| 2. |
- Jones, Benedict C, et al.
(författare)
-
To which world regions does the valence-dominance model of social perception apply?
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nature Human Behaviour. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2397-3374. ; 5:1, s. 159-169
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Over the past 10 years, Oosterhof and Todorov's valence-dominance model has emerged as the most prominent account of how people evaluate faces on social dimensions. In this model, two dimensions (valence and dominance) underpin social judgements of faces. Because this model has primarily been developed and tested in Western regions, it is unclear whether these findings apply to other regions. We addressed this question by replicating Oosterhof and Todorov's methodology across 11 world regions, 41 countries and 11,570 participants. When we used Oosterhof and Todorov's original analysis strategy, the valence-dominance model generalized across regions. When we used an alternative methodology to allow for correlated dimensions, we observed much less generalization. Collectively, these results suggest that, while the valence-dominance model generalizes very well across regions when dimensions are forced to be orthogonal, regional differences are revealed when we use different extraction methods and correlate and rotate the dimension reduction solution. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 5 November 2018. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7611443.v1 .
|
|
| 4. |
- Wikstrom, G., et al.
(författare)
-
Drug treatment patterns in patients newly diagnosed with heart failure : a retrospective population-based cohort study in Sweden
- 2017
-
Ingår i: European Journal of Heart Failure. - : European Society of Cardiology. - 1388-9842 .- 1879-0844. ; 19:S1, s. 55-55
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and purpose: Limited data are available on longitudinal drug treatment patterns in newly diagnosed patients with heart failure (HF) with preserved (HFpEF), reduced (HFrEF) and unknown ejection fraction (EF) in Sweden. We evaluated drug treatment patterns in these patients based on ESC 2012 guidelines, which recommend treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEis), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), ?-blockers (BBs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) for HFrEF (ESC does not make recommendations for HFpEF or unknown EF).Methods: Patients were identified via electronic medical records from primary and/or secondary care in Västerbotten, linked via unique identifiers to the National Patient Register and Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. Local echocardiography data identified HFrEF (<50%) and HFpEF (≥50%). Patients aged ≥18 years with ≥2 diagnoses of HF between 01/01/2010 and 31/03/2015 and an ICD-10 diagnostic code of I50 (inclusive of all granular codes), I42.0, I42.6, I42.7, I42.9, I110, I130 or I132 in any position were included. The date of the first diagnosis was defined as the index date. A 10-year look-back period was used to exclude prevalent HF cases. ATC codes were identified from drug prescriptions. Patients with a 4-year look-back and 2 years of follow-up were included.Results: Overall, 4357 patients were included (mean± SD age, 76.6± 12.6 years; 27.7% aged ≥85 years; HFrEF, 24.6%; HFpEF, 12.9%; unknown EF, 62.5%). At the index date, 63.0% of patients were treated with an ACEi or an ARB, 62.3% with a BB and 16.0% with an MRA; 18.5% were not receiving treatment. The most common treatment groups (monotherapy or combinations) were: ACEi + BB (HFrEF, 20.5%; HFpEF, 21.0%; unknown EF, 23.5%); BB monotherapy (HFrEF, 12.1%; HFpEF, 14.0%; unknown EF, 15.6%); and ARB + BB (HFrEF, 8.5%; HFpEF, 12.3%; unknown EF, 12.3%) (Figure). The majority of patients receiving an ACEi or ARB at the index date continued to do so for the following 2 years (ACEi, 63.6%; ARB, 60.9%); most of these were receiving doses lower than those recommended by the ESC (70.8% and 88.9%, respectively). A small proportion of patients receiving an ACEi at the index date switched to an ARB over the 2-year period (4.1%) and vice versa (2.6%). Most patients were not receiving the recommended ESC dose before switching (ACEi, 81.8%; ARB, 77.8%). Similarly, most patients who discontinued an ACEi (37.3%) or ARB (39.1%) were not receiving the recommended dose before discontinuation (ACEi, 64.8%; ARB, 87.4%).Conclusions: A large proportion of patients with HF in Sweden do not receive drug combinations recommended by the ESC. Furthermore, few patients are prescribed ESC-recommended doses of HF drugs and few undergo up-titration of treatment before switching. These findings are remarkable for HFrEF, for which guidelines are established. These findings may be partly reflective of the high proportion of elderly patients studied.
|
|
