Category: 8. Health

I first became aware of the work of Drummond Rennie almost by accident: By borrowing his office. It was the summer of 1997, and as a rising fourth-year medical student, I was spending a month at JAMA as the co-editor-in-chief of its then-medical student section, Pulse. Rennie, who was deputy editor of the journal at the time, was mostly traveling, so the staff installed me in his office, overflowing with books and manuscripts. 

Rennie, who died on September 12, was a towering figure in scientific publishing. Trained as a nephrologist, he joined the staff of the New England Journal of Medicine in 1977, and later, JAMA, where he remained for decades. He was known for promoting improved standards in medical journals, and for organizing the first Peer Review Congress, held in 1989 and nine more times since, most recently earlier this month.

In 2013, we were just a few years into the work of Retraction Watch, and thought talking about what we’d learned so far at the Congress would be a good idea. We submitted an abstract outlining what we wanted to talk about, writing that we’d gather data by the time of the meeting. 

That wasn’t going to work.

“We cannot go further unless we have some research in the form of data,” Rennie wrote to us in his characteristically sharp but highly constructive way. “The reviewers thought your abstract was pretty thin, and I agree. We know that you have the data and you have to think hard about what you are trying to say, remembering that the Peer Review Congresses were set up to present research, and not opinion.” 

We ended up withdrawing the abstract because we didn’t have time to do the work that we agreed was necessary. But we also learned a lot, enough to be successful in being part of a few presentations in a later Congress. And we were always grateful when Rennie cited the work of Retraction Watch in calls for papers for the meeting.

Others will recount his work in other areas, but here, we wanted to share several passages of Rennie’s that illustrate his gift for a well-turned phrase in service of a sharp opinion or insight. Rest in peace, Drummond.

---

“There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too trivial, no literature citation too biased or too egotistical, no design too warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving, no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print.”

“And it’s true that bringing in the peers does seem to make the process more democratic, though most editors would dislike the idea that they were not benign despots. But editors, most of whose working hours are spent oiling, balancing, and tuning the mechanisms of peer review, have a conflict of interest: symphonic conductors would probably be as much in favor of the retention of orchestras.”

“Scientists, however, seem to have been less able to accept the revelations than the general public, and a great deal less than members of Congress. Perhaps the difference can be explained by the fact that the Congress is composed largely of lawyers, who are not taught to trust easily. Our representatives correctly view themselves as custodians of the public purse and see plenty of evidence to counter the notion, seemingly prevalent among researchers, that scientific degrees endow their holders with the attributes of rectitude and honesty.”

“The ORI has neither the mandate nor the resources to lead the task of correcting a scientific literature polluted by fraudulent research. This responsibility lies with the community of scientists. When an ORI investigation ends with a finding of misconduct, the work is just beginning. Following the investigation, the community must identify all of a fraudulent author’s articles, publish retractions, and rid the literature of references to the fraudulent articles.”

“I arrived at the New England Journal of Medicine in September 1977, at the same time as its new Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Arnold Relman. It took 4 months before we met our first ethical issue. A physician wrote to point out that, on the same day that we had published an article to show that patients with chronic paranoid schizophrenia had low levels of monoamine oxidase in their platelets (Berger et al. 1978), another journal had published an article to show that levels in such patients were the same as in normals and other schizophrenics (Potkin et al. 1978). She also pointed out that though neither article referenced the other, they had two authors in common. When we challenged the authors, they justified their practice by asserting that it was not their custom to refer to unpublished work in a publication. (Wyatt and Murphy 1978). They, and no one else, had possessed information that completely undermined both their publications, so this disingenuous claim demonstrated at the very least a startling contempt for the process of publication. 

It was, for me at the New England Journal of Medicine, the first of many. Adopting Jules Pfeiffer’s phrase, I came to call such academic tricks ‘‘little murders’’—not deserving to be hanging offenses, but destructive of the delicate web of trust between colleagues that keeps the whole enterprise functioning and afloat.”

“At a larger level, our question is this: if the coauthors cannot understand the data, how can the reader? Isn’t it the duty of those on the collaboration to understand it well enough to stand behind it?

We don’t wish to suggest that it is easy to fulfill the obligations of a co-author or mentor. In reality, given the complexities of interpersonal relationships and the trust science requires, it can be difficult and daunting. Still, it’s the job.”

