Search

Background/objectives: Screening for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) is a core healthcare intervention in premature babies to avoid preventable sight loss. A variety of screening criteria are in place globally for this purpose. The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health recently updated the United Kingdom ROP screening guidelines (March 2022). A key change was the reduction in the gestational age (GA) to warrant retinal screening (from 32 to 31 weeks). Subjects/methods: In the course of informal national surveillance during guideline development (2017–2022) and soon after, babies under our care falling outside the updated screening criteria who underwent treatment for ROP were identified. A retrospective case review was carried out. Results: Six babies were identified as having undergone screening and treatment, prior to implementation of the new guidance. Screening and treatment would have been forfeited as per the March 2022 guidelines. All six had numerous systemic risk factors for developing ROP. Specifically, all had documented poor postnatal weight gain. Conclusions: We present this case series to bring forth an urgent discussion amongst key stakeholders as to whether the new guidance, as it stands, is safe and fit for purpose.

Byline: Marlene Zuk and Anne Houtman Twice a week for an hour and a half, the nonmajors come to hear me talk about biology. (Both of us teach nonmajors. We're [...]

The chain of events in the Texas crisis is a testbed for the relevance and more importantly, the effective implementation of the rules the European Union (EU) introduced in recent years on the security of its electricity and gas systems, aiming at improving their resilience and risk-preparedness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Humans are notoriously resistant to changing their longstanding beliefs and often act defensively when they encounter individuals holding divergent beliefs. We introduce a meaning-based approach to humility (e.g., reduced defensiveness) with the claim that the desire for meaning motivates individuals to ardently defend their central beliefs. We propose that affirming meaning prior to encountering attitudinally-dissimilar individuals should reduce defensiveness (e.g., less negative attitudes toward those who challenge their beliefs). Christian undergraduates (N = 79) were randomly assigned to a relationship affirmation, self-affirmation, or neutral priming condition, and then received negative feedback from an ostensibly antireligious individual (i.e., outgroup member) after writing an essay explicating their beliefs about an important social or cultural topic. Relationship affirmation reduced defensiveness via more positive ratings of the individual who derogated their beliefs, providing initial evidence for our theoretical approach. Implications for a meaning-based approach to humility are discussed.