Barbour Kehoe (actreport70)
As part of the Systematizing Confidence in Open Research and Evidence (SCORE) program, the present study consisted of a two-stage replication test of a central finding by Pennycook et al. (2020), namely that asking people to think about the accuracy of a single headline improves "truth discernment" of intentions to share news headlines about COVID-19. The first stage of the replication test (n = 701) was unsuccessful (p = .67). After collecting a second round of data (additional n = 882, pooled N = 1,583), we found a small but significant interaction between treatment condition and truth discernment (uncorrected p = .017; treatment d = 0.14, control d = 0.10). As in the target study, perceived headline accuracy correlated with treatment impact, so that treatment-group participants were less willing to share headlines that were perceived as less accurate. We discuss potential explanations for these findings and an unreported change in the hypothesis (but not the analysis plan) from the preregistration in the original study.This paper draws on an autoethnographic 'digital diary' which the author began after testing positive for HIV in July 2016, until May 2021, to critically assess (mis)representations of both the AIDS and COVID-19 pandemics in the media. Drawing on insights from art, literature, queer theory and social anthropology, the paper focuses on dominant moral and political discourses to show how narratives of blame, shame and guilt about viral transmission contribute to the stigmatisation of 'at risk' groups. Concepts of biopower and normative judgement are used to reflect on discourses which construct those who 'test positive' for HIV or SARS-CoV-2 as 'reckless', 'risky' or 'irresponsible' subjects. The paper also analyses notes on recent media appearances made by the author to discuss their participation in the PARTNER study, which showed that HIV antiretroviral therapy eliminates the possibility of HIV transmission, including reports in The Guardian, on BBC News, on Sky News, on Channel 5 News, and in the Metro. As the former had reported that the 'Covid-19 crisis raises hopes of end to UK transmission of HIV', portrayals of the two pandemics are compared to explore tensions between public health and individual responsibility as normative priorities.Background. The prediction of functional outcomes after spinal cord injury (SCI) is essential to plan the rehabilitation phase and the social reintegration. Recently, 2 models to predict independent and reliable bowel management 1 year after traumatic SCI have been derived and validated in 2 cohorts of patients included in the European Multicenter Study about Spinal Cord Injury (EMSCI). Objective. We aimed to validate 2 prediction models for bowel outcome after traumatic SCI in a patient sample external to EMSCI. Methods. The simplified model (based on a single predictor, the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury [ISNCSCI] total motor score) and the full model (based on 2 predictors, the ISNCSCI total motor score and item 3a of the Spinal Cord Independence Measure) were applied to the retrospectively collected data of 111 patients with traumatic SCI. Results. The simplified and the full models showed excellent discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of .939 (95% confidence interval (CI) .87-1.00) and .922 (95% CI 0.85-.99), respectively. Both models displayed similar results for sensitivity and negative predictive values; however, the simplified model showed higher values for specificity, positive predictive values, and accuracy. The calibration analysis showed a partial overlap between predicted probabilities and observed proportion, with better and acceptable calibration for the simplified model. Conclusions. Using an independent sample, our study demonstrates the validity of a simple model to predict independent and reliable bowel management 1 year after traumatic SCI.Introduction Although
