Deception and false belief in paranoia: Modelling Theory of Mind stories

Background. This study used Item Response Theory (IRT) to model the psychometric properties of a Theory of Mind (ToM) stories task. The study also aimed to determine whether the ability to understand states of false belief in others and the ability to understand another's intention to deceive are separable skills, and to establish which is more sensitive to the presence of paranoia.

Method. A large and diverse clinical and nonclinical sample differing in levels of depression and paranoid ideation performed a ToM stories task measuring false belief and deception at first and second order.

Results. A three-factor IRT model was found to best fit the data, consisting of first- and second-order deception factors and a single false-belief factor. The first-order deception and false-belief factors had good measurement properties at low trait levels, appropriate for samples with reduced ToM ability. First-order deception and false beliefs were both sensitive to paranoid ideation with IQ predicting performance on false belief items.

Conclusions. Separable abilities were found to underlie performance on verbal ToM tasks. However, paranoia was associated with impaired performance on both false belief and deception understanding with clear impairment at the simplest level of mental state attribution.     

Partial heat acclimation of athletes with spinal cord lesion

Heat acclimation (HA) can improve thermoregulatory stability in able-bodied athletes in part by an enhanced sweat response. Athletes with spinal cord lesion are unable to sweat below the lesion and it is unknown if they can HA. Five paralympic shooting athletes with spinal cord lesion completed seven consecutive days HA in hot conditions (33.4 ± 0.6 °C, 64.8 ± 3.7 %rh). Each HA session consisted of 20 min arm crank exercise at 50 % $ \dot{V}{\text{O}}_{{ 2 {\text{peak}}}} $ followed by 40 min rest, or simulated shooting. Aural temperature (T _aur) was recorded throughout. Body mass was assessed before and after each session and a sweat collection swab was fixed to T12 of the spine. Fingertip whole blood was sampled at rest on days 1 and 7 for estimation of the change in plasma volume. Resting T _aur declined from 36.3 ± 0.2 °C on day 1 to 36.0 ± 0.2 °C by day 6 (P < 0.05). During the HA sessions mean, T _aur declined from 37.2 ± 0.2 °C on day 1, to 36.7 ± 0.3 °C on day 7 (P < 0.05). Plasma volume increased from day 1 by 1.5 ± 0.6 % on day 7 (P < 0.05). No sweat secretion was detected or changes in body mass observed from any participant. Repeated hyperthermia combined with limited evaporative heat loss was sufficient to increase plasma volume, probably by alterations in fluid regulatory hormones. In conclusion, we found that although no sweat response was observed, athletes with spinal cord lesion could partially HA.     

Surgical assessment: measuring unobserved health

Background

The federal and provincial governments in Canada have invested an enormous amount of resources to measure, report and reduce surgical wait times. Yet these measures under-report the wait period that patients’ actually experience, because they do not capture the length of time a patient spends waiting to see the surgeon for a surgical assessment. This unmeasured time is referred to as the “wait one” (W1). Little is known about W1 and the effects that this has on patients’ health. Similarly, it is not understood whether patients waiting for surgical assessment actually want or need surgery. Existing administrative and clinical dataset do not capture information on health and decision-making while the patient is waiting for care form a specialist. The objective of this proposed study is to understand the impact that W1 for elective surgeries has on the health of patients and to determine whether this time can be reduced.

Methods/Design

A prospective survey design will be used to measure the health of patients waiting for surgical assessment. Working with the support of the surgical specialities in Vancouver Coastal Health, we will survey patients immediately after being referred for surgical assessment, and every four months thereafter, until they are seen by the surgeon.Validated survey instruments will be used, including: generic and condition-specific health status questionnaires, pain and depression assessments. Other factors that will be measured include: patients’ knowledge about their condition, and their desired autonomy in the decision making process. We have piloted data collection in one surgical specialty in order to demonstrate feasibility.

Discussion

The results from this study will be used to quantify changes in patients’ health while they wait for surgical assessment. Based on this, policy- and decision-makers could design care interventions during W1, aimed at mitigating any negative health consequences associated with waiting. The results from this study will also be used to better understand whether there are factors that predict patients’ desire to proceed to surgery. These could be used to guide future research into experimenting with interventions to minimize inappropriate referrals and where they are best targeted.     