---

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on X or Bluesky, like us on Facebook, follow us on LinkedIn, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].

---

Related

Although considered nonserious, adverse events (AEs) following pneumococcal vaccination occurred predominantly during the first 30 days after administration, according to a study published in Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology.¹ The main safety concerns identified included injection site reactions, erythema, crying, swelling, skin warmth, and cellulitis.

“The rising incidence of antimicrobial-resistant bacterial variants has led to significant reductions in the clinical effectiveness of existing antibiotic regimens, necessitating the development of novel treatment approaches,” wrote the authors of the study. “Concurrently, large-scale implementation of vaccination programs has been identified as an essential component in addressing this global health challenge.”

Streptococcus pneumoniae remains a leading cause of mortality across all countries and age groups throughout the globe.¹ Despite these mortality risks and the annual rates of S. pneumoniae reaching nearly 1 million adults, the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases reports that 46% of high-risk patients are unaware of pneumococcal disease.²

On top of this prominent lack of awareness regarding the virus, patients with antimicrobial resistance have led researchers to further develop pneumococcal vaccines with higher valencies than before. Furthermore, with the S. pneumoniae pathogen accounting for significantly increased risks among pediatric patients as well as adults, the structured development of pneumococcal vaccines has been a must in various patient populations requiring different needs.¹

READ MORE: Capvaxive Shows Immune Responses to All 21 Serotypes for Children, Adolescents

“PCVs have been integrated into national childhood immunization programs worldwide,” wrote the authors of a study published in Pneumonia.³ “Nevertheless, despite the success of PCVs [pneumococcal conjugate vaccines] in reducing pneumococcal carriage and invasive disease, particularly in children, as well as in high-risk adults, acquisition of a broadly serotype-independent vaccine remains the ‘holy grail’ of pneumococcal vaccine development, albeit a challenging and difficult endeavor.”

Pneumococcal conjugate vaccines, or PCVs, are 1 of 2 types of pneumococcal vaccines available for patients in the US, along with pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccines (PPSVs). While the 13-valent PCV (PCV13) has shown significantly successful results in protecting children and older adults against pneumococcal disease, researchers have been developing PCV15, PCV20, and PCV21 as the need for higher valencies and protection against various serotypes arises.⁴

Researchers conducting the current study, however, wanted to focus on a specific aspect of pneumococcal vaccine uptake and the reasons why patients may be hesitant to receive one: potential AEs.

“Our study employs comprehensive data mining of [vaccine adverse event reporting system] (VAERS) reports across multiple pneumococcal vaccine formulations to systematically characterize post-vaccination safety profiles, thereby establishing evidence-based risk stratification to inform clinical vaccination strategies,” they wrote.¹

As part of the study, researchers explored the VAERS database for all AEs in conjunction with reports of pneumococcal vaccines from January 1990 to March 2025. To further understand the severity and prominence of pneumococcal AEs, researchers also used the European Medicines Agency’s 62 preferred term codes to categorize designated medical events (DMEs) throughout the study period.

Among a total of 157,244 patients (54.29% women, 38.2% under the age of 18) receiving the pneumococcal vaccine included in the study, there were 632,481 AEs detected. For all study participants with documented clinical outcomes, the most common were complete recovery (44.2%) and hospitalization due to AEs (14.94%).

Furthermore, highlighting researchers’ key study finding, 77.11% of participants experienced AEs during the first 30 days after receiving a pneumococcal vaccine. The mean time it took for patients to develop AEs was 4.2 days, with a median onset of 0 days.

“To our knowledge, this pharmacovigilance study is the first to comprehensively integrate safety signals across multiple pneumococcal vaccines using the US VAERS database,” continued the authors.¹ “This study assessed post-licensure pneumococcal vaccines’ safety using VAERS database disproportionality assessments and DME list monitoring. It is noteworthy that this study observed 77.11% of AE reports clustering within the 0- to 30-day window following pneumococcal vaccination.”

As researchers have previously mentioned, the development of pneumococcal vaccines has presented a variety of challenges and complexities due to the sheer variance in patient populations that require protection against the disease. While the “holy grail” of pneumococcal vaccines has yet to be identified, studies like this will continue to inform the development of these vaccines and the necessary pharmacovigilance of future investigations.

