An exploration of how gender, political affiliation, or religious identity is associated with comfort and perceptions of controversial topics in bioethics.

Bioethics is an important aspect of understanding the relationship between science and society, but studies have not yet examined undergraduate student experiences and comfort in bioethics courses. In this study, we investigated undergraduate bioethics students' support of and comfort when learning three controversial bioethics topics: gene editing, abortion, and physician-assisted suicide (PAS). Furthermore, student identity has been shown to influence how students perceive and learn about controversial topics at the intersection of science and society. So, we explored how students' religious affiliation, gender, or political affiliation was associated with their support of and comfort when learning about gene editing, abortion, and PAS. We found that most students entered bioethics with moderated viewpoints on controversial topics but that there were differences in students' tendency to support each topic based on their gender, religion, and political affiliation. We also saw differences in student comfort levels based on identity: women reported lower comfort than men when learning about gene editing, religious students were less comfortable than nonreligious students when learning about abortion and PAS, and nonliberal students were less comfortable than liberal students when learning about abortion. Students cited that the controversy surrounding these topics and a personal hesitancy to discuss them caused discomfort. These findings indicate that identity impacts comfort and support in a way similar to that previously shown in the public. Thus, it may be important for instructors to consider student identity when teaching bioethics topics to maximize student comfort, ultimately encouraging thoughtful consideration and engagement with these topics.

Christian Student Experiences During Peer Interactions in Undergraduate Biology Courses.

The tension between religion and science as a long-standing barrier to science education has led researchers to explore ways of improving the experiences of Christian students in biology who can experience their Christianity as stigmatized in academic biology environments. As undergraduate science classes become student-centered, interactions among students increase, and Christians may feel a need to conceal their religious identities during peer discussions. In this interview study, we used the social psychology framework of concealable stigmatized identities to explore 30 Christian students' experiences during peer interactions in undergraduate biology courses to find potential ways to improve those experiences. We found that students felt their religious identity was salient during peer interactions in biology, and students thought revealing their religious identity to peers in their biology courses could be beneficial, yet few actually did so. Additionally, though most students anticipated stigma, comparatively few had experienced stigma from other students in their biology courses, despite the prior documented cultural stigma against Christians in biology. These results indicate a need for future studies exploring the impact of learning environments in which students are given the opportunity to share their religious identities with one another, which could reduce their anticipated and perceived stigma.

Third COVID-19 vaccine dose boosts neutralizing antibodies in poor responders.

Background: While evaluating COVID-19 vaccine responses using a rapid neutralizing antibody (NAb) test, we observed that 25% of mRNA vaccine recipients did not neutralize >50%. We termed this group "vaccine poor responders" (VPRs). The objective of this study was to determine if individuals who neutralized <50% would remain VPRs, or if a third dose would elicit high levels of NAbs. Methods: 269 healthy individuals ranging in age from 19 to 80 (Average age = 51; 165 females and 104 males) who received either BNT162b2 (Pfizer) or mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccines were evaluated. NAb levels were measured: (i) 2-4 weeks after a second vaccine dose, (ii) 2-4 months after the second dose, (iii) within 1-2 weeks prior to a third dose and (iv) 2-4 weeks after a third mRNA vaccine dose. Results: Analysis of vaccine recipients reveals that 25% did not neutralize above 50% (Median neutralization = 21%, titers <1:80) within a month after their second dose. Twenty-three of these VPRs obtained a third dose of either BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccine 1-8 months (average = 5 months) after their second dose. Within a month after their third dose, VPRs show an average 5.4-fold increase in NAb levels (range: 46-99%). Conclusions: The results suggest that VPRs are not permanently poor responders; they can generate high NAb levels with an additional vaccine dose. Although it is not known what levels of NAbs protect from infection or disease, those in high-risk professions may wish to keep peripheral NAb levels high, limiting infection, and potential transmission.

Longitudinal Comparison of Neutralizing Antibody Responses to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines after Second and Third Doses.

COVID-19 mRNA vaccines protect against severe disease and hospitalization. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) are a first-line defense mechanism, but protective NAb responses are variable. Currently, NAb testing is not widely available. This study employed a lateral flow assay for monitoring NAb levels postvaccination and natural infection, using a finger-stick drop of blood. We report longitudinal NAb data from BNT162b2 (Pfizer) and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) recipients after second and third doses. Results demonstrate a third dose of mRNA vaccine elicits higher and more durable NAb titers than the second dose, independent of manufacturer, sex, and age. Our analyses also revealed that vaccinated individuals could be categorized as strong, moderate, and poorly neutralizing responders. After the second dose, 34% of subjects were classified as strong responders, compared to 79% after the third dose. The final months of this study coincided with the emergence of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant and symptomatic breakthrough infections within our study population. Lastly, we show that NAb levels sufficient for protection from symptomatic infection with early SARS-CoV-2 variants were not protective against Omicron infection and disease. This work highlights the need for accessible vaccine response monitoring for use in healthcare, such that individuals, particularly those in vulnerable populations, can make informed vaccination decisions.

Aspects of Large-Enrollment Online College Science Courses That Exacerbate and Alleviate Student Anxiety.

Anxiety is the top mental health concern for undergraduates. While researchers have identified ways that in-person science courses can affect anxiety, little is known about how online science courses affect anxiety. In this study, 2111 undergraduates at a large research-intensive institution completed survey questions about their anxiety in large-enrollment online science courses. Specifically, we assessed students' anxiety in the context of online science courses and asked what aspects of online science courses increase and decrease their anxiety. Students also identified what instructors can do to lessen anxiety in online classrooms. We used open coding and logistic regression to analyze student responses. More than 50% of students reported at least moderate anxiety in the context of online college science courses. Students commonly reported that the potential for personal technology issues (69.8%) and proctored exams (68.0%) increased their anxiety, while being able to access content at a later time (79.0%) and attending class from where they want (74.2%) decreased their anxiety. The most common ways that students suggested that instructors could decrease student anxiety is to increase test-taking flexibility (25.0%) and be understanding (23.1%). This study provides insight into how instructors can create more inclusive online learning environments for students with anxiety.