Feasibility study of mobile phone photography as a possible outcome measure of systemic sclerosis-related digital lesions.

Objective: Clinical trials assessing systemic sclerosis (SSc)-related digital ulcers have been hampered by a lack of reliable outcome measures of healing. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of patients collecting high-quality mobile phone images of their digital lesions as a first step in developing a smartphone-based outcome measure. Methods: Patients with SSc-related digital (finger) lesions photographed one or more lesions each day for 30 days using their smartphone and uploaded the images to a secure Dropbox folder. Image quality was assessed using six criteria: blurriness, shadow, uniformity of lighting, dot location, dot angle and central positioning of the lesion. Patients completed a feedback questionnaire. Results: Twelve patients returned 332 photographs of 18 lesions. Each patient sent a median of 29.5 photographs [interquartile range (IQR) 15-33.5], with a median of 15 photographs per lesion (IQR 6-32). Twenty-two photographs were duplicates. Of the remaining 310 images, 256 (77%) were sufficiently in focus; 268 (81%) had some shadow; lighting was even in 56 (17%); dot location was acceptable in 233 (70%); dot angle was ideal in 107 (32%); and the lesion was centred in 255 (77%). Patient feedback suggested that 6 of 10 would be willing to record images daily in future studies, and 9 of 10 at least one to three times per week. Conclusion: Taking smartphone photographs of digital lesions was feasible for most patients, with most lesions in focus and central in the image. These promising results will inform the next research phase (to develop a smartphone monitoring application incorporating photographs and symptom tracking).

Reverse-Transcription Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Has High Accuracy for Detecting Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 in Saliva and Nasopharyngeal/Oropharyngeal Swabs from Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Individuals.

Previous studies have described reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) for the rapid detection of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in nasopharyngeal/oropharyngeal swab and saliva samples. This multisite clinical evaluation describes the validation of an improved sample preparation method for extraction-free RT-LAMP and reports clinical performance of four RT-LAMP assay formats for SARS-CoV-2 detection. Direct RT-LAMP was performed on 559 swabs and 86,760 saliva samples and RNA RT-LAMP on extracted RNA from 12,619 swabs and 12,521 saliva samples from asymptomatic and symptomatic individuals across health care and community settings. For direct RT-LAMP, overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) was 70.35% (95% CI, 63.48%-76.60%) on swabs and 84.62% (95% CI, 79.50%-88.88%) on saliva, with diagnostic specificity of 100% (95% CI, 98.98%-100.00%) on swabs and 100% (95% CI, 99.72%-100.00%) on saliva, compared with quantitative RT-PCR (RT-qPCR); analyzing samples with RT-qPCR ORF1ab CT values of ≤25 and ≤33, DSe values were 100% (95% CI, 96.34%-100%) and 77.78% (95% CI, 70.99%-83.62%) for swabs, and 99.01% (95% CI, 94.61%-99.97%) and 87.61% (95% CI, 82.69%-91.54%) for saliva, respectively. For RNA RT-LAMP, overall DSe and diagnostic specificity were 96.06% (95% CI, 92.88%-98.12%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for swabs, and 80.65% (95% CI, 73.54%-86.54%) and 99.99% (95% CI, 99.95%-100%) for saliva, respectively. These findings demonstrate that RT-LAMP is applicable to a variety of use cases, including frequent, interval-based direct RT-LAMP of saliva from asymptomatic individuals who may otherwise be missed using symptomatic testing alone.

A highly effective reverse-transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP) assay for the rapid detection of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

The COVID-19 pandemic has illustrated the importance of simple, rapid and accurate diagnostic testing. This study describes the validation of a new rapid SARS-CoV-2 RT-LAMP assay for use on extracted RNA or directly from swab offering an alternative diagnostic pathway that does not rely on traditional reagents that are often in short supply during a pandemic. Analytical specificity (ASp) of this new RT-LAMP assay was 100% and analytical sensitivity (ASe) was between 1 × 101 and 1 × 102 copies per reaction when using a synthetic DNA target. The overall diagnostic sensitivity (DSe) and specificity (DSp) of RNA RT-LAMP was 97% and 99% respectively, relative to the standard of care rRT-PCR. When a CT cut-off of 33 was employed, above which increasingly evidence suggests there is a low risk of patients shedding infectious virus, the diagnostic sensitivity was 100%. The DSe and DSp of Direct RT-LAMP (that does not require RNA extraction) was 67% and 97%, respectively. When setting CT cut-offs of ≤33 and ≤25, the DSe increased to 75% and 100%, respectively, time from swab-to-result, CT < 25, was < 15 min. We propose that RNA RT-LAMP could replace rRT-PCR where there is a need for increased sample throughput and Direct RT-LAMP as a near-patient screening tool to rapidly identify highly contagious individuals within emergency departments and care homes during times of increased disease prevalence ensuring negative results still get laboratory confirmation.

Sex differences in math performance: The role of children's approach to schoolwork.

This research examined whether the tendency for girls to outperform boys in the classroom is due to differences in how girls and boys approach schoolwork. In 5th grade and then again in 7th grade, children (N=518) reported on how they approach schoolwork (i.e., achievement goals and classroom behavior), their learning strategies, and their self-efficacy in math; math grades and achievement test scores were also collected. Girls were more likely than boys to hold mastery over performance goals and to refrain from disruptive classroom behavior, which predicted girls' greater effortful learning over time. The sex difference in learning strategies accounted for girls' edge over boys in terms of grades. Girls did not do better on achievement tests, possibly because self-efficacy, for which there was also no sex difference, was the central predictor of performance on achievement tests.