“The majority of AEs occurred within the initial 30-day post-vaccination period,” they concluded.¹ “These findings offer critical insights for clinical safety surveillance of pneumococcal vaccines and inform decision-making by regulatory agencies and health care professionals regarding risk mitigation strategies.”

READ MORE: Pneumococcal Resource Center

Ready to impress your pharmacy colleagues with the latest drug information, industry trends, and patient care tips? Sign up today for our free Drug Topics newsletter.

REFERENCES

1. Zheng X, Liu M, Ding A, et al. Post-marketing safety surveillance of pneumococcal vaccines: a real-world pharmacovigilance study using the U.S. vaccine adverse event reporting system (VAERS) database. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025;15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2025.1635180

2. Many at risk for pneumococcal disease are unaware. National Foundation for Infectious Diseases. November 12, 2019. Accessed September 15, 2025. https://www.nfid.org/many-at-risk-for-pneumococcal-disease-are-unaware/

3. Musher DM, Anderson R, Feldman C. The remarkable history of pneumococcal vaccination: an ongoing challenge. Pneumonia (Nathan). 2022 Sep 25;14(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41479-022-00097-y.

4. Types of pneumococcal disease. CDC. September 12, 2024. Accessed September 15, 2025. https://www.cdc.gov/pneumococcal/vaccines/types.html

Researchers at Lund University in Sweden have developed a digital cognitive test for diagnosing Alzheimer’s disease that is intended for use in primary care.

“This digital test, which patients perform on their own with minimal involvement from healthcare personnel, improves the primary care physician’s ability to determine who should be further examined by blood tests for Alzheimer’s pathology early in the investigation phase,” says Professor Oskar Hansson, who led the study alongside Pontus Tideman.

The study in brief:

• Clinical memory research // quantitative study, applied research // cross-sectional study // 2 groups with 223 and 403 patients, respectively
• The researchers have designed a digital cognitive test, BioCog, intended for use in primary care as a first step in the investigation process for Alzheimer’s disease.
• The test is self-administrated and tests the patient’s cognitive abilities, primarily memory but also attention, and can show whether cognition is impaired. Patients whose tests show impaired cognition continue the assessment process with additional blood tests to determine whether Alzheimer’s pathology is the cause of the impairment.

Alzheimer’s disease is the most common cause of dementia. As new disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer’s disease are now becoming available, both early and accurate diagnosis in a resource-efficient assessment process are becoming increasingly important, as not everyone responds to the new drugs. Seeking medical care for cognitive impairment is not necessarily the result of Alzheimer’s disease – it can for example be caused by depression, fatigue or other dementias.

Primary care does not have the resources, time or specialist knowledge to investigate possible Alzheimer’s disease in the same way as specialised memory clinics. And this is where a digital cognitive test can make the biggest difference.”

Oskar Hansson, professor of neurology, Lund University

Unlike pen-and-paper tests, which are generally used to assess cognitive impairment, digital tests provide a more detailed picture. More aspects and new variables that could not previously be measured as easily are included.

“The vast majority of people who experience memory loss will first seek treatment at their health centre. Our new digital test provides a first objective picture – at an earlier stage and with greater precision – of which patients have cognitive impairment indicative of Alzheimer’s disease. This indicates who should proceed with the blood test that measures the level of phosphorylated tau and is able to detect Alzheimer’s pathology in the brain with high accuracy,” says Pontus Tideman, doctoral student in the research group, Clinical Memory Research at Lund University and psychologist at the Memory Clinic, Skåne University Hospital.

At the moment, these blood tests are only available in specialised clinics/memory clinics in hospitals. In the long term, they will also be available in primary care, but doing blood tests on all patients presenting with cognitive problems is not the intention.

The researchers believe that the digital tool could be of great benefit, as it is currently very challenging to diagnose Alzheimer’s disease during a 15 to 20-minute patient encounter. This is where digital tools, which measure cognitive skills in an objective way, can make a big difference:

“The unique aspect of our BioCog test is that unlike other digital tests, it has been evaluated in a primary care population, i.e. patients seeking treatment at a health centre because they are experiencing cognitive problems, such as memory problems. Combining the results of the digital test and the blood test increases the accuracy of diagnosing Alzheimer’s disease. The purpose of the test is to make things easier for primary care doctors,” says Linda Karlsson, MSc in engineering physics and doctoral student in the research group, Clinical Memory Research at Lund University.

