1/ I use Endnote (20.2 (Bld 15709), to be precise.
It recently had a minor upgrade.
Now it's behaving oddly.
It's fixed one problem - previously it would revert all changes to a record if I deleted a pdf.
2/ This matters to me because it's often easier, when manually adding a reference, to copy a previous reference from the same author or publication, and then to edit the new reference. You don't have to retype a lot of details that were in the previous reference.
3/ But it's created another problem. Now, when you save a reference, the references shown disappear, and the selected reference is some random reference with a low record number.
This is annoying.
4/ (Another gripe isn't Endnote's fault. Many medical journals - such as @bmj_latest will insist on putting a link to a pdf version of an article into the URL field. I hate being given links to a pdf - especially when browsing on a mobile device.
5/ I'd rather see the article in HTML format, and download the pdf if I choose…)
6/ Returning to Endnote oddities - when you paste a reference it cancels the search and moves the focus to a random early entry. OK, the pasted one will be the latest one if ordered by record number; but still, this is odd and an unpleasant change.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
2/ I guess it will take a lot longer - and a different sort of study - to estimate the proportion of asymptomatic infections it will prevent. Until we know how many people are prevented from being infectious, it's hard to know what effect three doses will have on transmission.
3/ BTW, can we please stop calling the third dose a "booster dose"? I'm pretty certain that this will eventually become a three-dose primary course (with subsequent reinforcing doses if necessary, eg if there's waning of immunity or if there are vaccine escape variants.)
I was just at a Covid testing centre (accompanying somebody for a PCR test prior to a procedure).
I am shocked at the PPE used.
Staff wore gowns, plastic aprons, and magic gloves, as if dealing with a predominantly fomite-spread pathogen.
1/10
I've no real problem with the gowns and aprons - although they are likely a waste of money.
The gloves are worse than useless. They should be washing their hands with soap and water regularly (say, every hour); and using alcohol hand gel between patients.
2/10
Wearing gloves provides a false sense of security, and can reduce adherence to good hand-hygiene practice - you feel protected (although the gloves can spread fomites just as easily as bare hands can, if not gelled between patients).
3/10
1/ Following the Prime Minister's decision to be photographed, in Hexham Hospital, without a mask (despite everybody around him wearing one), I thought I'd look out the current guidance.
2/ (He clearly made a point of being filmed and photographed without a mask, and ensuring that those images were widely circulated…
3/ (…Whether this is a defiant dig at the mask-wearing rules he knows are necessary, but he hates, or another of his "dead cat" distraction ploys to draw attention away from gathering scandals, it was clearly deliberate.)
2/ "We have known since early 2020 that visors without masks are worse than useless at preventing Covid-19 transmission.
"Despite that, many people believe that they are effective, and wear them in the false belief that they are protecting themselves and/or others.
3/ "As Chair of the BMA Public Health Medicine Committee, I was closely involved with BMA messaging to try to correct this false belief - I can't seem to find the infographic we created on the BMA website any more, but see eg bma.org.uk/news-and-opini… .
1/ People with a Great Barrington Declaration bent ("don't do anything to control Covid-19 and hang the consequences - who cares how many people will die...") are now attacking the rest of us for saying we should continue to do what we can to control the disease.
2/ "You want it to go on for ever", they say, echoing the prime minister's "if not now, when?" questions.
It's a complete straw man attack. We have never said that.
3/ There are some discussions about whether we should try to eradicate the virus completely; or just bring it down to controllable levels.
But nobody's saying we need to take precautions for ever.
We needed more single rooms, ideally with negative pressure lobbies, to prevent transmission of airborne diseases.
Covid-19 won't be the last such pandemic.
So, if only for infection control purposes, we need more such rooms.
And yet…
2/4
I looked into the regulations during the flu pandemic.
Not only were there no standards for the number of respiratory infection safe rooms a hospital (even new-builds) should have, regulations on eg the minimum distance between beds were extremely weak or non-existent.
3/4