427 results for "fc26 pc Besuche die Website Buyfc26coins.com. Schnelle Lieferung, guter Support..i0HF"

in 8.26 milliseconds.

• Reprogramming of stroma-derived chemokine networks drives the loss of tissue organization in nodal B cell lymphoma

  Here, we utilized single-cell and spatial mapping to interrogate the mechanisms directing tissue architecture in human lymph nodes (LN) and its disruption in nodal B cell lymphoma. Specifically, we mapped the cellular landscape of follicular lymphoma (FL; n=6) and diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL; n=8) alongside non-malignant reactive LNs (rLN; n=5) using single-cell RNA sequencing. Our data support the central role of LN-resident stromal cells in chemokine-driven lymphocyte zonation and reveal an inflammatory feedback loop fueled by tumor-reactive T cells, triggering stromal remodeling, progressive loss of homeostatic chemokine gradients and tissue organization from non-malignant to FL and DLBCL. Collectively, our results highlight the principles of LN organization and suggest how lymphoma-induced microenvironmental reprogramming drives loss of tissue organization.

  Study EGAS00001006986

• Whole Genome-sequencing of rhabdomyosarcoma tumour tissue (2025-09-30)

  This study investigates high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) using multiple single-cell and spatial genomic technologies. We generated and analysed single-cell and single-nucleus RNA-sequencing, chromatin accessibility, and spatial transcriptomics data from primary tumours and validation samples. These datasets characterise cellular diversity within rhabdomyosarcoma and identify cell states associated with aggressive disease. The data support research into tumour biology, risk stratification, and therapeutic target discovery. This repository houses the whole-genome sequencing of RMS tumours data. . This dataset contains all the data available for this study on 2025-09-30.

  Dataset EGAD00001015712

• Best Practices for DACs

  Best Practices Data access committees (DACs) are institutional safeguards responsible for ensuring a balance between data protection and accessibility. However, there are no procedural standards that apply across DACs, which can lead to inconsistencies in their reviews and compromise their quality and effectiveness. Standardising DAC processes can foster trust and mutual recognition, paving the way for greater coordination, collaboration, and delegation between DACs and other oversight bodies to improve the efficiency of data access without sacrificing protection. To provide guidance, the following are suggestions for actions a DAC might take upon receiving a data access request: Aim to respond to all initial requests in less than 2 weeks. Failure to do so may result in follow-up emails from the EGA, journals, and ultimately dataset withdrawal. First, check that the data/EGAD number is consistent with your data submission. In other words, ensure that the requester has contacted the correct DAC. Verify that the user will be using the data within the terms of consent by asking them to sign up to the terms within the DAA. Ensure that data users who are granted access to the data comply with the terms of a Data Access Agreement (DAA) and to use the data only in approved ways. Look for an institutional email address for the requester. Search for evidence that the requester is "appropriately qualified/bona fide" for using the data, for example on PubMed, Research Gate, LinkedIn, etc. Confirm that the affiliated organisation is real and that the requester still works there. Inquire with the requester about who should have accounts created at the EGA under the terms of the agreement. If a negative decision is made, promptly communicate it to the requester and support it with the terms of the Data Access Policy that the requester has not met or cannot meet. Keep the information in the DAC up to date. If you leave your institution and are unable to manage data access requests on their behalf, you should add your replacement as a new contact in the DAC. Assist with data access requests for any further questions related to your data. The EGA can only check information that has been deposited in the repository. If the user has a specific question that the EGA cannot answer, we will redirect the user to the DAC. All the EGA studies and datasets referenced in a publication under your DAC must be publicly searchable on the EGA website before the paper is released. If possible, describe the permitted purposes for subsequent research projects, including associated limits and conditions, for all resources hosted in a repository using a common ontology, such as the GA4GH Data Use Ontology (DUO). It is considered best practice to try and release data only to those with an institutional email address. This gives reassurance to the EGA, research participants, and the general public that an appropriate individual is accessing and using the data. To prevent potential data breaches and ensure adherence to GDPR regulations, it is essential that the European Genome-Phenome Archive (EGA) is informed via the Helpdesk team of any changes to the Data Access Committee (DAC). This should be done in addition to any changes being made on the DAC portal. Data Controllers (as per the definition in the DPA) are also responsible for notifying the previous DAC of any modifications. Without proper notification, changes might not be automatically updated in our system, leading to the risk of incorrect permissions being applied and potential data access issues. Therefore, it is imperative that all Data Controllers follow this protocol to maintain data integrity and security.

