Early life investment in antlers and body growth reflects adult performance in roe deer population under supplementary feeding conditions.

Recent research has challenged the idea that cervid antlers are such costly traits, supporting the assertion early-life antler investment is an honest signal of adult phenotypic quality. However, inferences were made based on antler measurements while growing (velvet) and thus, studies on fully-formed clean antlers are needed to avoid possible bias caused by the inter-individual variation in antler growth phenology. We studied a semi-captive population of European roe deer inhabiting a sub-Mediterranean area (Valsemana research station) and living under optimal conditions (ad libitum food supply and veterinary care). Based on repeated measurements taken from 146 individuals, we assessed whether allocation to secondary sexual traits during early life affected body mass or antler development during adulthood. Furthermore, we evaluated which body measurements better predicted future male quality. Additionally, using 488 individuals, we described age-class-specific variation in male body measurements and assessed the decline in antler size between adult and senescent stages (i.e. magnitude of senescence). Results agree with the assertion that there is no negative effect of a high investment in antler during early life on adult antler size or body mass, but we suggest the use of clean antlers as a more robust and reliable measure. The variables that better predicted body mass during adulthood were yearling body mass and body size at 6 months. Antler score between 10 and 18 months resulted in the best indicator of adult antler size. Finally, we support the idea that the magnitude of senescence in antler size is smaller in environments with higher resource availability during winter.

Impacto de la administración del cuestionario Asthma Control Test en atención primaria sobre la puntuación de control del asma / Impact of administering the Asthma Control Test questionnaire on rating asthma control in primary health care

Objetivo: Comparar la puntuación indicativa del control del asma obtenida mediante el cuestionario Asthma Control Test (ACT®) administrado por médicos de atención primaria usuarios habituales del cuestionario y otros que no lo eran. Diseño: Estudio epidemiológico, multicéntrico, prospectivo. Emplazamiento: Centros de atención primaria en España. Participantes: Se definieron 2 poblaciones de estudio: «usuarios ACT®» y «no usuarios ACT®», según el uso del cuestionario ACT® de sus respectivos médicos de atención primaria. Mediciones principales: Los pacientes completaron el cuestionario ACT® en una visita basal y en otra de seguimiento a las 8 semanas. La variable de valoración principal fue el porcentaje de pacientes con una puntuación ACT® ≥ 20. Se analizó además la evolución de la puntuación ACT® según si hubo cambio de tratamiento. Resultados: Hubo un mayor porcentaje de pacientes con asma bien controlada en el grupo de usuarios ACT® tras 8 semanas (68,5 vs. 55,6%; p = 0,01). Se observó un aumento significativo en la puntuación ACT®, en la visita de seguimiento respecto a la visita basal, cuando hubo cambio de tratamiento, en ambos grupos (2,5 y 3,8 puntos, usuarios ACT® y no usuarios ACT®, respectivamente, p = 0,001 y p < 0,0001). Conclusiones: La administración del cuestionario ACT® mejoró la puntuación indicativa de control del asma en ambas poblaciones del estudio, obteniendo una mayor puntuación aquellos pacientes atendidos por médicos con experiencia previa en el uso del ACT®. La administración del ACT® podría contribuir a mejorar la evolución longitudinal del paciente favoreciendo la adecuación del tratamiento (AU)

Objective: To compare the score indicative of asthma control obtained using the Asthma Control Test (ACT®) questionnaire administered by primary health care physicians, habitual users of the questionnaire, and those were not. Design: A multicentre, prospective, epidemiological study. Setting: Primary health care centres in Spain. Participants: Two study populations were defined: «ACT® users» and «non-ACT® users», according to the use of the ACT® questionnaire by their respective primary health care physicians. Main measurements: The patients completed the ACT® questionnaire during a baseline visit, and in another follow-up visit at 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with an ACT® score ≥20. The change in the ACT® score was analysed if there was a change in treatment. Results: There was a higher percentage of patients with well-controlled asthma in the ACT® users group after 8 weeks (68.5% vs. 55.6%; P=.01). A significant increase in the ACT® score was observed in the follow-up visit compared to the baseline visit, when there was a change in treatment in both groups (2.5 and 3.8 points, ACT® users and non-ACT®-users, respectively, P=0.001 and P<0.0001). Conclusions: The administering of the ACT® questionnaire improved the score indicative of asthma control in both populations of the study, with a higher score being obtained in those patients attended by physicians with previous experience in the use of ACT®. The administering of the ACT® questionnaire could contribute to improving the long-term outcome of the patient, and favouring the appropriateness of the treatment (AU)

[Impact of administering the Asthma Control Test questionnaire on rating asthma control in primary health care]. / Impacto de la administración del cuestionario Asthma Control Test en atención primaria sobre la puntuación de control del asma.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the score indicative of asthma control obtained using the Asthma Control Test (ACT(®)) questionnaire administered by primary health care physicians, habitual users of the questionnaire, and those were not. DESIGN: A multicentre, prospective, epidemiological study. SETTING: Primary health care centres in Spain. PARTICIPANTS: Two study populations were defined: «ACT(®) users¼ and «non-ACT(®) users¼, according to the use of the ACT(®) questionnaire by their respective primary health care physicians. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: The patients completed the ACT(®) questionnaire during a baseline visit, and in another follow-up visit at 8 weeks. The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with an ACT(®) score ≥ 20. The change in the ACT(®) score was analysed if there was a change in treatment. RESULTS: There was a higher percentage of patients with well-controlled asthma in the ACT(®) users group after 8 weeks (68.5% vs. 55.6%; P=.01). A significant increase in the ACT(®) score was observed in the follow-up visit compared to the baseline visit, when there was a change in treatment in both groups (2.5 and 3.8 points, ACT(®) users and non-ACT(®)-users, respectively, P=.001 and P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The administering of the ACT(®) questionnaire improved the score indicative of asthma control in both populations of the study, with a higher score being obtained in those patients attended by physicians with previous experience in the use of ACT(®). The administering of the ACT(®) questionnaire could contribute to improving the long-term outcome of the patient, and favouring the appropriateness of the treatment.