About the test

The digital test is done by the patient individually on a tablet computer. The test measures:

• memory (memorising ten words)
• cognitive processing speed and attention (how quickly or slowly they process information)
• orientation (what year, day etc.)
• delayed recall (recalling previously memorized information)
• recognition (among 30 words, recognise the ten words previously memorized)

The test measures aspects and variables that could not easily be measured in the past using pen-and-paper tests, such as how long it takes the patient to search among the words or how quickly they tap the screen. The combination of the sub-tests produces a result that is highly likely to indicate whether or not the patient has a cognitive impairment and can help the physician to decide which patients to take a blood test from, and ultimately which patients may benefit from the new drug treatments for Alzheimer’s disease.

A pioneering international project led by prominent female scientists, involving research staff from the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (UC3M) and promoted by the Spanish Space Agency (AEE), has just completed its parabolic flight campaign in Bordeaux (France). Its main objective is to study and counteract the adverse effects of microgravity on the human body, a key challenge for future exploration of the Moon and Mars.

The research is led by Professor Ana Díaz Artiles, from Texas A&M University (TAMU, USA) and honorary professor in the Department of Aerospace Engineering at UC3M. Her team tested an innovative countermeasure to protect the cardiovascular and ocular health of astronauts on long-duration missions.

The results of this research will not only be crucial for the future of human space exploration, but could also have important applications on Earth, such as in the treatment of vascular diseases and cardiovascular rehabilitation.”

Ana Díaz Artiles, Professor, Texas A&M University, USA

This project marks a milestone due to its approach and its team members, which include a notable number of women and Spanish participants. Participants include: Sara García Alonso, reserve astronaut for the European Space Agency (ESA); Isabel Vera Trallero, director of the Office of Space and Society at the Spanish Space Agency; and Beatriz Puente-Espada, director of the Aerospace Medicine Training Center (CIMA) of the Air and Space Force. The Spanish team is completed by: Professor Óscar Flores Arias, director of the Department of Aerospace Engineering at UC3M; master’s student Huc Pentinat Llurba at TAMU; and the participation of the National Institute of Aerospace Technology (INTA).

Cutting-edge science to counteract the challenges of microgravity

During space missions, the absence of gravity gradients causes a redistribution of body fluids towards the head, which can cause vision problems, increased intracranial pressure, and increased risk of blood clots in the neck. To combat these effects, the team tested a technique called Lower Body Negative Pressure (LBNP), which applies negative pressure to the legs to redistribute fluids back to the lower body and normalize circulation.

“The most interesting thing about this project is that we are evaluating such a promising countermeasure as LBNP in real microgravity conditions. This will allow us to analyze the effectiveness of LBNP in protecting the ocular and cardiovascular health of astronauts, two of the major challenges of long-duration space missions,” says Oscar Flores. In addition to marking a turning point in protecting the health of astronauts, “the validation of the LBNP technique may also open the door to medical applications here on Earth” he adds.

Throughout the parabolic flight, the effectiveness of this technique will be analyzed by measuring blood circulation in the neck and other cardiovascular and ocular parameters. This collaborative effort is an example of global research with renowned partners in the US, such as the University of California, Davis, and the University of Florida. The project is funded by ESA, NASA, TAMU, and Lockheed Martin Corporation, underscoring its international importance.

 

We’ve been shouting it from the rooftops for years: Hormone Therapy (HT) is safe and effective for women struggling with menopause symptoms. The treatment offers life-changing relief for hot flashes, vaginal dryness, and mood changes; it also protects your bones and brain as you age. But thanks to the flawed 2002 Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) study, which linked HT with heart disease, stroke, and breast cancer, most patients have avoided the treatment with a 10-foot pole—causing many women to just tough out these often debilitating symptoms.

Luckily, more and more research is proving the safety and efficacy of HT—including a brand-spanking-new study by Mass General Brigham. The study, published today in JAMA Internal Medicine, looked back at 20-years’ worth of data from 27,347 WHI participants who had hot flashes and night sweats. Researchers wanted to see if taking HT at different ages could at all be linked to serious cardiovascular issues like heart attack and stroke.

