Building consensus around the assessment and interpretation of Symbiodiniaceae diversity.

Within microeukaryotes, genetic variation and functional variation sometimes accumulate more quickly than morphological differences. To understand the evolutionary history and ecology of such lineages, it is key to examine diversity at multiple levels of organization. In the dinoflagellate family Symbiodiniaceae, which can form endosymbioses with cnidarians (e.g., corals, octocorals, sea anemones, jellyfish), other marine invertebrates (e.g., sponges, molluscs, flatworms), and protists (e.g., foraminifera), molecular data have been used extensively over the past three decades to describe phenotypes and to make evolutionary and ecological inferences. Despite advances in Symbiodiniaceae genomics, a lack of consensus among researchers with respect to interpreting genetic data has slowed progress in the field and acted as a barrier to reconciling observations. Here, we identify key challenges regarding the assessment and interpretation of Symbiodiniaceae genetic diversity across three levels: species, populations, and communities. We summarize areas of agreement and highlight techniques and approaches that are broadly accepted. In areas where debate remains, we identify unresolved issues and discuss technologies and approaches that can help to fill knowledge gaps related to genetic and phenotypic diversity. We also discuss ways to stimulate progress, in particular by fostering a more inclusive and collaborative research community. We hope that this perspective will inspire and accelerate coral reef science by serving as a resource to those designing experiments, publishing research, and applying for funding related to Symbiodiniaceae and their symbiotic partnerships.

International Pediatric Multidisciplinary Management Using Telemedicine to Promote Equitable Care.

Objective: To evaluate the use of telemedicine as a collaboration tool between a pediatrician and subspecialists looking to address challenges, such as the lack of health care specialists, which are present in the Dominican Republic. Study design: During this 6-year study, 65 patients were evaluated by a medical team consisting of a local pediatrician and 17 subspecialists from a leading academic medical center in the Unites States. Patient's age ranged from 2 months to 16 years of age (mean 8 years old). The most common reasons for referral were masses or malignancies, vascular malformations, urogenital anomalies, stuttering, and cochlear implant programming. Results: A total of 39 out of 65 cases (60%) carried an initial diagnosis. Of the 65 cases, a change in medical management occurred in 92.31% of cases (60 cases). There was no change in medical diagnosis or treatment in 5 of 65 cases (8%). Conclusion: This protocol exhibited high patient satisfaction with the technology and platform and direct patient savings from transportation costs. It also demonstrated the importance of thorough diagnosis in providing appropriate treatment and solutions. Telemedicine use in comparable practices should be studied further to aid in the development of policies for the diagnosis and management of chronic illnesses that require referrals to subspecialists.

An independent interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility evaluation of the new AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System.

STUDY DESIGN: Agreement study. OBJECTIVE: To perform an independent interobserver and intraobserver agreement evaluation of the new AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The new AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System was recently published. It showed substantial reliability and reproducibility among the surgeons who developed it; however, an independent evaluation has not been performed. METHODS: Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs, and computed tomographic scans of 70 patients with acute traumatic thoracolumbar injuries were selected and classified using the morphological grading of the new AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System by 6 evaluators (3 spine surgeons and 3 orthopedic surgery residents). After a 6-week interval, the 70 cases were presented in a random sequence to the same evaluators for repeat evaluation. The Kappa coefficient (κ) was used to determine the interobserver and intraobserver agreement. RESULTS: The interobserver reliability was substantial when considering the fracture type (A, B, or C), with a κ= 0.62 (0.57-0.66). The interobserver agreement when considering the subtypes was moderate; κ= 0.55 (0.52-0.57). The intraobserver reproducibility was also substantial, with 85.95% full intraobserver reproducibility considering the fracture type, with κ= 0.77 (0.72-0.83), and was also substantial when considering subtypes with 75.71% full agreement and κ= 0.71 (0.67-0.76). No significant differences were observed between spine surgeons and orthopedic residents in the overall interobserver reliability and intraobserver reproducibility, or in the inter- and intraobserver agreement of specific A, B, or C types of injuries. CONCLUSION: This classification allows adequate agreement among different observers and by the same observer on separate occasions. Future prospective studies should evaluate whether this classification improves clinical decision making.