Nebulisers or spacers for the administration of bronchodilators to those with asthma attending emergency departments?

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews and national guidelines conclude that the nebulised route of administration of bronchodilators has no advantage over the use of a spacer in moderately severe exacerbations of asthma. Whether this recommendation is implemented and whether it might affect use of staff time is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine the current method of administration of bronchodilators to those with non-life-threatening asthma attending emergency departments (ED) in London, UK and to monitor the implementation of a new policy to administer bronchodilators by spacers in one ED with a special reference to the time taken by nurses to administer the therapy by two different routes. METHODS: Thirty-five EDs in Greater London were surveyed regarding their current practice. A time and motion study was then undertaken in one department observing nurses administering bronchodilators in the 3 weeks before and 3 weeks after a departmental policy change to favour the use of spacer devices rather than nebulisers. RESULTS: The majority of EDs (94.3%) in Greater London were using the nebulised route of administering bronchodilators to the majority of their adult patients. Spacers were more commonly used for the treatment of children (60.3% of departments using spacers and nebulisers or spacers alone). Over half of the hospitals surveyed (51.4%) were unaware that the British Guidelines on Asthma Management suggested that outcomes were the same and that there were potential advantages in the use of a spacer for both adults and children. Time and motion studies showed that the use of a spacer took no more nursing time than administration of the bronchodilator via a nebuliser; in fact treatment and set-up time were considerably lower for spacers. CONCLUSION: Spacer administration of bronchodilators to those with asthma attending EDs utilises less treatment time than use of a nebuliser. A survey of EDs in Greater London has shown that despite guideline conclusions there appears to be little evidence of reduction in use of nebulisers; a fear that use of alternatives might take nurses longer is not supported by this study.     