Once they crunched the numbers, researchers found that women under age 60 who used HT did not have an increased risk of cardiovascular issues. This was true for women who were taking estrogen only (an option for people who no longer have a uterus) and women on estrogen and synthetic progestin.

Study co-author JoAnn Manson, MD, chief of the Division of Preventive Medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, tells Oprah Daily that HT also carries no cardiovascular risk for women who take it within 10 years of the onset of menopause. Hitting menopause at 55 and starting HT at 63, for example, is typically considered safe.

However, Manson and her co-authors also found that women who started HT after the age of 70 to treat hot flashes and night sweats had a higher risk of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, an umbrella term for illnesses caused by a buildup of plaque in the arteries. Furthermore, HT didn’t even prove that beneficial for reducing hot flashes and night sweats in this population.

The news leaves women in their 60s in a bit of a gray area. The study recommends caution for women wanting to start HT during that decade, and that advice has to do with the 10-year rule mentioned before. Thankfully, Manson says that continuing HT into your 60s is typically not a problem—as long as you started it within 10 years of menopause or during your 50s.

If this news raises new questions or concerns for you, bring them to your OB-GYN to better understand the potential benefits and risks of HT specific to your particular health situation. (And women with a history of hormonal cancers like breast or ovarian cancer, for example, may still want to steer clear). But this new reassurance that HT is a safe (and effective!) option for some of the most frustrating menopause symptoms can open up a new door to relief for many women sweating it out in silence.

Member Exclusive: Explore “The Life You Want Class” Library

Cassie Hurwitz (she/her) is an associate editor at Oprah Daily, where she covers everything from culture to entertainment to lifestyle. She can typically be found in the middle of multiple books and TV shows all at once. Previously, Cassie worked at Parents, Rachael Ray In Season, and Reveal. Her love language is pizza (New York slices, Chicago deep dish, and otherwise). 

In melanoma diagnostics, accurate and consistent evaluation of immune cell infiltration is critical for guiding treatment decisions. However, traditional visual assessments by pathologists can vary significantly between observers, leading to potential inconsistencies in clinical care. In a recent interview with Dermatology Times, Thazin Aung, PhD, an associate research scientist at the Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut, discusses her team’s efforts to develop an AI-driven tool that standardizes immune cell scoring and lays the groundwork for future clinical implementation.

DT: What motivated you and your team to do a comparison of AI scoring and traditional methods for evaluating in melanoma?

Aung: I have been working at Yale for over 6 years, and my interest is artificial intelligence and machine learning. And I was interested in translational research, so I was always looking for ways to integrate these machine learning and AI in cancer research, translational cancer research. So I started this work about 3 years ago with AI in melanoma. But that time, it was just validating the previous publications and results. But now it’s a step further. After validating the previous results in this work, we try to make it more consistent across users. So if we want to ever replace human pathologists later down the line, we hope to be ready with that work.

Right now, in clinical projects, pathologists actually look at the slides and a microscope and estimate how many immune cells are in the tumor. These immune cells are the body’s defense mechanism, and they can either attack their cancer cells or kill the cancer cells. But the problem is that the scoring of the pathologists is not consistent. So they vary from person to person, because they are eyeballing. It’s not always accurate counting. So on the other hand, the AI model that we developed was trained on 1000s of cells and melanoma tissue lines, so it can automatically find and count those immune cells. Because it looks at the patterns across the slide, it gives much more consistent immune cell counts, and that is our motivation. And if we are getting consistent results with our method, we can replace the human pathologist and actually get much more efficient work. So that’s what we want. That’s why we did this work.

DT: In the study itself, AI significantly outperformed those visual assessments in reproducibility. Can you walk through why consistency is so critical when evaluating these biomarkers?