  Documentation access/data-access-committee/best-practices

• Copy-Number Analysis of Understudied Black Women Ovarian Cancers

  Two general types of genetic alterations drive cancer progression: mutations and copy number alterations (CNAs). With the exception of p53, single nucleotide variant mutations (here, simply "mutations") are not drivers of 80% of tumors within the most frequent and deadly histotype of ovarian cancer: serous ovarian cancer (SOC). Rather, CNAs are more prevalent in SOC than any other cancer type studied by phs000178 The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Fully two-thirds of genes are altered by CNAs in the average SOC. Bioinformatic methods have shown that these CNAs modulate specific molecular pathways, such as autophagy, and this finding enabled effective pathway-targeted therapies1. Unfortunately, TCGA ovarian cancer data lacks racial diversity. Only 6% of SOC tumors (n=32) studied are from African origin. Black women diagnosed with ovarian cancer are more likely to die from their disease than white women. Five-year survival after diagnosis is 31% among blacks versus 42% among whites, and this disparity is seen in every age group and tumor stage distribution. Dr. Kelemen examined data from 365 white and 95 black ovarian cancer patients from the Hollings Cancer Center (HCC) Cancer Registry between 2000 and 2015 and found that black women had an 81% higher risk of death after diagnosis compared to white women (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.35-2.43), independent of diagnosis center (98% were treated at HCC but half were diagnosed elsewhere), tumor stage, histology, extent of residual tumor remaining following surgery, insurance status, smoking, type of treatment for ovarian cancer, and age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index. This disparity remained even when restricted to women who received the standard of care, surgery-chemotherapy sequence (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.10-2.89). Despite receiving the same treatment, black race was still associated with inferior survival. A similar disparity has been reported by others, indicating that the HCC experience is representative of national data. Here, an additional set of high-grade serous ovarian cancer primary tumors were acquired from biorepositories with a focus on expanding data originating from African American women. Data were analyzed for copy-number alterations using exome sequencing and control-FREEC software.

  Study phs002313

• Neoadjuvant atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: the phase 2 PANDA trial

  Gastric and gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancers carry a poor prognosis, and despite recent advancements most patients die of their disease. While immune checkpoint blockade has become part of the standard of care for patients with metastatic G/GEJ cancers, its efficacy and impact on the tumor microenvironment in the early disease setting remain largely unknown. We hypothesized a higher efficacy of neoadjuvant immunotherapy plus chemotherapy in patients with non-metastatic G/GEJ cancer. In the phase 2 PANDA trial, patients with previously untreated resectable G/GEJ tumors (n=21) received neoadjuvant treatment with one cycle of atezolizumab monotherapy followed by 4 cycles of atezolizumab plus docetaxel, oxaliplatin and capecitabine. Treatment was well-tolerated, and all patients underwent resection without treatment-related delays, meeting the primary endpoint of safety and feasibility. Tissue was obtained at multiple time points, allowing analysis of the effects of single-agent PD-L1 blockade and the subsequent combination with chemotherapy on the tumor microenvironment. A total of 21 patients were included, of whom 20 patients underwent surgery and were evaluable for the secondary pathologic response and survival endpoints, while 19 were evaluable for exploratory translational analyses. A major pathologic response (MPR, ≤10% residual viable tumor) was observed in 14/20 (70%; 95% CI 46-88%) patients, including 9 (45%; 95% CI 23-68%) pathologic complete responses. At a median follow-up of 47 months, 13/14 responders were alive and disease-free, while 5/6 nonresponders had died due to disease recurrence. Notably, baseline PD-1+CD8+ T cell infiltration was significantly higher in responders than in nonresponders, and comparison of the tumor microenvironment alterations following anti-PD-L1 monotherapy versus the subsequent combination with chemotherapy revealed that increased immune activity was achieved upon single-agent PD-1/L1 axis blockade. Based on these data, anti-PD-L1 plus chemotherapy warrants further exploration in patients with non-metastatic G/GEJ cancer, and these results call for validation in a larger cohort.

