Multiple independent genetic factors at NOS1AP modulate the QT interval in a multi-ethnic population.

Extremes of electrocardiographic QT interval are associated with increased risk for sudden cardiac death (SCD); thus, identification and characterization of genetic variants that modulate QT interval may elucidate the underlying etiology of SCD. Previous studies have revealed an association between a common genetic variant in NOS1AP and QT interval in populations of European ancestry, but this finding has not been extended to other ethnic populations. We sought to characterize the effects of NOS1AP genetic variants on QT interval in the multi-ethnic population-based Dallas Heart Study (DHS, n = 3,072). The SNP most strongly associated with QT interval in previous samples of European ancestry, rs16847548, was the most strongly associated in White (P = 0.005) and Black (P = 3.6 x 10(-5)) participants, with the same direction of effect in Hispanics (P = 0.17), and further showed a significant SNP x sex-interaction (P = 0.03). A second SNP, rs16856785, uncorrelated with rs16847548, was also associated with QT interval in Blacks (P = 0.01), with qualitatively similar results in Whites and Hispanics. In a previously genotyped cohort of 14,107 White individuals drawn from the combined Atherosclerotic Risk in Communities (ARIC) and Cardiovascular Health Study (CHS) cohorts, we validated both the second locus at rs16856785 (P = 7.63 x 10(-8)), as well as the sex-interaction with rs16847548 (P = 8.68 x 10(-6)). These data extend the association of genetic variants in NOS1AP with QT interval to a Black population, with similar trends, though not statistically significant at P<0.05, in Hispanics. In addition, we identify a strong sex-interaction and the presence of a second independent site within NOS1AP associated with the QT interval. These results highlight the consistent and complex role of NOS1AP genetic variants in modulating QT interval.

A Multi- Faceted, Intensive Family Preservation Program Evaluation

This evaluation of a county intensive family preservation services (ifps) program makes several important methodological contributions to assessing post-treatment placement patterns of ifps clients. It is the first published ifps evaluation that utilizes an interval-level, overall measure of restrictiveness of placement, and one of the few that has followed placement patterns for a full two-years after treatment. The study is also a good example of complementing placement data with measures of family health and stability, and with qualitative feedback from former ifps clients. Finally, this study demonstrates the potential for doing methodologically sound evaluations of local ifps programs.

A Multi-Dimensional Approach to Evaluating Family Preservation Programs

The current study evaluates the effectiveness of family preservation programs funded by the Mississippi Department of Human Services. This venture encompassed scrutiny and assessment of improvements in child functioning, positive changes in parental functioning and family functioning and the decrease in foster care placement. Further, this evaluation assessed client and staff satisfaction. It also included an assessment of the perceived impact this program had on the community. Results indicate that the family preservation programs were effective in improving the self-esteem of participants, family cohesion, and adaptability. There were no significant changes in child placement, teen births, or abuse rates. Client and staff satisfaction were high on all quality dimensions. The majority of the sample of community members felt that the family preservation programs were effective in the community.

A multi-site pilot test study to measure safety climate in the university work setting

Next to leisure, sport, and household activities, the most common activity resulting in medically consulted injuries and poisonings in the United States is work, with an estimated 4 million workplace related episodes reported in 2008 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009). To address the risks inherent to various occupations, risk management programs are typically put in place that include worker training, engineering controls, and personal protective equipment. Recent studies have shown that such interventions alone are insufficient to adequately manage workplace risks, and that the climate in which the workers and safety program exist (known as the "safety climate") is an equally important consideration. The organizational safety climate is so important that many studies have focused on developing means of measuring it in various work settings. While safety climate studies have been reported for several industrial settings, published studies on assessing safety climate in the university work setting are largely absent. Universities are particularly unique workplaces because of the potential exposure to a diversity of agents representing both acute and chronic risks. Universities are also unique because readily detectable health and safety outcomes are relatively rare. The ability to measure safety climate in a work setting with rarely observed systemic outcome measures could serve as a powerful means of measure for the evaluation of safety risk management programs. ^ The goal of this research study was the development of a survey tool to measure safety climate specifically in the university work setting. The use of a standardized tool also allows for comparisons among universities throughout the United States. A specific study objective was accomplished to quantitatively assess safety climate at five universities across the United States. At five universities, 971 participants completed an online questionnaire to measure the safety climate. The average safety climate score across the five universities was 3.92 on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 indicating very high perceptions of safety at these universities. The two lowest overall dimensions of university safety climate were "acknowledgement of safety performance" and "department and supervisor's safety commitment". The results underscore how the perception of safety climate is significantly influenced at the local level. A second study objective regarding evaluating the reliability and validity of the safety climate questionnaire was accomplished. A third objective fulfilled was to provide executive summaries resulting from the questionnaire to the participating universities' health & safety professionals and collect feedback on usefulness, relevance and perceived accuracy. Overall, the professionals found the survey and results to be very useful, relevant and accurate. Finally, the safety climate questionnaire will be offered to other universities for benchmarking purposes at the annual meeting of a nationally recognized university health and safety organization. The ultimate goal of the project was accomplished and was the creation of a standardized tool that can be used for measuring safety climate in the university work setting and can facilitate meaningful comparisons amongst institutions.^