Activity

Imbalances in approach-avoidance conflict (AAC) decision-making (e.g., sacrificing rewards to avoid negative outcomes) are considered central to multiple psychiatric disorders. We used computational modelling to examine 2 factors that are often not distinguished in descriptive analyses of AAC decision uncertainty and sensitivity to negative outcomes versus rewards (emotional conflict).

A previously validated AAC task was completed by 478 participants, including healthy controls (

= 59), people with substance use disorders (

= 159) and people with depression and/or anxiety disorders who did not have substance use disorders (

= 260). Using an active inference model, we estimated individual-level values for a model parameter that reflected decision uncertainty and another that reflected emotional conflict. We also repeated analyses in a subsample (59 healthy controls, 161 people with depression and/or anxiety disorders, 56 people with substance use disorders) that was propensity-matched for age and geneased emotional conflict, may explain maladaptive approach-avoidance behaviours in people with psychiatric disorders.

These results suggest that reduced confidence in how to act, rather than increased emotional conflict, may explain maladaptive approach-avoidance behaviours in people with psychiatric disorders.In chronic liver disease, the incidence of cirrhosis is increasing. About 1 million deaths from cirrhosis are reported annually by WHO, occupying the 11th position in the hierarchy of pathologies that cause death (1). The prevalence of cirrhosis is often underestimated based on the fact that one third of the patients are asymptomatic (2). Regardless of whether it is elective or urgent extra-hepatic surgery, operative interventions in this range of patients are burdened by an increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality (3,4). This reality requires the evaluation of the benefit-risk balance for each patient with the surgical firm indication. A journal of the medical literature, presented over the period 1995-2018 (PubMed), noted that the most frequent extrahepatic interventions in the cirrhotic patient were addressed to the cholecyst and CBD (23%), parietal defects (hernias, events) in 17 %, gastric pathology (19%) and rectum-colon (19%).v Liver cirrhosis is frequently associated with abnormalities of coagulation mechanisms thrombopenia and platelet dysfunctions, decreased coagulation factors but also proteins involved in fibrinolysis. compound library chemical Cardio-circulatory changes are all the more important as the cirrhotic pathology is more evolved, being expressed by hyperkinetic syndrome and systemic vasodilation with hyper-flow, tachycardia and low peripheral resistance (5). The “trigger” element of these anomalies is the portal hypertension and the porto-systemic shunts that involve vasodilating mediators but also the compensatory activation of the renin-angiotensin system (6). The perioperative anaesthetic strategy in the patients is integrated in a multidisciplinary effort of specific management.As the COVID-19 pandemic extends, its negative consequences on the effectiveness of therapeutic programs – previously assumed by the medical community and imperatively suspended for a difficult-to-predict period of time – are becoming increasingly worrying. In this context, as the evidence-based recommendations are not possible, most of the national and international scientific societies tried to develop balanced recommendations (1-4). The Romanian Society of Coloproctology (SRCP) and the Romanian Association for Endoscopic Surgery (ARCE) have created a working group that, taking into account recent publications, the statements of international academic societies, the national legislative context and the unique experience of countries severely affected by this pandemic (China, Italy, Spain, USA, etc.) proposes for Romania, the following recommendations for medical practice in colorectal surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. These recommendations are subjected to continuous review, depending on the global and national situation of the pandemic, the particular needs of each hospital, the recommendations of the competent authorities and the evolution of the literature that publishes the conclusions of ongoing clinical trials.

Primary care providers who lack reliable referral relationships with specialists may be less likely than those who do have such relationships to conduct cancer screenings. Community health centers (CHCs), which provide primary care to disadvantaged populations, have historically reported difficulty accessing specialty care for their patients. This study aimed to describe strategies CHCs use to integrate care with specialists and examine whether more strongly integrated CHCs have higher rates of screening for colorectal and cervical cancers and report better communication with specialists.

Using a 2017 survey of CHCs in 12 states and the District of Columbia and administrative data, we estimated the association between a composite measure of CHC/specialist integration and 1) colorectal and cervical cancer screening rates, and 2) 4 measures of CHC/specialist communication using multivariate regression models.

Integration strategies commonly reported by CHCs included having specialists deliver care on-site (80%) and establishing referral agreements with specialists (70%). CHCs that were most integrated with specialists had 5.6 and 6.8 percentage-point higher colorectal and cervical cancer screening rates, respectively, than the least integrated CHCs (P < .05). They also had significantly higher rates of knowing that specialist visits happened (67% vs 42%), knowing visit outcomes (65% vs 42%), receiving information after visits (47% vs 21%), and timely receipt of information (44% vs 27%).

CHCs use various strategies to integrate primary and specialty care. Efforts to promote CHC/specialist integration may help increase rates of cancer screening.

CHCs use various strategies to integrate primary and specialty care. Efforts to promote CHC/specialist integration may help increase rates of cancer screening.

In 2019, nearly 30% of US high-school students reported current (past 30 day) e-cigarette use. Adolescents with disabilities are consistently more likely to smoke cigarettes compared with their nondisabled peers, yet little is known about their use of other forms of tobacco, including e-cigarettes. We compared the prevalence of tobacco use (e-cigarettes, cigarettes, little cigars, large cigars, hookahs, and smokeless tobacco) among high school students with at least 1 disability to those without disability.

Data were from the 2015 and 2017 Oregon Healthy Teens survey, a statewide representative sample of 11th-grade students. We estimated the prevalence of current (past 30 day) tobacco use by product type and disability status (yes or no). We used multivariable Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios measuring the association between disability status and current tobacco use, by product 1) combustible products only, 2) e-cigarettes only, and 3) dual use of combustibles and e-cigarettes.

Students with disabilities were more likely to use a variety of tobacco products compared with their nondisabled peers, including cigarettes (12.