Life insurance: genomic stratification and risk classification

With the development and increasing accessibility of new genomic tools such as next-generation sequencing, genome-wide association studies, and genomic stratification models, the debate on genetic discrimination in the context of life insurance became even more complex, requiring a review of current practices and the exploration of new scenarios. In this perspective, a multidisciplinary group of international experts representing different interests revisited the genetics and life insurance debate during a 2-day symposium ‘Life insurance: breast cancer research and genetic risk prediction seminar'' held in Quebec City, Canada on 24 and 25 September 2012. Having reviewed the current legal, social, and ethical issues on the use of genomic information in the context of life insurance, the Expert Group identified four main questions: (1) Have recent developments in genomics and related sciences changed the contours of the genetics and life insurance debate? (2) Are genomic results obtained in a research context relevant for life insurance underwriting? (3) Should predictive risk assessment and risk stratification models based on genomic data also be used for life insurance underwriting? (4) What positive actions could stakeholders in the debate take to alleviate concerns over the use of genomic information by life insurance underwriters? This paper presents a summary of the discussions and the specific action items recommended by the Expert Group.Access to genetic information by life insurers has been a topic of discussion for many years.¹ The possibility of using genetic data to underwrite an applicant''s insurance policy has given rise to concerns about the emergence of ‘genetic discrimination''. Genetic discrimination in the field of life insurance is not necessarily illegal in that in insurance underwriting questions about health, family history of disease, or genetic information may constitute legal exceptions to antidiscrimination legislation.^{2, 3} Nevertheless, the expression ‘genetic discrimination'' has acquired public notoriety⁴ and we will use more neutral language in this paper.Countries including Canada, the United States, Russia, and Japan⁵ have chosen not to adopt laws specifically prohibiting access to genetic data for underwriting by life insurers.⁶ In these countries, life insurance underwriters treat genetic data like other types of medical or lifestyle data. However, a growing number of countries such as Belgium, France, and Norway⁵ have chosen to adopt laws to prevent or limit insurers'' access to genetic data for life insurance underwriting. Other countries including Finland and the United Kingdom have developed voluntary arrangements with the industry (ie moratoria) with similar objectives.⁷Life insurance is a private contract between the policy-holder and the insurer. Its principal role is to provide financial security to the beneficiaries in the event of the insured''s death.⁸ Because of this important role, life insurance is often required, or strongly recommended for those seeking loans to acquire primary social goods, like housing or cars.⁹ In Europe, a consequence of the advent of the welfare state is that private insurance has increasingly played a complementary and supplementary role to social insurance by offering additional security and protection to the population. Thus, in this region, insurance is often considered as a social good that allows individuals to live a comfortable life and as a tool to promote social integration.¹⁰ In other regions of the world, this social role of life insurance is also recognized to a lesser extent. Given this social role, equitable access to life insurance is perceived as a sensitive issue and cases of denial looked upon negatively in popular media. Although documented incidents of denial or of increased premiums on the basis of genetic information have remained limited to the context of a few relatively well known, highly penetrant, familial, adult-onset, genetic conditions,¹¹ they have nevertheless generated significant public concern. Fear that insurers will have access to genetic information generated in a clinical or research setting for use in underwriting has been reported by several studies as a reason for non-participation in genetic research or recommended clinical genetic testing.^{12, 13, 14}The clinical utility of genetic testing for monogenic disorders such as Huntington disease, and hereditary forms of cancer are well established.¹⁵ However, genomic risk profiles based on the known common susceptibility variants have limited utility in risk prediction at the individual level, although they could be used for risk stratification in prevention programmes in populations.¹⁶ Today, a new era of genomic research has made it increasingly affordable to scan the entire genome of an individual. Researchers and physicians can interpret these data together with medical and lifestyle information in the form of sophisticated risk prediction models.¹⁷ Moreover, improvement in computing technologies coupled with the Internet make predictive information increasingly available, whether through direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests, genetic data sharing online communities, or international research database projects. Given these important technological and scientific changes, and their impact on various stakeholders. The term ‘stakeholders'' is used in this text to refer to the following groups of individuals: actuaries (person who computes insurance risk and premium rates based on statistical data), academic researchers, community representatives, ethics committees, genetic counsellors, genomic researchers, human rights experts, insurers, governmental representatives, non-governmental organisations, patient representatives, physicians, policy makers, popular media, reinsurers (company in charge of calculating the risk and premium amount for insuring a particular customer), research participants, and underwriters (company or person in charge of calculating the risk involved in providing insurance for a particular customer and to decide how much should be paid for the premium). This list is not meant to be exhaustive as relevant new groups may emerge as this topic further develops in the coming years. A multidisciplinary group of international experts representing different interests (hereinafter ‘the Expert Group'') revisited the genetics and life insurance debate. The following text presents a summary of the issues discussed and the ‘Action Items'' agreed upon by the Expert Group at the ‘Life Insurance, Risk Stratification, and Personalized Medicine Symposium''.     

Systematic comparison of adeno‐associated virus and biotinylated dextran amine reveals equivalent sensitivity between tracers and novel projection targets in the mouse brain

As an anterograde neuronal tracer, recombinant adeno‐associated virus (AAV) has distinct advantages over the widely used biotinylated dextran amine (BDA). However, the sensitivity and selectivity of AAV remain uncharacterized for many brain regions and species. To validate this tracing method further, AAV (serotype 1) was systematically compared with BDA as an anterograde tracer by injecting both tracers into three cortical and 15 subcortical regions in C57BL/6J mice. Identical parameters were used for our sequential iontophoretic injections, producing injections of AAV that were more robust in size and in density of neurons infected compared with those of BDA. However, these differences did not preclude further comparison between the tracers, because the pairs of injections were suitably colocalized and contained some percentage of double‐labeled neurons. A qualitative analysis of projection patterns showed that the two tracers behave very similarly when injection sites are well matched. Additionally, a quantitative analysis of relative projection intensity for cases targeting primary motor cortex (MOp), primary somatosensory cortex (SSp), and caudoputamen (CP) showed strong agreement in the ranked order of projection intensities between the two tracers. A detailed analysis of the projections of two brain regions (SSp and MOp) revealed many targets that have not previously been described in the mouse or rat. Minor retrograde labeling of neurons was observed in all cases examined, for both AAV and BDA. Our results show that AAV has actions equivalent to those of BDA as an anterograde tracer and is suitable for analysis of neural circuitry throughout the mouse brain. J. Comp. Neurol. 522:1989–2012, 2014. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.