  Study EGAS50000000168

• German early-onset prostate cancer cohort of the Pan-Prostate Cancer Genome (PPCG) project

  Prostate cancer is the most frequent malignant tumor in males and the second most frequent cause of cancer-related death. Currently, in Germany, more than 60,000 prostate cancers are diagnosed every year. Although most of these patients are treated in a curative attempt, more than 10,000 German men die from prostate cancer annually. Owing to the demographic changes of our society, a further doubling of prostate cancer incidences during the next 20 years is expected. Prostate cancer is generally considered a tumor of elderly men. However, a fraction of prostate cancers are diagnosed at the age of 55 years or less. For several reasons, these “early onset prostate cancers” may represent a key entity for the understanding of prostate cancer biology. First, it is likely that early onset prostate cancers represent a distinct molecular subgroup of prostate cancer (PCa), potentially characterized by relatively small numbers of genetic changes, some of which may be particularly strong driver mutations for PCa development. Second, a fraction of prostate cancers in young individuals could represent classical prostate cancers that are detected at a very early stage and might therefore have accumulated molecular changes/mutations occurring that are most instrumental for prostate cancer early detection. Third, PCa with hereditary backgrounds are likely to accumulate in the age group below 55 years. A comparison with other sample sets (e.g. from other ICGC consortia), a systematic genomic analysis of young men with PCa could therefore lead to the detection of mechanisms for hereditary PCa. Fourth, a better understanding of these tumors is particularly relevant as finding optimal treatment regimens is most critical in young cancer patients. We are analyzing the entire genomic DNA sequences of at least 200 PCas (and matched non-tumorous DNA) of young men (≤ 55y), to at least 30 fold coverage, and integrate single-nucleotide variants and genomic structural variations with differential methylation, mRNA and miRNA expression data.Tissues were collected at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. Sequencing was performed at DKFZ and NCT (Heidelberg), EMBL (Heidelberg), and MPIMG (Berlin). Data management and bioinformatic data analyses is being conducted at DKFZ.

  Study EGAS00001003373

• Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD - Imaging)

