Role of Figures in Mathematics Problems in Slovak Testing T9

Besides providing information to pupils, their parents, teachers, and school founders about the achieved level in mathematics, the pupils’ results in mathematics at international or national testing can also be used for other purposes. In our research, the results of Slovak national testing T9 (success rate of pupils and difficulty of individual thematic areas and test items) seem to us to be a reasonable source for identification of critical areas in school mathematics. Based on the findings of such areas, we target more at these areas in the preparation of future teachers of mathematics. The special group of problems, so-called problems with figures, seems to be one of the critical areas. In the assignment of these problems, a part of the input information is not of a purely textual character, and in the process of solving the solver has to read information about objects appearing in the problem and relations between objects from figures (e. g. scheme, graph, chart, table, picture or map). The paper focuses on success rates of pupils in solving problems of this type and on various roles and functions of figures in problems with figures from the testing T9.

Comparing student motivations for and emotional responses to national standardised tests and internal school tests: The devil in the detail

National testing of students has become an increasingly prevalent policy tool, often implemented to drive improvement through increased accountability and heightened competition between schools. Such testing has been found to generate negative emotional responses among students, including increased stress and anxiety . However, there is little examining whether such responses are associated specifically with national testing regimes or are more general responses to testing situations. This study surveyed 206 students in Australian secondary schools to compare responses to NAPLAN and internal school tests. Students reported higher expectations for their performance in internal school tests than for NAPLAN, higher levels of boredom for NAPLAN and greater levels of confidence for their internal school tests. While most students reported low levels of negative emotional responses to NAPLAN, a small group of students reported strong negative emotional responses to both NAPLAN and internal school tests, suggesting that negative responses to national testing programs may be more dependent on the individual student.

Perspectives on COVID-19 testing policies and practices: a qualitative study with scientific advisors and NHS health care workers in England

Background As COVID-19 death rates have risen and health-care systems have experienced increased demand, national testing strategies have come under scrutiny. Utilising qualitative interview data from a larger COVID-19 study, this paper provides insights into influences on and the enactment of national COVID-19 testing strategies for health care workers (HCWs) in English NHS settings during wave one of the COVID-19 pandemic (March–August 2020). Through the findings we aim to inform learning about COVID-19 testing policies and practices; and to inform future pandemic diagnostic preparedness. Methods A remote qualitative, semi-structured longitudinal interview method was employed with a purposive snowball sample of senior scientific advisors to the UK Government on COVID-19, and HCWs employed in NHS primary and secondary health care settings in England. Twenty-four interviews from 13 participants were selected from the larger project dataset using a key term search, as not all of the transcripts contained references to testing. Framework analysis was informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of patient-facing health and care technologies implementation framework (NASSS) and by normalisation process theory (NPT). Results Our account highlights tensions between the communication and implementation of national testing developments; scientific advisor and HCW perceptions about infectiousness; and uncertainties about the responsibility for testing and its implications at the local level. Conclusions Consideration must be given to the implications of mass NHS staff testing, including the accuracy of information communicated to HCWs; how HCWs interpret, manage, and act on testing guidance; and the influence these have on health care organisations and services.

Rapid incidence estimation from SARS-CoV-2 genomes reveals decreased case detection in Europe during summer 2020

By May 2021, over 160 million SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses have been reported worldwide. Yet, the true number of infections is unknown and believed to exceed the reported numbers by several fold. National testing policies, in particular, can strongly affect the proportion of undetected cases. Here, we propose a novel method (GInPipe) that reconstructs SARS-CoV-2 incidence profiles within minutes, solely from publicly available, time-stamped viral genomes. We validated GInPipe against in silico generated outbreak data and elaborate phylodynamic analyses. We apply the method to reconstruct incidence histories from sequence data for Denmark, Scotland, Switzerland, and Victoria (Australia). GInPipe reconstructs the different pandemic waves robustly and remarkably accurate. We demonstrate how the method can be used to investigate the effects of changing testing policies on the probability to diagnose and report infected individuals. Specifically, we find that under-reporting was highest in mid 2020 in parts of Europe, coinciding with changes towards more liberal testing policies at times of low testing capacities. Due to the increased use of real-time sequencing, it is envisaged that GInPipe can complement established surveillance tools to monitor the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. We anticipate that the method is particularly useful in settings where diagnostic and reporting infrastructures are insufficient. In ‘post-pandemic’ times, when diagnostic efforts are decreased, GInPipe may facilitate the detection of hidden infection dynamics.

