Adolescence is a developmental period, during which the brain and particularly medial prefrontal cortical (mPFC) regions thereof have not fully matured. Because epidemiological data have suggested that adolescent nicotine use may result in disturbances in cognitive function in adulthood, we investigated the long-term effects of adolescent nicotine exposure in rats. Male Wistar rats were exposed to either nicotine (three times daily, 0.4 mg/kg s.c.) or saline for 10 days during (postnatal day (PND) 34-43) or following (PND 60-69) adolescence. After 5 weeks during adulthood, separate groups of animals were tested in operant paradigms taxing attention and distinct measures of impulsivity. Visuospatial attention and impulsive action were tested in the five-choice serial reaction time task, whereas impulsive choice was assessed in the delayed reward task. Our data show that adolescent, but not postadolescent, nicotine exposure affects cognitive performance in adulthood and results in diminished attentional performance and increments in impulsive action, while leaving impulsive choice intact. This altered cognitive performance appeared to be associated with enhanced releasability of dopamine in the mPFC. Together, these data suggest that adolescence is a time window during which the brain is vulnerable to long-lasting cognitive disturbances resulting from nicotine exposure.

No abstract

Collaborative approaches in health, such as One Health (OH), are promising; nevertheless, several authors point at persistent challenges for designing and implementing OH initiatives. Among other challenges, OH practitioners struggle in their efforts to collaborate across disciplines and domains. This paper aims to provide insights into the existing challenges for designing and implementing OH initiatives, their causes and solutions, and points out strategic solutions with the potential to solve practical challenges. A systematic literature search was performed for emerging challenges and proposed solutions in the process of conducting OH initiatives. Next, a thematic and a causal analysis were performed to unravel challenges and their causes. Finally, solutions were discriminated on whether they were only recommended, or implemented as a proof-of-principle. The 56 included papers describe 21 challenges endured by OH initiatives that relate to different themes (policy and funding; education and training; surveillance; multi-actor, multi-domain, and multi-level collaborations; and evidence). These challenges occur in three different phases: the acquisition of sufficient conditions to start an initiative, its execution, and its monitoring and evaluation. The findings indicate that individual challenges share overlapping causes and crosscutting causal relations. Accordingly, solutions for the successful performance of OH initiatives should be implemented to tackle simultaneously different types of challenges occurring in different phases. Still, promoting collaboration between the wide diversity of stakeholders, as a fundamental aspect in the OH approach, is still by far the most challenging factor in performing OH initiatives. Causes for that are the difficulties in promoting meaningful and equal participation from diverse actors. Solutions proposed for this challenge focused on guiding stakeholders to think and collaborate beyond their professional and cultural silos to generate knowledge co-creation and innovative methodologies and frameworks. Finally, the biggest knowledge gap identified, in terms of proposed solutions, was for monitoring and evaluating OH initiatives. This highlights the need for future research on evaluation methods and tools specific for the OH approach, to provide credible evidence on its added value. When considering challenges endured by former OH initiatives and the proposed solutions for these challenges, practitioners should be able to plan and structure such initiatives in a more successful way, through the strategic pre-consideration of solutions or simply by avoiding known barriers.

No abstract

BackgroundGenetic information of pathogens is an essential input for infectious disease control, public health and for research. Efficiency in preventing and responding to global outbreaks relies on timely access to such information. Still, ownership barriers stand in the way of timely sharing of genetic data from pathogens, frustrating efficient public health responses and ultimately the potential use of such resources in innovations. Under a One Health approach, stakeholders, their interests and ownership issues are manifold and need to be investigated. We interviewed key actors from governmental and non-governmental bodies to identify overlapping and conflicting interests, and the overall challenges for sharing pathogen data, to provide essential inputs to the further development of political and practical strategies for improved data sharing practices.Methods & findingsTo identify and prioritize barriers, 52 Key Opinion Leaders were interviewed. A root-cause analysis was performed to identify causal relations between barriers. Finally, barriers were mapped to the innovation cycle reflecting how they affect the range of surveillance, innovation, and sharing activities. Four main barrier categories were found: compliance to regulations, negative consequences, self-interest, and insufficient incentives for compliance. When grouped in sectors (research institutes, public health organizations, supra-national organizations and industry) stakeholders appear to have similar interests, more than when grouped in domains (human, veterinary and food). Considering the innovation process, most of barriers could be mapped to the initial stages of the innovation cycle as sampling and sequencing phases. These are stages of primary importance to outbreak control and public health response. A minority of barriers applied to later stages in the innovation cycle, which are of more importance to product development.ConclusionOverall, barriers are complex and entangled, due to the diversity of causal factors and their crosscutting features. Therefore, barriers must be addressed in a comprehensive and integrated manner. Stakeholders have different interests highlighting the diversity in motivations for sharing pathogen data: prioritization of public health, basic research, economic welfare and/or innovative capacity. Broad inter-sectorial discussions should start with the alignment of these interests within sectors. The improved sharing of pathogen data, especially in upstream phases of the innovation process, will generate substantial public health benefits through increased availability of data to inform surveillance systems, as well as to allow the (re-)use of data for the development of medical countermeasures to control infectious diseases.