RESULTS: We have devised a method to introduce Agrobacterium suspensions into plant leaves with greater reproducibility. Using a decommissioned dissecting microscope as an armature, a syringe body with the bacterial suspension is mounted to the nosepiece. Gentle, even pressure is applied by rotating the focus knob. The treatment force is measured using a basic kitchen scale. The development of the Standardized Pressure Agrobacterium Infiltration Device (SPAID) provides a means to deliver consistent amounts of bacterial suspensions into plant tissues with the goal of increasing reproducibility between replicates and laboratories.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from 759 patients with biopsy-proven NAFLD (24% with advanced fibrosis), seen at 10 centers in 9 countries in Asia, from 2006 through 2018. By using liver biopsies as the reference standard, we calculated percentages of misclassifications and indeterminate or discordant results from assessments made based on fibrosis scores (NAFLD fibrosis score [NFS] or Fibrosis-4 score) and liver stiffness measurements (LSMs), alone or in combination. The analysis was repeated using randomly selected subgroups with a different prevalence of advanced fibrosis (histologic fibrosis stage ≥F3).
RESULTS: In groups in which 3.7% and 10% of patients had advanced fibrosis, a 2-step approach (using the NFS followed by LSM only for patients with indeterminate or high NFS) and using a gray zone of 10 to 15 kPa for LSM, produced indeterminate or discordant results for 6.9% of patients and misclassified 2.7% of patients; only 25.6% of patients required LSM. In the group in which 10% of patients had advanced fibrosis, the same approach produced indeterminate or discordant results for 7.9% of patients and misclassified 6.6% of patients; only 27.4% of patients required LSM. In groups in which 24% and 50% of patients had advanced fibrosis, using LSM ≥10 kPa alone for the diagnosis of advanced fibrosis had the highest accuracy and misclassified 18.1% and 18.3% of patients, respectively. These results were similar when the Fibrosis-4 score was used in place of NFS.
CONCLUSIONS: In a retrospective analysis, we found that a 2-step approach using fibrosis scores followed by LSM most accurately detects advanced fibrosis in populations with a low prevalence of advanced fibrosis. However, LSM ≥10 kPa identifies patients with advanced fibrosis with the highest level of accuracy in populations with a high prevalence of advanced fibrosis.
METHOD: Here we present a new case history instrument which is comprehensive in scope and can be answered by people with and without tinnitus alike. This 'European School for Interdisciplinary Tinnitus Research Screening Questionnaire' (ESIT-SQ) was developed with specific attention to questions about potential risk factors for tinnitus (including demographics, lifestyle, general medical and otological histories), and tinnitus characteristics (including perceptual characteristics, modulating factors, and associations with co-existing conditions). It was first developed in English, then translated into Dutch, German, Italian, Polish, Spanish, and Swedish, thus having broad applicability and supporting international collaboration.
CONCLUSIONS: With respect to better understanding tinnitus profiles, we anticipate the ESIT-SQ to be a starting point for comprehensive multi-variate analyses of tinnitus. Data collected with the ESIT-SQ can allow establishment of patterns that distinguish tinnitus from non-tinnitus, and definition of common sets of tinnitus characteristics which might be indicated by the presence of otological or comorbid systemic diseases for which tinnitus is a known symptom.
STUDY DESIGN: We enrolled healthy married, monogamous, heterosexual condom users in a randomized controlled, cross-over, pilot trial in Malaysia. We randomized participants to six groups with different condom use-orders of the experimental WLC and WLM and control latex condom for four episodes for vaginal sex over 1 month for each condom type. We summarized the clinical and non-clinical failure rate, safety and acceptability of each condom type using descriptive statistics. We tested differences in condom failure and acceptability using generalized estimating equations and repeated measure ANOVA respectively.
RESULTS: We screened 75 couples and randomized 50 eligible couples. Two couples withdrew before receiving any condom. The remaining used 576 condoms with 192 uses for each condom variant. Clinical failure rates of WLC, WLM and DT were 1.04%, 0% and 0.52%, respectively. Non-clinical failure rates of WLC, WLM and DT were 2.08%, 3.12% and 1.04%, respectively. Removal was found more painful with Wondaleaf products than the DT. Preferences of participants for WLC, WLM and DT were 33.3%, 29.2% and 25%, respectively. Overall, WLC and DT had greater acceptances among male participants than WLM.
CONCLUSION: Results of this pilot study support that use of synthetic adhesive male condoms is associated with failure rates similar to those seen with existing latex, and with greater acceptability. A larger study to ascertain non-inferiority is underway.
IMPLICATIONS: The availability of synthetic adhesive male condoms may increase the acceptability of condom use. However, removal pain and clinical performance requires further study.
OBJECTIVES: To estimate prevalence and secular trends in children's hearing loss.
DATA SOURCES: We searched MEDLINE and Embase from January 1996 to August 2017.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included epidemiologic studies in English reporting hearing loss prevalence.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: The modified Leboeuf-Yde and Lauritsen tool was used to assess methodological quality. Meta-analyses combined study-specific estimates using random-effects models.
PARTICIPANTS: Children 0 to 18 years of age.
RESULTS: Among 88 eligible studies, 43.2% included audiometric measurement of speech frequencies. In meta-analyses, pooled prevalence estimates of slight or worse bilateral speech frequency losses >15 decibels hearing level (dB HL) were 13.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.0-17.0). Using progressively more stringent cutpoints, pooled prevalence estimates were 8.1% (95% CI, 1.3-19.8) with >20 dB HL, 2.2% (95% CI, 1.4-3.0) with >25 dB HL, 1.8% (95% CI, 0.4-4.1) with >30 dB HL, and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.1-2.6) with >40 dB HL. Also, 8.9% (95% CI, 6.4-12.3) had likely sensorineural losses >15 dB HL in 1 or both ears, and 1.2% (95% CI, 0.5-2.1) had self-reported hearing loss. From 1990 to 2010, the prevalence of losses >15 dB HL in 1 or both ears rose substantially (all P for trend