Ten simple rules for pushing boundaries of inclusion at academic events.

Inclusion at academic events is facing increased scrutiny as the communities these events serve raise their expectations for who can practically attend. Active efforts in recent years to bring more diversity to academic events have brought progress and created momentum. However, we must reflect on these efforts and determine which underrepresented groups are being disadvantaged. Inclusion at academic events is important to ensure diversity of discourse and opinion, to help build networks, and to avoid academic siloing. All of these contribute to the development of a robust and resilient academic field. We have developed these Ten Simple Rules both to amplify the voices that have been speaking out and to celebrate the progress of many Equity, Diversity, and Inclusivity practices that continue to drive the organisation of academic events. The Rules aim to raise awareness as well as provide actionable suggestions and tools to support these initiatives further. This aims to support academic organisations such as the Deep Learning Indaba, Neuromatch Academy, the IBRO-Simons Computational Neuroscience Imbizo, Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG), Arabs in Neuroscience, FAIRPoints, and OLS (formerly Open Life Science). This article is a call to action for organisers to reevaluate the impact and reach of their inclusive practices.

Social Vulnerability and Surgery Outcomes: A Cross-sectional Analysis.

Background: Post-operative complications present a challenge to the healthcare system due to the high unpredictability of their incidence. However, the socioeconomic factors that relate to postoperative complications are still unclear as they can be heterogeneous based on communities, types of surgical services, and sex and gender. Methods: In this study, we conducted a large population cross-sectional analysis of social vulnerability and the odds of various post-surgical complications. We built statistical logistic regression models of postsurgical complications with social vulnerability index as the independent variable along with sex interaction. Results: We found that social vulnerability was associated with abnormal heart rhythm with socioeconomic status and housing status being the main association factors. We also found associations of the interaction of social vulnerability and female sex with an increase in odds of heart attack and surgical wound infection. Conclusions: Our results indicate that social vulnerability measures such as socioeconomic status and housing conditions could be related to health outcomes. This suggests that the domain of preventive medicine should place social vulnerability as a priority to achieve its goals.

Sex-specific associations between lifetime diagnosis of bipolar disorder and cardiovascular disease: A cross-sectional analysis of 257,673 participants from the UK Biobank.

BACKGROUND: Sex is seldom considered as a potential moderator of the impact of bipolar disorder (BD) on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. We aimed to characterize the sex-specific association of CVD and BD using data from the UK Biobank. METHODS: In a cross-sectional analysis, we compared the odds ratio between women and men with BD for seven CVD diagnoses (coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, angina, atrial fibrillation, heart failure, stroke, and essential hypertension) and four cardiovascular biomarkers (arterial stiffness index, low-density lipoprotein, C-reactive protein, and HbA1c) in 293 participants with BD and 257,380 psychiatrically healthy controls in the UK Biobank. RESULTS: After adjusting for age, we found a two- to three-fold stronger association among women than among men between BD and rates of coronary artery disease, heart failure, and essential hypertension, with a significant sex-by-diagnosis interactions. The association remained significant after controlling for self-reported race, education, income, and smoking status. After controlling for potential confounders, there was no significant association between sex and any cardiovascular biomarkers. LIMITATIONS: These analyses could not disentangle effects of BD from its treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results underscore the importance of incorporating sex and mental illness in risk estimation tools for CVD, and improving screening for, and timely treatment of, CVD in those with BD. Future research is needed to better understand the contributors and mechanisms of sex differences related to CVD risk in BD.