhanced e-consent. The authors write that research institutions should consider developing and further validating e-consents that deliver information interactively, beyond that which is required by federal regulations, including facts that may enhance patient-informed consent and trust in research.

Researchers at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC) have developed a technique to more quickly analyze extensive data from Arctic ice sheets in order to gain insight and useful knowledge on patterns and trends. Over the years, vast amounts of data have been collected about the Arctic and Antarctic ice. These data are essential for scientists and policymakers seeking to understand climate change and the current trend of melting. Masoud Yari, research assistant professor, and Maryam Rahnemoonfar, associate professor of information systems, have utilized new AI technology to develop a fully automatic technique to analyze ice data, published in the Journal of Glaciology. This is part of the National Science Foundation's ongoing BigData project.

For decades, researchers have kept close track of polar ice, snow, and soil measurements, but processing the large volume of available data has proven challenging. NASA's processes for collecting, tracking, and labeling polar data involve significant manual work, and changes detected in the data can take months or even years to see. Even Arctic data collected via remote sensing technologies require manual processing.

According to Rahnemoonfar, "Radar big data is very difficult to mine and understand just by using manual techniques." The AI techniques she and Yari are developing can be used to mine the data more quickly, to get useful information on trends related to the thickness of the ice sheets and the level of snow accumulation in a certain location.

The researchers developed an algorithm that learns how to identify objects and patterns within the Arctic and Antarctic data. An AI algorithm must be exposed to hundreds of thousands of examples in order to learn how to identify important elements and patterns. Rahnemoonfar and her team used existing incomplete and noisy labeled data from the Arctic to train the AI algorithm on how to categorize and understand new data.

The algorithm's training is not yet complete, as it will need to be scaled up over multiple sensors and locations to create a more accurate tool. However, it has already successfully begun to automate a process that was previously inefficient and labor-intensive.

The rapid expansion of using AI technology to understand ice and snow thickness in the Arctic will allow scientists and researchers to make faster and more accurate predictions to inform international dialogue about climate change. The rate at which Arctic ice is melting impacts sea level rise, and if scientists are better able to predict the severity of the melting, society can better mitigate the harm caused by sea level rise.