Effectiveness of Olympic Combat Sports on Balance, Fall Risk or Falls in Older Adults: A Systematic Review

This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the available body of published peer-reviewed articles related to the effects of Olympic combat sports (OCS), compared with active/passive controls, on balance, fall risk, or falls in older adults. The TESTEX and GRADE scales assessed the methodological quality and certainty of the evidence. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (code: CRD42020204034). From 1496 records, eight studies were included, involving 322 older adults (64% female; mean age = 71.1 years). The TESTEX scale revealed all studies with a score ≥ 60% (moderate-high quality). The GRADE scale indicated all studies with at least some concerns, up to a high risk of bias (i.e., was rated very low). Meta-analyses were planned, although the reduced number of studies precluded its incorporation in the final manuscript. Only two from six studies that assessed balance found improvements after OCS compared to controls. No differences were found between OCS vs. control groups for fall risk or falls. The available evidence does not allow a definitive recommendation for or against OCS interventions as an effective strategy to improve balance and reduce the fall risk or falls in older adults. Therefore, more high-quality studies are required to draw definitive conclusions.

Peer review declaration

All papers published in this volume of IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering have been peer reviewed through processes administered by the Editors. Reviews were conducted by expert referees to the professional and scientific standards expected of a proceedings journal published by IOP Publishing. · Type of peer review: Single-blind · Conference submission management system: SoftConf.com (https://www.softconf.com/l/phm2021) · Number of submissions received: 203 · Number of submissions sent for review: 121 · Number of submissions accepted: 25 · Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted/Number of Submissions Received X 100): 12.3% · Average number of reviews per paper: 2 · Total number of reviewers involved: 46 · Any additional info on review process: Papers out of the scopes of the conference had been rejected in an initial paper screening process. Papers passing the initial screening process had been further evaluated by a group of experts in the field to make sure they meet the necessary standards for acceptance and publication. Each paper underwent formal paper review by at least two reviewers in terms of appropriateness, clarity, originality/Innovativeness, and Overall Recommendation. We used professional conference paper management system “SOFTCONF” in coordinating the paper review process and communicating with the authors. A paper was accepted for presentation and publication only if the comments from both reviewers are positive. The reviewers’ comments had been provided to the authors so that they could follow the suggestions from the reviewers to further improve their papers. The authors were required to highlight the revisions in red in the final manuscript so that the Paper Review Committee could check to ensure the reviewers’ comments were accommodated in the revised manuscript. · Contact person for queries: Jie (Peter) Liu, Professor, Carleton University; Email: [email protected]

Utility of Vajikarana in General Health- A Review

Objective: Vajikarana or Vrishya chikitsa is the branch of Ayurveda dealing with reproductive health and virility. Though this branch makes use of drugs under the category of aphrodisiac, the multifaceted effect of those is underexplored. The properties of disease prevention and restoration of health might be the attribute benefited in sexual health too. This paper intends to explore the general health benefits of Vajikarana drugs. Materials and Methods: Data related to the aphrodisiac drugs are located in classical texts of Ayurveda and online journals with keywords “Vajikarana, Ayurveda, aphrodisiacs, neuro-endocrine immune system, Vrishya chiktsa, Ojas and sex hormones”. The relevant scripts were selected and appropriate data from 8 articles and 18 chapters were extracted for the final manuscript construction. Results: The drugs like Ashwgandha, Shatavari, Atmagupta, Sweta musali and Masha proved to have a neuro-endocrinological effects, psycho-neuro-immunological effects, anti-inflammatory and anti-oxidant properties apart from aphrodisiac effects. It stabilizes Tridosha, Saptadathu and eventually Ojas, and calms mental faculties. Conclusion: The proper use of the Vajikarana formulations imparts qualities like good physique, potency, strength, and complexion. This benefits of Vajikarana can be incorporated into other health conditions also. The practice of Vajikarana corrects the deformities of reproductive systems and in turn balances other body functions. Advanced research on the health benefits and enhancing sexual potency of women should be carried out on Vajikarana therapy. This will aid prevention of diseases which is a major health standpoint in the current day scenario.

Telehealth in Oncology: ASCO Standards and Practice Recommendations

PURPOSE To provide standards and practice recommendations specific to telehealth in oncology. METHODS A systematic review of the literature on telehealth in oncology was performed, including the use of technologies and telecommunications systems, and other electronic methods of care delivery and sharing of information with patients. The evidence base was combined with the opinion of the ASCO Telehealth Expert Panel to develop telehealth standards and guidance. Public comments were solicited and considered in preparation of the final manuscript. RESULTS The Expert Panel determined that general guidance on implementing telehealth across general and specialty settings has been published previously and these resources are endorsed. A systematic search for studies on topics specific to oncology resulted in the inclusion of two clinical practice guidelines, 12 systematic reviews, and six primary studies. STANDARDS AND GUIDANCE Standards and guidance are provided for which patients in oncology can be seen via telehealth, establishment of the doctor-physician relationship, role of allied health professionals, role of advanced practice providers, multidisciplinary cancer conferences, and teletrials in oncology. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/standards .

