Suchergebnisse

Three hypotheses were developed and tested relating the moderating effects of interdependence between leader behaviors and satisfaction and performance. Results from a survey of 419 participants on 22 teams in eight sports revealed strong support for the performance hypotheses, but not for the satisfaction hypotheses. Winning coaches of high interdependence sports teams were described as exhibiting significantly greater leader-initiating structure than losing high interdependence coaches. Also, winning coaches of high interdependence teams exhibited significantly more leader-initiating structure and significantly less leader consideration than winning coaches of low interdependence teams.

Introduction The QCOVID algorithm is a risk prediction tool for infection and subsequent hospitalisation/death due to SARS-CoV-2. At the time of writing, it is being used in important policy-making decisions by the UK and devolved governments for combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, including deliberations on shielding and vaccine prioritisation. There are four statistical validations exercises currently planned for the QCOVID algorithm, using data pertaining to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, respectively. This paper presents a common procedure for conducting and reporting on validation exercises for the QCOVID algorithm. Methods and analysis We will use open, retrospective cohort studies to assess the performance of the QCOVID risk prediction tool in each of the four UK nations. Linked datasets comprising of primary and secondary care records, virological testing data and death registrations will be assembled in trusted research environments in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. We will seek to have population level coverage as far as possible within each nation. The following performance metrics will be calculated by strata: Harrell's C, Brier Score, R 2 and Royston's D. Ethics and dissemination Approvals have been obtained from relevant ethics bodies in each UK nation. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journal.

INTRODUCTION: The QCOVID algorithm is a risk prediction tool for infection and subsequent hospitalisation/death due to SARS-CoV-2. At the time of writing, it is being used in important policy-making decisions by the UK and devolved governments for combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, including deliberations on shielding and vaccine prioritisation. There are four statistical validations exercises currently planned for the QCOVID algorithm, using data pertaining to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, respectively. This paper presents a common procedure for conducting and reporting on validation exercises for the QCOVID algorithm. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will use open, retrospective cohort studies to assess the performance of the QCOVID risk prediction tool in each of the four UK nations. Linked datasets comprising of primary and secondary care records, virological testing data and death registrations will be assembled in trusted research environments in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. We will seek to have population level coverage as far as possible within each nation. The following performance metrics will be calculated by strata: Harrell's C, Brier Score, R(2) and Royston's D. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Approvals have been obtained from relevant ethics bodies in each UK nation. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journal.

Introduction: The QCOVID algorithm is a risk prediction tool for infection and subsequent hospitalisation/death due to SARS-CoV-2. At the time of writing, it is being used in important policy-making decisions by the UK and devolved governments for combatting the COVID-19 pandemic, including deliberations on shielding and vaccine prioritisation. There are four statistical validations exercises currently planned for the QCOVID algorithm, using data pertaining to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, respectively. This paper presents a common procedure for conducting and reporting on validation exercises for the QCOVID algorithm. Methods and analysis: We will use open, retrospective cohort studies to assess the performance of the QCOVID risk prediction tool in each of the four UK nations. Linked datasets comprising of primary and secondary care records, virological testing data and death registrations will be assembled in trusted research environments in England, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. We will seek to have population level coverage as far as possible within each nation. The following performance metrics will be calculated by strata: Harrell's C, Brier Score, R2 and Royston's D. Ethics and dissemination: Approvals have been obtained from relevant ethics bodies in each UK nation. Findings will be made available to national policy-makers, presented at conferences and published in peer-reviewed journal.

There is an urgent need to inform policy deliberations about whether children with asthma should be vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 and, if so, which subset of children with asthma should be prioritised. We were asked by the UK's Joint Commission on Vaccination and Immunisation to undertake an urgent analysis to identify which children with asthma were at increased risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes. This national incident cohort study was done in all children in Scotland aged 5-17 years who were included in the linked dataset of Early Pandemic Evaluation and Enhanced Surveillance of COVID-19 (EAVE II). We used data from EAVE II to investigate the risk of COVID-19 hospitalisation among children with markers of uncontrolled asthma defined by either previous asthma hospital admission or oral corticosteroid prescription in the previous 2 years. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to derive hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for the association between asthma and COVID-19 hospital admission, stratified by markers of asthma control (previous asthma hospital admission and number of previous prescriptions for oral corticosteroids within 2 years of the study start date). Analyses were adjusted for age, sex, socioeconomic status, comorbidity, and previous hospital admission. Between March 1, 2020, and July 27, 2021, 752 867 children were included in the EAVE II dataset, 63 463 (8·4%) of whom had clinician-diagnosed-and-recorded asthma. Of these, 4339 (6·8%) had RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection. In those with confirmed infection, 67 (1·5%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19. Among the 689 404 children without asthma, 40 231 (5·8%) had confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infections, of whom 382 (0·9%) were admitted to hospital with COVID-19. The rate of COVID-19 hospital admission was higher in children with poorly controlled asthma than in those with well controlled asthma or without asthma. When using previous hospital admission for asthma as the marker of uncontrolled asthma, the adjusted HR was 6·40 (95% CI 3·27-12·53) for those with poorly controlled asthma and 1·36 (1·02-1·80) for those with well controlled asthma, compared with those with no asthma. When using oral corticosteroid prescriptions as the marker of uncontrolled asthma, the adjusted HR was 3·38 (1·84-6·21) for those with three or more prescribed courses of corticosteroids, 3·53 (1·87-6·67) for those with two prescribed courses of corticosteroids, 1·52 (0·90-2·57) for those with one prescribed course of corticosteroids, and 1·34 (0·98-1·82) for those with no prescribed course, compared with those with no asthma. School-aged children with asthma with previous recent hospital admission or two or more courses of oral corticosteroids are at markedly increased risk of COVID-19 hospital admission and should be considered a priority for vaccinations. This would translate into 9124 children across Scotland and an estimated 109 448 children across the UK. UK Research and Innovation (Medical Research Council), Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund, Health Data Research UK, and Scottish Government. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.]

Our thanks to the EAVE II Patient Advisory Group for their support. EAVE II is funded by the Medical Research Council (MR/R008345/1) with the support of BREATHE—The Health Data Research Hub for Respiratory Health (MC_PC_19004)—which is funded through the UK Research and Innovation Industrial Strategy Challenge Fund and delivered through Health Data Research UK. Additional support has been provided through Public Health Scotland and Scottish Government Director-General Health and Social Care and the Data and Connectivity National Core Study, led by Health Data Research UK in partnership with the Office for National Statistics and funded by UK Research and Innovation. SVK acknowledges funding from an NHS Research Scotland Senior Clinical Fellowship (SCAF/15/02), the Medical Research Council (MC_UU_00022/2) and the Scottish Government Chief Scientist Office (SPHSU17). ; Peer reviewed ; Publisher PDF