Search

Maxillofacial injury is a common injury resulting from bicycle (including e-bike) and scooter accidents. With 80,000 admissions to emergency departments in 2019, bicycle accidents account for more than half of all traffic-related emergency department visits in the Netherlands. The United States reports approximately 130,000 injuries and 1000 fatalities related to cycling annually. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to examine the protective effect of helmets against maxillofacial injuries resulting from bicycle and scooter (including e-bike and e-scooter) accidents. After a systematic literature search, 14 studies were found to be eligible for this systematic review. Of these, 11 were included in the meta-analysis. None of the included studies focused on vehicles with motors (e-bikes and e-scooters); all focused only on non-motorized vehicles. All included studies were non-randomized, which could have led to bias in the pooled results. Data from the included studies were tested for heterogeneity using the binary random-effects model (DerSimonian-Laird method), and the odds ratio for the occurrence of maxillofacial injury in cyclists wearing a helmet versus those not wearing a helmet was calculated by random-effects meta-analysis. Patients who had worn a helmet suffered significantly fewer maxillofacial injuries than patients who had not, in bicycle accidents (odds ratio 0.682). In conclusion, wearing a helmet has a significant protective effect against maxillofacial injury, indicating the need for strict helmet legislation., Competing Interests: Competing interests None., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Affective behaviors enable social robots to not only establish better connections with humans but also serve as a tool for the robots to express their internal states. It has been well established that emotions are important to signal understanding in Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). This work aims to harness the power of Large Language Models (LLM) and proposes an approach to control the affective behavior of robots. By interpreting emotion appraisal as an Emotion Recognition in Conversation (ERC) tasks, we used GPT-3.5 to predict the emotion of a robot's turn in real-time, using the dialogue history of the ongoing conversation. The robot signaled the predicted emotion using facial expressions. The model was evaluated in a within-subjects user study ( N = 47) where the model-driven emotion generation was compared against conditions where the robot did not display any emotions and where it displayed incongruent emotions. The participants interacted with the robot by playing a card sorting game that was specifically designed to evoke emotions. The results indicated that the emotions were reliably generated by the LLM and the participants were able to perceive the robot's emotions. It was found that the robot expressing congruent model-driven facial emotion expressions were perceived to be significantly more human-like, emotionally appropriate, and elicit a more positive impression. Participants also scored significantly better in the card sorting game when the robot displayed congruent facial expressions. From a technical perspective, the study shows that LLMs can be used to control the affective behavior of robots reliably in real-time. Additionally, our results could be used in devising novel human-robot interactions, making robots more effective in roles where emotional interaction is important, such as therapy, companionship, or customer service., Competing Interests: Authors CM and GS were employed by Furhat Robotics AB. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. GS was an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision., (Copyright © 2023 Mishra, Verdonschot, Hagoort and Skantze.)

Introduction: Clinical prediction models (CPMs) for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may support clinical decision making, treatment, and communication. However, attitudes about using CPMs for COVID-19 decision making are unknown., Methods: Online focus groups and interviews were conducted among health care providers, survivors of COVID-19, and surrogates (i.e., loved ones/surrogate decision makers) in the United States and the Netherlands. Semistructured questions explored experiences about clinical decision making in COVID-19 care and facilitators and barriers for implementing CPMs., Results: In the United States, we conducted 4 online focus groups with 1) providers and 2) surrogates and survivors of COVID-19 between January 2021 and July 2021. In the Netherlands, we conducted 3 focus groups and 4 individual interviews with 1) providers and 2) surrogates and survivors of COVID-19 between May 2021 and July 2021. Providers expressed concern about CPM validity and the belief that patients may interpret CPM predictions as absolute. They described CPMs as potentially useful for resource allocation, triaging, education, and research. Several surrogates and people who had COVID-19 were not given prognostic estimates but believed this information would have supported and influenced their decision making. A limited number of participants felt the data would not have applied to them and that they or their loved ones may not have survived, as poor prognosis may have suggested withdrawal of treatment., Conclusions: Many providers had reservations about using CPMs for people with COVID-19 due to concerns about CPM validity and patient-level interpretation of the outcome predictions. However, several people who survived COVID-19 and their surrogates indicated that they would have found this information useful for decision making. Therefore, information provision may be needed to improve provider-level comfort and patient and surrogate understanding of CPMs., Highlights: While clinical prediction models (CPMs) may provide an objective means of assessing COVID-19 prognosis, provider concerns about CPM validity and the interpretation of CPM predictions may limit their clinical use.Providers felt that CPMs may be most useful for resource allocation, triage, research, or educational purposes for COVID-19.Several survivors of COVID-19 and their surrogates felt that CPMs would have been informative and may have aided them in making COVID-19 treatment decisions, while others felt the data would not have applied to them.

