PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Jamie Cooper

Publications and source records attributed to Jamie Cooper.

5 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2026

Viral community structure in New Zealand's aquatic birds is associated with scavenging behavior.

Wild migratory birds play a major role in the global spread of viruses, yet the ecological drivers underpinning viral diversity and transmission, particularly host behavior, remain poorly understood. Aotearoa/New Zealand provides a powerful system to address this, including unique species that reflect its geographical isolation, yet with international connections provided by migratory birds across the East Asian-Australasian Flyway and Antarctic regions. Herein, we conducted a large-scale metatranscriptomic survey of wild birds across New Zealand and its subantarctic islands, in which we collected 1,348 samples from 690 individuals across 31 host species spanning four avian orders. We identified 118 avian viruses from 17 families, including 107 novel species, expanding our knowledge of avian viral diversity. Notably, viral community composition was most strongly associated with bird scavenging behavior, which explained more variation than host taxonomy, geography, or migratory status. Scavenging birds and opportunistic scavengers harbored more diverse viromes than non-scavengers, consistent with increased viral exposure across trophic levels. This was supported by the detection of 12 mammalian-associated viruses, primarily in scavengers, including hedgehog hepatovirus, rabbit hemorrhagic disease virus 2, and sea lion astroviruses, with host sequence data confirming dietary origin. We also detected viruses of epidemiological and evolutionary interest, including a low-pathogenic avian influenza A(H1N9) virus from red knots (Calidris canutus) and a divergent tobanivirus from Auckland Island teal (Anas aucklandica), which represented the first putative avian member of the Tobaniviridae. These findings suggest that virome structure in wild birds is associated with scavenging behavior, thus highlighting the importance of incorporating host ecology into viral surveillance and risk assessment.

New Zealand↗
PubMed2005

Prophylaxis of Thromboembolism in Critical Care (PROTECT) Trial: a pilot study.

PURPOSE: There is no randomized trial comparing low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) and unfractionated heparin (UFH) for thromboprophylaxis in medical-surgical ICU patients. The primary objective of this randomized pilot study on LMWH vs UFH was to assess the feasibility of conducting a large randomized trial with respect to timely enrollment and blinded study drug administration, practicality of twice-weekly lower limb ultrasounds to screen for deep venous thrombosis, LMWH bioaccumulation and dose adjustment in renal insufficiency, and recruitment rates for a future trial in medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Its additional goals were to evaluate the suitability of the exclusion criteria and to document the range of research activities that precede accrual of patients into a trial to plan multisite management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: By computerized telephone randomization, we allocated 129 medical-surgical ICU patients to treatment with dalteparin 5,000 IU QD SC or that with UFH 5,000 IU BID SC. Within each clinical center, only the study pharmacist was not blinded. We performed bilateral lower limb compression ultrasounds within 48 hours of ICU admission, twice weekly, on suspicion of deep venous thrombosis, and 7 days after ICU discharge. Research coordinators and investigators at 7 centers reported the time they engaged in all research activities before the first patient was randomized. RESULTS: Timely complete study drug administration occurred after enrollment. More than 99% of scheduled doses were administered in a blinded fashion. Scheduled ultrasounds were performed without exception. No bioaccumulation of dalteparin was observed when creatinine clearance decreased to lower than 30 mL/min. Average recruitment was 2 patients/center per month before the study exclusion criteria were modified. Study startup activities required, on average, 65.5 hours of combined investigator and research coordinator time at each center. Careful examination of the accrual in the pilot study led to a reexamination of the Prophylaxis of Thromboembolism in Critical Care Trial (PROTECT) study exclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that a multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing LMWH with UFH in critically ill medical-surgical patients is feasible. Pilot studies can improve the design of larger trials and may enhance successful timely completion.

Anticoagulants↗
PubMed2002

Multicenter clinical research in adult critical care.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the development, organization, and operation of several collaborative groups conducting investigator-initiated multicenter clinical research in adult critical care. DESIGN: To review the process by which investigator-initiated critical care clinical research groups were created using examples from Europe, Australia, the United States, and Canada. Various models of group structure and function are discussed, highlighting complementary approaches to protocol development, multicenter study management, and project funding. DATA SOURCES: Published peer review research and unpublished terms of reference documents on the structure and function of these groups. DATA SYNTHESIS: The overall goal of clinical critical care research groups engaged in multicenter studies is to improve patient outcomes through conducting large, rigorous investigations. Research programs we reviewed included the following: a) multicenter epidemiologic studies and surveys; b) technology evaluations of mechanical ventilation; c) investigations focused on three priority fields (acute lung injury, infection, and acute brain injury); d) a series of randomized trials of treatments for one syndrome (acute respiratory distress syndrome); and e) diverse methodologies addressing several clinical problems. The structure and function of these research groups differ according to their historical development, research culture, and enabling resources. Specific protocols emerge from clinical questions generated by investigators or from collectively prioritized research agendas. Project funding includes government support, peer-review grants, intensive care foundations, industry, local hospital funds, and hybrid models. Infrastructure for study management varies widely. CONCLUSIONS: Several national and international groups have engaged in investigator-initiated multicenter critical care research. The development, organization, and operational methods of these groups illustrate several collaborative models for clinical investigations in the intensive care unit. Common characteristics of these groups are a cohesive spirit, a sense of mission to achieve shared research goals, and acknowledgment that such an organization is much more than the sum of its parts.

Adult↗