Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in standardised first few X cases and household transmission investigations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

We aimed to estimate the household secondary infection attack rate (hSAR) of SARS-CoV-2 in investigations aligned with the WHO Unity Studies Household Transmission Investigations (HHTI) protocol. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis according to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We searched Medline, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and medRxiv/bioRxiv for "Unity-aligned" First Few X cases (FFX) and HHTIs published 1 December 2019 to 26 July 2021. Standardised early results were shared by WHO Unity Studies collaborators (to 1 October 2021). We used a bespoke tool to assess investigation methodological quality. Values for hSAR and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted or calculated from crude data. Heterogeneity was assessed by visually inspecting overlap of CIs on forest plots and quantified in meta-analyses. Of 9988 records retrieved, 80 articles (64 from databases; 16 provided by Unity Studies collaborators) were retained in the systematic review; 62 were included in the primary meta-analysis. hSAR point estimates ranged from 2% to 90% (95% prediction interval: 3%-71%; I 2 = 99.7%); I 2 values remained >99% in subgroup analyses, indicating high, unexplained heterogeneity and leading to a decision not to report pooled hSAR estimates. FFX and HHTI remain critical epidemiological tools for early and ongoing characterisation of novel infectious pathogens. The large, unexplained variance in hSAR estimates emphasises the need to further support standardisation in planning, conduct and analysis, and for clear and comprehensive reporting of FFX and HHTIs in time and place, to guide evidence-based pandemic preparedness and response efforts for SARS-CoV-2, influenza and future novel respiratory viruses.

Culturally adapted pictorial screening tool for autism spectrum disorder: A new approach.

AIM: To assess the performance of a newly designed, culturally adapted screening tool for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). METHODS: Items for the screening tool were modeled from already documented checklists and diagnostic criteria for ASD. Each item in text was paired with a photograph that illustrated the written content, which was in the 2 main local languages. The final product had 21 items and was named the pictorial autism assessment schedule (PAAS). Performance of PAAS was tested on a clinical sample of 18-48 mo old children, diagnosis naïve, presenting with developmental deficits. Mothers completed PAAS checklist. Based on clinical diagnosis, which was taken as the gold standard, children were later grouped into ASD (Group 1) and non-ASD developmental disorders (Group 2). Mothers of a control sample of typically developing children also completed PAAS (Group 3). RESULTS: A total of 105 children (Group 1-45, Group 2-30, Group 3-30) participated in the study. Mean age of Group 1 and Group 2 were 36 and 40 mo respectively. Majority were male in all 3 groups. Performance of PAAS in discriminating between ASD and non-ASD developmental disorders was sensitivity 88.8%, specificity 60.7%, positive predictive value (PPV) 78.4%, negative predictive value (NPV) 77.2%, likelihood ratio (LR+) 2.26, and LR- 0.18. Performance of PAAS in discriminating between ASD and typical development was sensitivity 88.0%, specificity 93.3%, PPV 95.2%, NPV 84.0%, LR+ 13.3 and LR- 0.12. The results indicated that that a positive result from PAAS was 2.26 times more likely to be found in a child with ASD than in a child with non-ASD developmental disorder. A positive result from PAAS was 13.3 times more likely to be found in a child with ASD than in a child with typical development. CONCLUSION: PAAS is an effective tool in screening for ASD. Further study is indicated to evaluate the feasibility of using this instrument for community screening for ASD.

Outcome of Home-Based Early Intervention for Autism in Sri Lanka: Follow-Up of a Cohort and Comparison with a Nonintervention Group.

This paper presents the outcome of a home-based autism intervention program (HBAIP) in 18- to 40-month-old children newly diagnosed and treatment naïve. Intervention was exclusively implemented at home. Outcome was measured at 3 months and 6 months after intervention and compared with a group of newly diagnosed children with autism who were >40 months at intake but had not received any autism specific clinical management. Aim was also to estimate whether natural development would contribute to gain in skills and compare with the effect of intervention. Five selected parameters of behavior representing social interaction and social communication were used to assess outcome. Results showed a statistically significant improvement between preintervention and postintervention in all the measured parameters. The effect size was large when compared to preintervention and gains were indicated by changes in mean scores and p values within a narrow confidence interval. Highest gains were in first 3 months of postintervention which continued up to 6 months. Although the comparison group was more advanced in the measured skills at intake, they were significantly below the level reached by experimental group at 3 months and 6 months after intervention. This study was registered in the Sri Lanka Clinical Trials Registry (SLCTR/2009/011).

Combined ω3 and ω6 supplementation in children with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) refractory to methylphenidate treatment: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Children (6-12 years) with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) being treated with methylphenidate and standard behavior therapy for more than 6 months, whose parents reported no improvement in behavior and academic learning, were randomly assigned to receive supplementation with a combined ω3 and ω6 preparation or a placebo. Outcome was measured at 3 and 6 months after treatment using a self-assessment checklist completed by the parents. Statistically significant improvement was found in the treatment group compared with the placebo group (P < .01) in the following measures: restlessness, aggressiveness, completing work, and academic performance. Statistically significant improvement was not found at 3 months of treatment between groups but was evident at 6 months of treatment (P < .05) with inattention, impulsiveness, and cooperation with parents and teachers. Distractibility failed to show improvement. Effect sizes ranged from 0.3 to 1.1 at 3 months and 0.2 to 1.4 at 6 months for individual symptom variables.