Study Design: Retrospective Cohort Study., Objective: Yearly, bicycle and scooter accidents in the Netherlands amount to 90 thousand emergency department visits. Maxillofacial injuries are common after cycling or scooter accidents. To prevent these injuries, helmet use might be beneficial. However, the effect of helmet use on maxillofacial injuries remains unclear. The aim of this retrospective study is to assess the effect of helmet use on maxillofacial injuries in patients who had a bicycle or scooter accident., Methods: We collected data from the emergency department of the Erasmus Medical Center in the period from October 2017 to October 2019. Patients that were involved in a bicycle or scooter accident and subsequently received a CT scan of the head were included. We compared the incidence of maxillofacial injuries in helmeted cyclists and scooter users to non-helmeted users. Descriptive and analytic statistics were computed. Level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05., Results: Helmet use among scooter users was associated with a significant reduction in maxillofacial fractures (p < 0.001) and soft tissue injuries (p < 0.001). Helmet use among cyclists was not associated with a reduction in maxillofacial fractures (p = 0.17) or soft tissue injuries (p = 0.30). Helmet use was not associated with a reduction in soft tissue injuries of the lower face in both cyclists (p = 0.47) and scooter users (p = 0.24)., Conclusions: Helmet use should be considered among cyclists and scooter users to prevent maxillofacial injuries. Especially unhelmeted scooter users might benefit from helmet use as this is associated with a lower incidence of maxillofacial injuries., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article., (© The Author(s) 2021.)

Objective: To evaluate the presence of medically unexplained otorhinolaryngological symptoms in a patient cohort and propose an interdisciplinary approach for their care., Study Design: Prospective cohort study., Methods: The study describes the population of patients presenting consecutively at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology at the Maastricht University Medical Center. Patients with symptoms who did not meet clear "medical" criteria and were associated with psychological distress and high health care utilization were enrolled in the study by two experienced otorhinolaryngologists following informed consent. The aim of the study is 1) to specify the presence of medically unexplained otorhinolaryngological symptoms and 2) to evaluate the integration of otorhinolaryngological and psychiatric treatment in an interdisciplinary approach in order to help otorhinolaryngologists improve patient care., Results: Of the 102 patients included, 41% (N = 42) did not have a proven somatic otorhinolaryngological diagnosis. For only 10.8% (N = 4) of the latter, no psychiatric diagnosis had been established. Overall, 78% of the study population (N = 80) was diagnosed with psychiatric morbidity/comorbidity, as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition., Conclusion: The preliminary data suggest that the majority of patients with these unexplained complaints may suffer from under- or undiagnosed psychiatric morbidity. Therefore, easy access to integrated interdisciplinary care (otorhinolaryngology and psychiatry) should be offered to patients with medically unexplained otorhinolaryngological symptoms after detailed information is made available to them about the pathogenesis of the complaints and the foreseen psychosomatic approach., (© 2014 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

This study describes the swallowing function of patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) and the effect of bolus consistency on swallowing in this group. The aim of the study is twofold: (a) to identify which (and to what extent) swallowing variables change for DM1 patients relative to healthy control subjects and (b) to examine whether the degree of oropharyngeal dysphagia is associated with disease severity. Forty-five consecutive DM1 patients and ten healthy subjects underwent a swallowing assessment, at Maastricht University medical Center in the Netherlands. The assessment included a standardized fiberoptic endoscopic evaluation of swallowing (FEES) protocol using different bolus consistencies. Clinical severity of the disease was assessed using the muscular impairment rating scale (MIRS). Significant differences were found between patients and controls for all FEES variables. The magnitude of these differences depended on the bolus consistency. The odds of a more pathological swallowing outcome increased significantly with higher MIRS levels. In conclusion, swallowing function is found to be significantly altered in DM1 patients. The results emphasize the importance of conducting a detailed swallowing assessment in all patients, even those with mild muscle weakness., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Common wisdom has it that Buddhism enhances compassion and self-other integration. We put this assumption to empirical test by comparing practicing Taiwanese Buddhists with well-matched atheists. Buddhists showed more evidence of self-other integration in the social Simon task, which assesses the degree to which people co-represent the actions of a coactor. This suggests that self-other integration and task co-representation vary as a function of religious practice.

The process of reading aloud bare nouns in alphabetic languages is immune to semantic context effects from pictures. This is accounted for by assuming that words in alphabetic languages can be read aloud relatively fast through a sub-lexical grapheme-phoneme conversion (GPC) route or by a direct route from orthography to word form. We examined semantic context effects in a word-naming task in two languages with logographic scripts for which GPC cannot be applied: Japanese kanji and Chinese hànzì. We showed that reading aloud bare nouns is sensitive to semantically related context pictures in Japanese, but not in Chinese. The difference between these two languages is attributed to processing costs caused by multiple pronunciations for Japanese kanji.