Risks for ross river virus disease in tropical Australia

Background There are no analytical studies of individual risks for Ross River virus (RRV) disease. Therefore, we set out to determine individual risk and protective factors for RRV disease in a high incidence area and to assess the utility of the case-control design applied for this purpose to an arbovirus disease. Methods We used a prospective matched case-control study of new community cases of RRV disease in the local government areas of Cairns, Mareeba, Douglas, and Atherton, in tropical Queensland, from January I to May 31, 1998. Results Protective measures against mosquitoes reduced the risk for disease. Mosquito coils, repellents, and citronella candles each decreased risk by at least 2-fold, with a dose-response for the number of protective measures used. Light-coloured clothing decreased risk 3-fold. Camping increased the risk 8-fold. Conclusions These risks were substantial and statistically significant, and provide a basis for educational programs on individual protection against RRV disease in Australia. Our study demonstrates the utility of the case-control method for investigating arbovirus risks. Such a risk analysis has not been done before for RRV infection, and is infrequently reported for other arbovirus infections.

Objectives for multiple-species conservation planning

The first step in conservation planning is to identify objectives. Most stated objectives for conservation, such as to maximize biodiversity outcomes, are too vague to be useful within a decision-making framework. One way to clarify the issue is to define objectives in terms of the risk of extinction for multiple species. Although the assessment of extinction risk for single species is common, few researchers have formulated an objective function that combines the extinction risks of multiple species. We sought to translate the broad goal of maximizing the viability of species into explicit objectives for use in a decision-theoretic approach to conservation planning. We formulated several objective functions based on extinction risk across many species and illustrated the differences between these objectives with simple examples. Each objective function was the mathematical representation of an approach to conservation and emphasized different levels of threat Our objectives included minimizing the joint probability of one or more extinctions, minimizing the expected number of extinctions, and minimizing the increase in risk of extinction from the best-case scenario. With objective functions based on joint probabilities of extinction across species, any correlations in extinction probabilities bad to be known or the resultant decisions were potentially misleading. Additive objectives, such as the expected number of extinctions, did not produce the same anomalies. We demonstrated that the choice of objective function is central to the decision-making process because alternative objective functions can lead to a different ranking of management options. Therefore, decision makers need to think carefully in selecting and defining their conservation goals.

Public reporting of hospital outcomes based on administrative data: risks and opportunities

In the wake of findings from the Bundaberg Hospital and Forster inquiries in Queensland, periodic public release of hospital performance reports has been recommended. A process for developing and releasing such reports is being established by Queensland Health, overseen by an independent expert panel. This recommendation presupposes that public reports based on routinely collected administrative data are accurate; that the public can access, correctly interpret and act upon report contents; that reports motivate hospital clinicians and managers to improve quality of care; and that there are no unintended adverse effects of public reporting. Available research suggests that primary data sources are often inaccurate and incomplete, that reports have low predictive value in detecting outlier hospitals, and that users experience difficulty in accessing and interpreting reports and tend to distrust their findings.

The mental health risks of adolescent cannabis use

Since the early 1970s, when cannabis first began to be widely used [1], the proportion of young people who have used cannabis has steeply increased and the age of first use has declined [2, 3]. Most cannabis users now start in the mid-to-late teens [1], an important period of psychosocial transition when misadventures can have large adverse effects on a young person's life chances.