Aung: When 2 pathologists look at the same slide and patient, for example, and give two different scores…one gives, let’s say, 60% of the immune cells, which is good because if there are more immune cells, then they are going to fight more cancer cells. And then the other pathologist comes in and says, “Okay, no, this patient only has a 45%.” The clinical decision-making is now very difficult, so that is very important. And so in our study, we actually had about 40 pathologists and over 90 operators…more than half of them are scientists and some of them are actually pathologists who used this algorithm to analyze the immune cells. And the consistency between the people who use the AI algorithm is very tight. They are very consistent. But within the pathologies, we call it the coefficient of variation, meaning they vary too much. So the AI has much more reliability [and] that’s what we meant in the article. So the coefficients of variation, it’s very important, and it needs to be as small as possible. And the AI model that we built did that and gave us very tight coefficient of variations.

DT: Given that the study was retrospective in nature, what are the next steps to move the open-source AI tool toward clinical implementation?

Aung: Currently, we build the algorithm on the open-source software. So it’s very convenient – as long as you have a computer, you can use that. You can run our algorithm on the open-source software, and you can just evaluate if you have that tissue slide. But the only disadvantage of the open-source software is that it’s low maintenance. It may be difficult later because the technology is improving, and if the software doesn’t match with the latest technology, it’s going to be hard. So for next steps, we are thinking of developing this interface of our own and then making this algorithm to be able to run on our own interface, instead of the open-source software. That’s the first step. The second step is, because it is retrospective, we need to evaluate our AI model prospectively. To be able to evaluate it, we have to link it to treatment outcomes. So we have a lot of work to do to get to that point, but we are now thinking of working with the oncologist, working with the dermatologist, and running the prospective trial. And we have to also find a cut point for the patients who have high or low immune cells by using this AI algorithm. So that’s the next step we have in mind.

DT: How do you see open-source AI tools such as this one, transforming clinical workflows in dermatopathology, not just for melanoma, but even other skin cancers as well?

Aung: Like I said, open-source software is very good because everybody can use it, but because it is low maintenance, it’s going to be a little bit challenging later down the line. But for research purposes, no doubt this will be very helpful. Not only in melanoma, but also other skin cancers, like mucosal or acromelanoma or other types of skin cancer, or even different types of cancer, like head and neck cancer. So if you want to adopt the AI tool in clinics, I think you need to actually lock down the model as well as the interface that you’re using. Because open-source software to start with, is really good. You could do your research without having to worry about developing your own tools, and without having to spend too much time on that. But using it in the clinic is another question. So you have to actually have it as a fixed one. Unless you know, you can use this open-source software for another 20 years without having to worry about updating all of that. But I think having your own interface to use in clinics is the way to go.

DT: Is there anything else you’d like to share with our audience of dermatologists?

Aung: Although the AI did pretty well, it gave us very consistent results and everything, we’re not able to replace pathologists. We still need the pathologist’s opinions to mark the cells. As a scientist, we know generally what cells look like, what types they are. But pathologists know better, because they’ve been trained for 8 years. We still need to have the ground truth and opinion from the pathologist. But to be able to run in the clinic, once we’ve already developed the algorithm, I think the scientists can do the job.

[Transcript has been edited for clarity]

People living in the UK and following a diet close to the Mediterranean diet are more likely to have better gum health, with potentially lower amounts of gum disease and inflammation. 

Findings from a King’s College London study indicate that people not following a Mediterranean – style diet tended to have more severe gum disease, especially if they consumed red meat frequently. 

In these patients, the researchers observed higher levels of circulating inflammatory markers, such as Interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP). 

However, patients whose diets were rich in plant-based food which are typical of a Mediterranean diet, such as legumes, vegetables, fruits and olive oil, showed lower levels of various inflammatory markers. 

The research, published today in the Journal of Periodontology, evaluated 200 hospital patients enrolled in the King’s College London Oral, Dental and Craniofacial Biobank by performing dental exams, taking blood samples, and asking them about their diets through questionnaires. 

The Mediterranean diet is known for its emphasis on fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and healthy fats. It has been associated with a lower risk of developing major diseases, including cardiovascular diseases, neurodegenerative disorders, and certain cancers. 

There is substantial evidence showing that diet might play a role on human health by affecting the immune system and moderating inflammation. This depends on the composition of molecules in the diet, which include macronutrients, micronutrients and phytochemicals. Plant-based diets can contain more of these molecules which can lead to lower inflammation. 

Our findings suggest that a balanced, Mediterranean-type diet could potentially reduce gum disease and systemic inflammation. 

