METHODS: We used different methods, including one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), linear regression, mediating effect, and moderating effect, to test the four hypotheses. Four experiments in the study were conducted from May 2022 and August 2022 and involved undergraduates from a university and volunteers recruited online. All participants are adults and verbally agree to participate voluntarily. Study 1a (N = 96 (male 47, female 49), participants from a business school in China) measured resource scarcity in the laboratory experiments and verified the effect of resource scarcity on consumer HISC preference by using linear regression (H1). Study 1b (N = 191 (male 98, female 93), students and teachers from a university in China) measured resource scarcity in the laboratory experiments and manipulated positively and negatively valenced experiences. Using the PROCESS SPSS Mode l, we verified that negatively valenced stimuli also lead to higher levels of arousal, which in turn restores the self-discrepancy caused by resource scarcity (H2). Study 2 (an online experiment, N = 182 (male 91, female 91), participants from China) manipulated the resource scarcity in a color sensory stimulant context, replicating the preliminary effect and examined the mediating effect of the self-worth by using the PROCESS SPSS Mode 4 (H3). Study 3 (an online experiment, N = 251 (male 125, female 126), participants from China) manipulated resource scarcity and self-acceptance in the tactile sensory experience, and tested the moderating effect of self-acceptance by using the PROCESS SPSS Mode 8 (H4).
RESULTS: Four studies suggest that not only do individuals facing resources scarcity prefer HISC but also that this consumption is mediated and moderated by self-worth and self-acceptance, respectively. This preference for HISC is negated when individuals have high self-acceptance traits. The findings are tested in the auditory domain (as evidenced by a propensity for louder volume), the visual domain (as evidenced by a propensity for more intense colors), and the tactile domain (as evidenced by a propensity for more intense need for touch). The findings also demonstrate that individual preferences for HISC is shown to operate regardless of the valence (positive valence vs. negative valence) of the sensory consumption.
CONCLUSIONS: Across four experiments, we find that individuals who are subjected to resource scarcity show a preference for high-intensity sensory consumption in the auditory, visual, and tactile domains. We also find that both negatively and positively valenced sensory stimuli have the same impact on resource-scarce individuals' preference for HISC. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the sense of self-worth significantly mediates the effect of resource scarcity on HISC. Finally, we reveal that self-acceptance moderates the effect of resource scarcity on HISC preference.
METHODS: Questionnaire study conducted in May-December 2012 on 847 physicians from 255 ICUs in 10 low-middle-income countries and regions according to the World Bank's classification, and 618 physicians from 211 ICUs in six high-income countries and regions.
RESULTS: After we accounted for personal, ICU, and hospital characteristics on multivariable analyses using generalised linear mixed models, physicians from low-middle-income countries and regions were less likely to limit cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, vasopressors and inotropes, tracheostomy and haemodialysis than those from high-income countries and regions. They were more likely to involve families in end-of-life care discussions and to perceive legal risks with limitation of life-sustaining treatments and do-not-resuscitate orders. Nonetheless, they were also more likely to accede to families' requests to withdraw life-sustaining treatments in a patient with an otherwise reasonable chance of survival on financial grounds in a case scenario (adjusted odds ratio 5.05, 95 % confidence interval 2.69-9.51, P
METHODS: This phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted at 66 centres across 11 countries and territories (ten in Asia-Pacific; one in the Middle East). The trial included patients aged 18 years and older with Dukes' C or high-risk Dukes' B colon cancer or Dukes' B or C rectal cancer who had undergone resection and had completed standard adjuvant therapy (at least 3 months of chemotherapy). Patients with contraindications to aspirin, familial syndromes of colorectal cancer, recent other cancers, and clinically significant history of cardiovascular disease or stroke were excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to aspirin 200 mg daily or placebo for 3 years, and were followed up for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by study centre, tumour site and stage, and inclusion of oxaliplatin in adjuvant chemotherapy. The patients, study team, and sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was disease-free survival. The primary analysis used a stratified Cox model in those commencing study treatment (modified intention-to-treat population), analysing all events to March 31, 2023. Safety was analysed in the same population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00565708). The primary analysis has been completed, but translational studies of putative aspirin sensitivity biomarkers are ongoing.
FINDINGS: Between Feb 25, 2009, and June 30, 2021, 1587 patients underwent randomisation, of whom 1550 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis: 791 (51%) in the aspirin group and 759 (49%) in the placebo group. Of these patients, the median age was 57 years (IQR 48-65); 897 (58%) were male and 653 (42%) female; 271 (17%) had Dukes' B colon cancer, 770 (50%) Dukes' C colon cancer, and 509 (33%) rectal cancer. Median follow-up at data cutoff was 59·2 months (IQR 36·7-60·0). 5-year disease-free survival was 77·0% (95% CI 73·6-80·0) in the aspirin group and 74·8% (71·3-77·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio of 0·91 [95% CI 0·73-1·13]; p=0·38). Any-grade adverse events were reported in 390 (49%) of 791 patients in the aspirin group versus 386 (51%) of 759 in the placebo group. Serious adverse events were reported in 95 (12%) patients in the aspirin group versus 107 (14%) in the placebo group. There were no treatment-related deaths in either group. Among adverse events of special interest, there were no cases of acute myocardial infarction in the aspirin group versus two in the placebo group; no ischaemic cerebrovascular events in the aspirin group versus two in the placebo group; and three major gastrointestinal bleeds in the aspirin group versus one in the placebo group.
INTERPRETATION: In patients with colorectal cancer, aspirin 200 mg daily for 3 years after completion of standard adjuvant therapy was well tolerated but did not significantly improve disease-free survival.
FUNDING: SingHealth Foundation, National Medical Research Council Singapore, National Cancer Centre Research Fund, Rising Tide Foundation, Lee Foundation, Lee Kim Tah Foundation, Duke-NUS Khoo Bridge Funding Award, Terry-Fox Run, Silent Foundation, Cancer Australia, Bowel Cancer Australia, and Cancer Council NSW.