Methods for epidemiological studies in competitive cycling: an extension of the IOC consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport 2020

In 2020, the IOC released a consensus statement that provides overall guidelines for the recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sport. Some aspects of this statement need to be further specified on a sport-by-sport basis. To extend the IOC consensus statement on methods for recording and reporting of epidemiological data on injury and illness in sports and to meet the sport-specific requirements of all cycling disciplines regulated by the Union Cycliste Internationale (UCI). A panel of 20 experts, all with experience in cycling or cycling medicine, participated in the drafting of this cycling-specific extension of the IOC consensus statement. In preparation, panel members were sent the IOC consensus statement, the first draft of this manuscript and a list of topics to be discussed. The expert panel met in July 2020 for a 1-day video conference to discuss the manuscript and specific topics. The final manuscript was developed in an iterative process involving all panel members. This paper extends the IOC consensus statement to provide cycling-specific recommendations on health problem definitions, mode of onset, injury mechanisms and circumstances, diagnosis classifications, exposure, study population characteristics and data collection methods. Recommendations apply to all UCI cycling disciplines, for both able-bodied cyclists and para-cyclists. The recommendations presented in this consensus statement will improve the consistency and accuracy of future epidemiological studies of injury and illness in cycling.

Maternal and child outcomes reported by breastfeeding women following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination

Table of Contents SummaryWhat’s known on this subjectOne published U.S. study with 31 breastfeeding women who were vaccinated with either of the two available mRNA COVID-19 vaccines found that 67% experienced any side effects after dose one and 61% after dose two of the vaccine.What this study addsMore than 85% of 180 breastfeeding women who received an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine reported local or systemic symptoms, with higher frequency following the second dose. Few symptoms were reported in their breastfed children. No serious adverse events were noted.Contributors’ Statement PageDr. Chambers and Ms. Bertrand designed the study and supervised the collection of data used in the study. Mr. Honerkamp-Smith performed the statistical analysis. All authors were involved in preparing the manuscript. All authors approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

How to Handle Co-authorship When Not Everyone’s Research Contributions Make It into the Paper

While much of the scholarly work on ethics relating to academic authorship examines the fair distribution of authorship credit, none has yet examined situations where a researcher contributes significantly to the project, but whose contributions do not make it into the final manuscript. Such a scenario is commonplace in collaborative research settings in many disciplines and may occur for a number of reasons, such as excluding research in order to provide the paper with a clearer focus, tell a particular story, or exclude negative results that do not fit the hypothesis. Our concern in this paper is less about the reasons for including or excluding data from a paper and more about distributing credit in this type of scenario. In particular, we argue that the notion ‘substantial contribution’, which is part of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) authorship criteria, is ambiguous and that we should ask whether it concerns what ends up in the paper or what is a substantial contribution to the research process leading up to the paper. We then argue, based on the principles of fairness, due credit, and ensuring transparency and accountability in research, that the latter interpretation is more plausible from a research ethics point of view. We conclude that the ICMJE and other organizations interested in authorship and publication ethics should consider including guidance on authorship attribution in situations where researchers contribute significantly to the research process leading up to a specific paper, but where their contribution is finally omitted.

Streptococcus equi infections: current best practice in the diagnosis and management of ‘strangles’

Foreword This document was commissioned to provide UK veterinary surgeons with up-to-date information on Streptococcus equi infection and to provide practical recommendations for veterinary surgeons in the field. The participants were selected to provide representation from a range of expertise and viewpoints and included practitioners, academics and social scientists. The document and practical recommendations were developed using a modified non-anonymised two-round Delphi process, considering published and unpublished research relating to ‘strangles’ using online discussion. The expert group was convened by UK-Vet Equine and Redwings and an online meeting held on 20th January 2021 with sponsorship from MSD and support from World Horse Welfare. The sponsors did not participate in the meeting and had no influence over editorial content. Each of the panellists was provided with a sub-topic and presented a review of the evidence pertaining to that area prior to taking two rounds of questions relating to the evidence presented. Where research evidence was conflicting or absent, collective expert opinion, based on the experience of the group, was applied. The opinions expressed are the consensus of views expressed by the authors who all approved the final manuscript. Where it was not possible to reach consensus, different viewpoints are presented.

Adding CURE to Traditional Labs

This project involves students in a course-based undergraduate research experience (CURE) as part of the traditional introductory biology laboratory course. Recently, research has shown that student engagement in authentic research has significant positive impacts on students, such as development of science literacy and reasoning skills. Being recently featured in the news, microplastics are a timely, interesting, and relevant topic for students. The authentic research conducted by students was the first attempt at quantification of microplastics in the Great Plains, which garnered further student excitement and engagement. Surface water and substrate samples were collected at 23 locations from small streams, rivers, ponds, and reservoirs in fall 2018. Authentic research, as broadly defined in the pedagogical context, is research conducted primarily by students. In the context of this project, authentic research is specifically defined as research done primarily by students in which the students are asking questions, designing experiments, collecting and analyzing data, and writing a final manuscript that was submitted, and accepted, as a peer-reviewed publication. This project could be incorporated at the high school or university level, for biology major or nonmajor courses. The purpose of this paper is to serve as a how-to, sharing the lesson design with specific detail on student responsibilities.

Heidegger and the Critics

This paper uses the unpublished correspondence between Heidegger and Eduard Lachmann to contextualize Heidegger’s 1939 talk “‘Wie wenn am Feiertage…,’” which has been the focus of an excoriating critical response to Heidegger’s Hölderlinrezeption. Contra the protestations of critics like Paul de Man, the paper shows that Heidegger was fully aware of the intricacies of the hymn’s final manuscript page, using the correspondence with Lachmann to offer a reading of Heidegger’s inclusion of the variant referring to Semele’s ashes. It argues that Heidegger’s characterization of Semele’s incineration as a “Gegenspiel,” or counter-play, orients the possibility of a reception “without danger” that collapses the event of the hymn’s language into the treatment of the poem as an objective text. The paper’s central claim is that “danger” orients the mortal finitude of the hymn’s reception, whose excess as text becomes readable only against the testimony of Semele’s ashes.