Title page Title Perspectives on COVID-19 testing policies and practices: a qualitative study with scientific advisors and NHS health care workers in England

Background As COVID-19 death rates have risen and health-care systems have experienced increased demand, national testing strategies have come under scrutiny. Utilising qualitative interview data from a larger COVID-19 study, this paper provides insights into influences on and the enactment of national COVID-19 testing strategies for health care workers (HCWs) in English NHS settings during wave one of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-August 2020). We aim to inform COVID-19 learning and future pandemic diagnostic preparedness.Methods A remote qualitative, semi-structured longitudinal interview method was employed with a purposive snowball sample of senior scientific advisors to the UK Government on COVID-19, and HCWs employed in NHS primary and secondary health care settings in England. 24 interviews from 13 participants were selected from the larger project dataset. Framework analysis was informed by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability of patient-facing health and care technologies implementation framework (NASSS) and by normalisation process theory (NPT).Results Our account highlights tensions between the communication and implementation of national testing developments; scientific advisor and HCW perceptions about infectiousness; and uncertainties about the responsibility for testing and its implications at the local level.Conclusions Consideration must be given to the implications of mass NHS staff testing, including the accuracy of information communicated to HCWs; how HCWs interpret, manage, and act on testing guidance; and the influence these have on health care organisations and services.

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic dynamics and infection tracing in Denmark

We model and simulate the COVID-19 infection and healthcare dynamics in Denmark from the onset till March 5, 2021. The simulation is matched and calibrated to hospital and death data as well as antibody population measurement. In this work we focus on comparing the time evolution of the estimated infection level with the daily identified infected individuals based on the national testing and contact tracing program. We find that the national testing program on average identifies 1/3 of the infected individuals July 1, 2020 - March 5, 2021. Our investigations indicate the current program does not have a proper balance between random probing, focused contact tracing, and testing prioritization. Too much of the program operates as a semi-random daily sampling of part of the population. We propose a policy with a focus on local infection tracing and interventions.

International multicenter examination of MOG antibody assays

ObjectiveTo compare the reproducibility of 11 antibody assays for immunoglobulin (Ig) G and IgM myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies (MOG-IgG and MOG-IgM) from 5 international centers.MethodsThe following samples were analyzed: MOG-IgG clearly positive sera (n = 39), MOG-IgG low positive sera (n = 39), borderline negative sera (n = 13), clearly negative sera (n = 40), and healthy blood donors (n = 30). As technical controls, 18 replicates (9 MOG-IgG positive and 9 negative) were included. All samples and controls were recoded, aliquoted, and distributed to the 5 testing centers, which performed the following antibody assays: 5 live and 1 fixed immunofluorescence cell-based assays (CBA-IF, 5 MOG-IgG, and 1 MOG-IgM), 3 live flow cytometry cell-based assays (CBA-FACS, all MOG-IgG), and 2 ELISAs (both MOG-IgG).ResultsWe found excellent agreement (96%) between the live CBAs for MOG-IgG for samples previously identified as clearly positive or negative from 4 different national testing centers. The agreement was lower with fixed CBA-IF (90%), and the ELISA showed no concordance with CBAs for detection of human MOG-IgG. All CBAs showed excellent interassay reproducibility. The agreement of MOG-IgG CBAs for borderline negative (77%) and particularly low positive (33%) samples was less good. Finally, most samples from healthy blood donors (97%) were negative for MOG-IgG in all CBAs.ConclusionsLive MOG-IgG CBAs showed excellent agreement for high positive and negative samples at 3 international testing centers. Low positive samples were more frequently discordant than in a similar comparison of aquaporin-4 antibody assays. Further research is needed to improve international standardization for clinical care.

An international multicenter examination of MOG antibody assays

ObjectivesTo compare the reproducibility of 11 antibody assays for IgG and IgM myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein antibodies (MOG-IgG, MOG-IgM) from five international centers.MethodsThe following samples were analyzed: MOG-IgG clearly positive sera (n=39), MOG-IgG low positive sera (n=39), borderline negative sera (n=13), clearly negative sera (n=40), and healthy blood donors (n=30). As technical controls, 18 replicates (9 MOG-IgG positive and 9 negative) were included. All samples and controls were re-coded, aliquoted, and distributed to the five testing centers which performed the following antibody assays: five live and one fixed immunofluorescence cell-based assays (CBA-IF, five MOG-IgG, one MOG-IgM), three live flow cytometry cell-based assays (FACS-CBA, all MOG-IgG), and two enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA, both MOG-IgG).ResultsWe found excellent agreement (96%) between the live CBAs for MOG-IgG for samples previously identified as clearly positive or negative from four different national testing centers. The agreement was lower with fixed CBA-IF (90%) and the ELISA showed no concordance with CBAs for detection of human MOG-IgG. All CBAs showed excellent inter-assay reproducibility. The agreement of MOG-IgG CBAs for borderline negative (77%) and particularly low positive (33%) samples was less good. Finally, most samples from healthy blood donors (97%) were negative for MOG-IgG in all CBAs.ConclusionLive MOG-IgG CBAs showed excellent agreement for high positive and very good agreement for negative samples at four international testing centers. Low positive samples were more frequently discordant than in similar assays for other autoantigens. Further research is needed to improve international standardization for clinical care.