We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Social Determinants of Health (SDOH) greatly influence health outcomes. SDOH surveys, such as the Assessing Circumstances & Offering Resources for Needs (ACORN) survey, have been developed to screen for SDOH in Veterans. The purpose of this study is to determine the terminological representation of the ACORN survey, to aid in natural language processing (NLP).
Methods:
Each ACORN survey question was read to determine its concepts. Next, Solor was searched for each of the concepts and for the appropriate attributes. If no attributes or concepts existed, they were proposed. Then, each question’s concepts and attributes were arranged into subject-relation-object triples.
Results:
Eleven unique attributes and 18 unique concepts were proposed. These results demonstrate a gap in representing SDOH with terminologies. We believe that using these new concepts and relations will improve NLP, and thus, the care provided to Veterans.
It is important for SARS-CoV-2 vaccine providers, vaccine recipients, and those not yet vaccinated to be well informed about vaccine side effects. We sought to estimate the risk of post-vaccination venous thromboembolism (VTE) to meet this need.
Methods
We conducted a retrospective cohort study to quantify excess VTE risk associated with SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in US veterans age 45 and older using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) National Surveillance Tool. The vaccinated cohort received at least one dose of a SARS-CoV-2 vaccine at least 60 days prior to 3/06/22 (N = 855,686). The control group was those not vaccinated (N = 321,676). All patients were COVID-19 tested at least once before vaccination with a negative test. The main outcome was VTE documented by ICD10-CM codes.
Results
Vaccinated persons had a VTE rate of 1.3755 (CI: 1.3752–1.3758) per thousand, which was 0.1 percent over the baseline rate of 1.3741 (CI: 1.3738–1.3744) per thousand in the unvaccinated patients, or 1.4 excess cases per 1,000,000. All vaccine types showed a minimal increased rate of VTE (rate of VTE per 1000 was 1.3761 (CI: 1.3754–1.3768) for Janssen; 1.3757 (CI: 1.3754–1.3761) for Pfizer, and for Moderna, the rate was 1.3757 (CI: 1.3748–1.3877)). The tiny differences in rates comparing either Janssen or Pfizer vaccine to Moderna were statistically significant (p < 0.001). Adjusting for age, sex, BMI, 2-year Elixhauser score, and race, the vaccinated group had a minimally higher relative risk of VTE as compared to controls (1.0009927 CI: 1.007673–1.0012181; p < 0.001).
Conclusion
The results provide reassurance that there is only a trivial increased risk of VTE with the current US SARS-CoV-2 vaccines used in veterans older than age 45. This risk is significantly less than VTE risk among hospitalized COVID-19 patients. The risk-benefit ratio favors vaccination, given the VTE rate, mortality, and morbidity associated with COVID-19 infection.
To compare the predictive validity of learning and retention measures from the picture version of the Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test with Immediate Recall (pFCSRT + IR) for identifying incident mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
Methods:
Learning was defined by the sum of free recall (FR) and retention by delayed free recall (DFR) tested 15–20 min later. Totally, 1422 Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging (BLSA) participants (mean age 69.6 years, 54% male, mean 16.7 years of education) without dementia or MCI received the pFCSRT + IR at baseline and were followed longitudinally. Cox proportional hazards models were used to evaluate the effect of baseline learning and retention on risk of MCI.
Results:
In total, 187 participants developed MCI over a median of 8.1 years of follow-up. FR and DFR each predicted incident MCI adjusting for age, sex, and education. Also, each independently predicted incident MCI in the presence of the other with similar effect sizes: around 20% decrease in the hazard of MCI corresponding to one standard deviation increase in FR or DFR.
Conclusion:
The practice of preferring retention over learning to predict incident MCI should be reconsidered. The decision to include retention should be guided by time constraints and patient burden.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.