We observed that there may be a connection between periodontal disease severity, diet, and inflammation. These aspects should be holistically considered when assessing the treatment for periodontitis in patients. Our research offers an important starting point that can lead to more research to better understand the relationship between foods intake and gum disease.” 

Dr. Giuseppe Mainas, first author of the study and postdoctoral researcher, King’s College London

Professor Luigi Nibali, lead author and a Professor of Periodontology from King’s College London said: “There is emerging evidence about the role that a balanced diet might have in maintaining a periodontal healthy status. Our research shows the potential effect that a nutrient-dense, plant-rich diet could play in improving the nation’s gum health. Nevertheless, more investigation is needed to develop personalised approaches to help people manage their gum health.” 

Patients who have a new type of lens implanted in their eyes during surgery for cataracts or to correct their eyesight have excellent or good vision over distances both near and far, and often no longer need spectacles for reading.

Research presented today (Sunday) at the 43^rd Congress of the European Society of Cataract and Refractive Surgeons (ESCRS) evaluated outcomes for around 200 patients in 17 sites in Europe and Asia-Pacific who had surgery to implant the TECNIS PureSEE^TM, a purely refractive extended depth of field (EDF) presbyopia correction Intraocular Lens (IOL). Presbyopia is the condition that affects all people as they age, making it harder to focus clearly on close objects and text.

The study looked at visual acuity after surgery: how well the patients could see over far, intermediate and near distances on the logMAR visual acuity charts used by ophthalmologists that consist of rows of letters that become smaller as they go down the chart. It also measured Manifest Refraction Spherical Equivalent (MRSE) – a way of quantifying the refractive errors of the eye. In addition, the study reported on how patients were managing after surgery in terms of whether or not they needed spectacles for reading, how satisfied they were with their outcomes and whether they would recommend the lens to others.

Data were available for 238 patients at the time of the Congress, making it one of the biggest studies to report on this type of lens so far. The findings showed that the EDF presbyopia correction IOL, on average, provided excellent distance, very good intermediate, and functional near vision without glasses, with little refractive error.

Nearly all patients (96%) reported needing glasses ‘none’ or ‘a little of the time’ for distance vision; 93% reported this for intermediate distances, 62% for near distances, and 85% for overall vision. 

For satisfaction with the outcomes, 96% were ‘mostly’ or ‘completely’ satisfied with their distance vision, 94% with intermediate, 73% with near, and 95% with overall vision; 96% would recommend the lens to their family and friends.

Professor Oliver Findl, Chair of the ESCRS Education Committee, is a consultant eye surgeon and head of the ophthalmology department at Hanusch Hospital, Vienna. He presented the findings to the congress. 

He said: “The PureSee EDF IOL gave patients excellent distance, very good intermediate and functional near vision, which resulted in high patient satisfaction with less need for spectacles. The data in this study came from several surgical centres throughout Europe and Asia in a ‘real world setting’ outside of the usual clinical trials. 

“The category of EDF IOLs, such as the TECNIS PureSee, are a great alternative to multifocal lenses for patients who wish to be less dependent on spectacles after lens surgery and do not want to take the risk of unwanted optical side-effects.”

Currently, when a person requires cataract surgery, their cloudy lens is replaced with an artificial lens. To enable a patient to see objects both near and far, their surgeon may offer them a choice of lenses, such as: 

1. Monofocal lens, which enables patients to see clearly at one distance point (far, intermediate or near), but which mean they need spectacles for the distances they have not chosen. If surgery is needed on both eyes, patients can choose to have a lens for close-up work in one eye, and another lens for distances in the other eye. This combination is known as monovision and the brain then adjusts to the two distances so that the patient can see both near and far.
2. Multifocal lens, which can provide good vision over all distances, without the need for glasses. The lens is split into different zones or concentric rings, with different prescription lengths for each section, which provide clear, complete vision when combined. However, these lenses may cause some unwanted optical side-effects, especially at night.
3. Extended depth of field (EDF) lens, which provides good distance and intermediate (arm’s length) vision, but spectacles may still be needed for close work such as reading small print.

