Categorical moderators are often found in meta-analysis and examined using meta-regression models. When multiple effect sizes are present within studies, several methods can be used for meta-regression: multivariate models, three-level models, correlated-effects models with robust variance estimation (RVE), three-level models with RVE, and correlated-effects models with RVE and cluster wild bootstrapping (CWB). This study aimed to compare the performance of these methods through a simulation study. Cohen’s d values were generated under a multivariate model, incorporating a binary variable that could represent either study-level or effect size-level characteristics. When the moderator referred to an effect size-level characteristic, its effect was allowed to vary across studies. Factors manipulated in the simulation included number of studies, number of outcomes per study, and the distribution of effect sizes across the categories of the moderator variable, ranging from balanced to highly unbalanced. The methods were applied and compared in terms of bias, Type I error, and power. The results showed that all methods exhibited lower power to detect effects when the moderator variable referred to study-level characteristics and the effect size distribution was very unbalanced. Methods based on RVE (correlated-effects with RVE or with RVE and CWB, and three-level models with RVE) effectively controlled Type I error rates but tended to be overconservative. In contrast, three-level models achieved higher power but at the cost of inflated Type I error. The best balance between Type I error control and power was observed when using a combination of three-level models and RVE.

Lesser celandine (Ranunculus ficaria L.) is an ephemeral perennial invasive species on which limited research has been conducted. In a field experiment, we studied methods of R. ficaria control and the effects of different control methods on the response of the native understory. In a full-factorial study, we used two different types of herbicides (glyphosate or imazapyr), two different concentrations of herbicide (low or high), and three different dates of herbicide application (pre-flowering in mid-March, flowering in early April, or post-flowering in early May). Treatments were applied in 2 by 2 m plots in heavily infested riparian areas (100% cover of R. ficaria in each plot) at three different sites in southwestern Ohio. Treatment combinations were replicated three times per site. One year later, plots were measured for percent cover of R. ficaria and percent cover of native species. Imazapyr was most effective in reducing R. ficaria regardless of application date, while the effectiveness of glyphosate application decreased over the season. The presence of native species 1 yr later was affected by date of application. Application in mid-April led to greater native species cover than application in early May, with applications in mid-March intermediate between the two. We found that there were differences among sites in efficacy of control and in the cover of native species, which are likely related to differences in conditions at each site.

¿Cómo reconcilian los académicos del ámbito socio-jurídico, que comparan las sanciones monetarias con “sacarle sangre a un nabo” o “sacarle sangre a una piedra,” estas expresiones con el hecho de que las multas y recargos constituyen una industria en expansión? Abordamos este enigma enfocándonos en lo que tal vez sea la experiencia más común con sanciones monetarias entre la población: las multas de estacionamiento. Dado que las multas de estacionamiento se adjudican en un ámbito legal fundamentalmente distinto al de las sanciones penales – que dominan la atención académica –, nos preguntamos si estos resultados pueden extenderse más allá del ámbito penal hacia el municipal. Usando a Chicago como estudio de caso, nuestra investigación analiza los determinantes estructurales de 11.3 millones de multas emitidas entre 2013 y 2017. Aplicamos una serie de modelos de conteo para predecir las tasas de incidencia de las multas a nivel de tracto censal, así como para estimar cuántas estuvieron sujetas a sanciones por impago. Lo que encontramos evidencia disparidades racializadas en cuanto a quiénes son el objetivo de estas sanciones y quiénes resultan más perjudicados por ellas. Para interpretar estos resultados, articulamos ideas clave de la teoría crítica de la raza empírica junto con desarrollos recientes de la teoría de la depredación.

The objective of this study was to assess the prevalence and predictors of nutrition knowledge, nutrition label use and dietary diversity among a sample of university students in Bangladesh. A cross-sectional study was carried out from November 2023 to April 2024 among undergraduate and postgraduate students. About 428 participants (aged 18–26 years) completed a structured questionnaire containing questions related to their demographic information, nutrition knowledge, nutrition label use, and dietary diversity (consumption of different food categories). Separate logistic regression models identified the main factors associated with nutrition knowledge, nutrition label use and dietary diversity. Approximately 32.5% participants had satisfactory nutrition knowledge and 36.0% were frequent nutrition label users. Female participants were more likely to have satisfactory nutrition knowledge (adjusted odds ratio, AOR = 2.05, 95% CI = 1.29, 3.26) and use nutrition labels more frequently (AOR = 1.97, 95% CI = 1.22, 3.17) than their male counterparts respectively. Around 40% of the participants had a high level of dietary diversity. Students with satisfactory nutrition knowledge (AOR = 3.02, 95% CI = 1.41–6.45) and frequent use of nutrition labels (AOR = 2.73, 95% CI = 1.35–5.55) had a higher dietary diversity compared to their counterparts. Less than half of Bangladeshi students in this study have adequate nutrition knowledge, label use, and dietary diversity. The findings highlight the importance of implementing nutrition awareness programmes and nutrition education interventions for university students, such as basic food and nutrition knowledge and the use of nutrition labels, to enhance their dietary diversity and health status.

While parrots are popular companion animals, many experience significant welfare challenges, often resulting from not fulfilling their behavioural, environmental, and social needs. To address this issue, we developed a welfare assessment tool designed specifically for companion parrot caregivers. We involved a panel of seven experts with extensive working experience with companion parrots and in animal welfare assessment. Using an iterative process consisting of four online surveys and nine focus group meetings, the expert panel was invited to select relevant welfare indicators, rephrase selected indicators into user-friendly questions, identify missing content, and finally review the wording and structure of the tool. A preliminary version of the tool was then evaluated by four additional anonymous external experts and 69 parrot caregivers for its completeness, clarity and practicality through an online survey. Feedback from this stage was incorporated, and the revised version was subsequently reviewed again by the initial expert panel. The resulting tool, PsittaWel (freely downloadable at: https://www.vetmeduni.ac.at/psittawel), consists of 75 questions covering 145 welfare indicators and is divided into eight sections covering key aspects of parrot welfare: general information; physical health; housing and physical activity; provision of enrichment and exploration; nutrition and maintenance behaviours; social and reproductive behaviours; parrot-human interactions; maladaptive and fear-related behaviours. Further research is needed to assess the reliability of the indicators. Nevertheless, PsittaWel is already a valuable tool for caregivers to monitor welfare and identify potential room for improvement, ultimately improving the lives of their companion parrot.

This article analyzes three kinds of privilege—roughly, the monopoly or near-monopoly of a prized social good by a group—in terms of the political barriers facing attempts to reform them. Extending previous work, it distinguishes among discrimination privileges, which are zero-sum and relative, benefiting some groups at others’ expense; monopolized social right privileges, involving goods enjoyed only by some that can and should be extended to all; and differential treatment privileges, involving disagreement over whether a good currently monopolized by some should be extended to all or to none. The political barriers to reforming discrimination privilege involve group interest; those to reforming monopolized social rights include privilege, ignorance, cost, priorities, policy uncertainty, and the psychological wage. Differential treatment privilege is complicated. An exercise in applied political realism, this article treats normative categories as political inputs rather than philosophical conclusions and seeks to demonstrate the insights enabled by doing so.