The difference between some of these lenses and the EDF presbyopia correction IOL that we used in this study is that it is a fully ‘refractive’ IOL, meaning it uses variations in the lens curvature to focus light at a single distance. The surface of the lens is smooth and you don’t see bumps or rings. This means you have better night vision and don’t see halos, starbursts, glare and other visual disturbances that can occur with other lenses.”

Professor Oliver Findl, Chair of the ESCRS Education Committee

Dr Joaquín Fernández is ESCRS Secretary, CEO of Qvision and Medical Director of Andalusian Ophthalmology Institute at Vithas Hospitals. He was not involved in the research. He commented: “Eye surgery for cataracts or to correct vision is constantly evolving but, so far, the ‘holy grail’ of developing a lens that can give patients good vision over all distances without any visual disturbances has been elusive. These data from a ‘real world’ study are very encouraging and suggest that the available options are expanding to better meet the expectations of our patients. However, other options still need to be explored. We look forward to further results from the study.”

A new synthesis of global evidence finds that experiencing gestational diabetes during pregnancy is linked with a decline in intellectual function among mothers, and may increase the risk of neurodevelopmental disorders, including autism spectrum disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children.

The ongoing systematic review and meta-analysis of 48 observational studies involving over 9 million pregnancies, is being presented at this year’s Annual Meeting of The European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD), Vienna (15-19 Sept).

The authors say that given the increasing prevalence of gestational diabetes in pregnancies, the findings underscore the importance of accurate management and early screening to reduce and detect such neurocognitive complications for both mothers during pregnancy and children after birth.

There are increasing concerns about the neurotoxic effects of gestational diabetes on the developing brain. Our findings underscore the urgency of addressing this significant public health concern that poses substantial cognitive dysfunction risks for both mothers and offspring.”

Dr. Ling-Jun Li, lead senior author Assistant Professor, School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, Singapore

Gestational diabetes, a type of diabetes that can develop during pregnancy, affects around 14% of pregnancies globally, and is becoming more common, with those who are living with obesity, have a family history of diabetes, non-White mothers, and those who are older at greater risk. 

Gestational diabetes usually resolves after birth but can cause complications during and after pregnancy. Mothers, for example, are at increased risk of high blood pressure and primary caesarean delivery, and their children are at higher risk of premature birth, being born with a large-for-gestational-age weight, and having neonatal hypoglycaemia. Children are also more likely to develop obesity and diabetes in adulthood.

Additionally, a growing body of evidence indicates that gestational diabetes affects neurocognitive function in offspring. However, until now, there has been no comprehensive synthesis of the available evidence.

To find out more, researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, combining the results of observational studies up to April 2024 examining the impact of gestational diabetes on neurocognitive outcomes in both mothers antenatally and offspring (from birth to 29 years of age). Data were analysed for 48 studies involving over 9 million pregnancies from 20 countries and globally. 

The analysis of five studies on maternal antenatal cognitive function found that mothers with a history of gestational diabetes scored significantly lower (by an average of 2.47 points) on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (total score out of 30) compared to those without the condition.

Further analyses of 43 studies examining offspring cognitive function also found statistically significant disparities between children of pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes and their counterparts. For example, children born to mothers with gestational diabetes had subsequent IQ scores 3.92 points lower than children not exposed to the condition, as well as a 3.18 point reduction in verbal crystallised intelligence (the ability to understand, analyse, and communicate effectively through language).

Additionally, children born to mothers who experienced gestational diabetes faced a 45% higher risk for total and partial developmental delays, were 36% more likely to have attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) ), and were at a 56% increased risk for autism spectrum disorder (ASD).

However, no significant differences were found in major brain structure or general cognitive scores [2] between children born to mothers with gestational diabetes and those who were not in the meta-analysis.

The authors note that it is still not fully clear how gestational diabetes affects a child’s brain development. However, several possible explanations exist. During pregnancy, factors such as inflammation, stress in the body’s cells, reduced oxygen supply, and high insulin levels may influence how the baby’s brain develops in the womb, which could later affect learning and cognitive abilities as the child grows.

The research team say that more research is needed to establish causality and clarify the associations between gestational diabetes and the full spectrum of cognitive functions. “Longer follow-ups across childhood are also needed to examine whether these associations persist or progress further to other worse outcomes,” says the presenting author, Ms Caitlin Por, a Medical Student at Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.