  Available DataAction to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD-Imaging), provides access to ECG signals data from the ACCORD clinical trial. The clinical phenotyping and outcomes data from the trial are associated with ACCORD-BioLINCC, phs003551.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine if intensive glycemic control, multiple lipid management and intensive blood pressure control could prevent major cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular death) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Secondary hypotheses included treatment differences in other cardiovascular outcomes, total mortality, microvascular outcomes, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness.BackgroundGlycemia Trial:Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus die of cardiovascular disease (CVD) at rates two to four times higher than non-diabetic populations of similar demographic characteristics. They also experience increased rates of nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke. With the growing prevalence of obesity in the United States, CVD associated with type 2 diabetes is expected to become an even greater public health challenge in the coming decades than it is now. Expected increases in event rates will be associated with a concomitant rise in suffering and resource utilization.The ACCORD study investigated whether intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels would reduce cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes who had either established cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors when compared to standard therapy (HbA1c between 7.0% and 7.9%). A separate analysis investigated whether reduction of blood glucose concentration decreases the rate of microvascular complications in these patients.Lipid Therapy Trial:Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus have an increased incidence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease attributable, in part, to associated risk factors such as dyslipidemia. This is characterized by elevated plasma triglyceride levels, low levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and small, dense low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particles. The ACCORD Lipid Therapy trial was designed to test the effect of a therapeutic strategy that uses a fibrate to raise HDL-C and lower triglyceride levels and uses a statin for treatment of LDL-C reduce the rate of CVD events compared to a strategy that only uses a statin for treatment of LDL-C on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes that were at high risk for cardiovascular disease.Blood Pressure Trial:Diabetes mellitus increases the risk of cardiovascular disease at every level of systolic blood pressure. Because cardiovascular risk in patients with diabetes is graded and continuous across the entire range of levels of systolic blood pressure, even at prehypertensive levels, the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC 7) recommended beginning drug treatment in patients with diabetes who have systolic blood pressures of 130 mm Hg or higher, with a treatment goal of reducing systolic blood pressure to below 130 mm Hg. There is, however, a paucity of evidence from randomized clinical trials to support these recommendations. The ACCORD Blood Pressure trial tested the effect of a target systolic blood pressure below 120 mm Hg on major cardiovascular events among high-risk persons with type 2 diabetes compared to a strategy that targeted a SBP of EYE Substudy:Diabetic retinopathy, an important microvascular complication of diabetes, is a leading cause of blindness in the United States. Randomized, controlled clinical trials in cohorts of patients with type 1 diabetes and those with type 2 diabetes have shown the beneficial effects of intensive glycemic control and intensive treatment of elevated blood pressure on the progression of diabetic retinopathy. Elevated serum cholesterol and triglyceride levels have been implicated, in observational studies and small trials, as additional risk factors for the development of diabetic retinopathy and visual loss. The ACCORD EYE Substudy evaluated the effects of the ACCORD medical strategies on the progression of diabetic retinopathy in a subgroup of trial patients.MIND Substudy:Studies suggest that older persons with type 2 diabetes have at least twice the likelihood of developing late-life cognitive impairment or dementia compared to those without. The mechanisms underlying these cognitive disorders are increasingly thought to reflect a mixed pathology pattern with contributions from vascular, neurodegenerative and neurovascular processes. Pathophysiological mechanisms that have been described include inflammation, oxidative stress, energy imbalance, protein misfolding, glucocorticoid-mediated effects and differences in genetic susceptibilities. The ACCORD MIND substudy took as a premise that early intervention with the ACCORD therapeutic strategies to improve glycemic control could mitigate the adverse effects of type 2 diabetes on the brain.Subjects10,251 patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c concentrations of 7.5% or more participated in the trial. Of these patients, 5518 were assigned to the lipid therapy arm and 4733 to the blood pressure arm. EYE Substudy:A subgroup of 2856 patients was evaluated for the effects of the ACCORD interventions at 4 years on the progression of diabetic retinopathy. Patients who, at baseline, had a history of proliferative diabetic retinopathy that had been treated with laser photocoagulation or vitrectomy were excluded.MIND Substudy:A subgroup of 2977 patients was evaluated for cognitive function and brain volume. The ACCORD MIND substudy excluded patients aged DesignPatients were randomly assigned to undergo either intensive glycemic control (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level EYE Substudy:EYE Substudy patients were evaluated at two standardized and comprehensive eye examinations for the effects of the ACCORD interventions at 4 years on the progression of diabetic retinopathy by 3 or more steps on the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study Severity Scale (as assessed from seven-field stereoscopic fundus photographs, with 17 possible steps and a higher number of steps indicating greater severity) or the development of diabetic retinopathy necessitating laser photocoagulation or vitrectomy.MIND Substudy:The cognitive primary outcome, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) score, was assessed at baseline, 20 and 40 months. Total brain volume (TBV), the primary brain structure outcome, was assessed with MRI at baseline and 40 months in a sub-set of 632 patients. All patients with follow-up data were included in the primary analyses.ConclusionsGlycemia Trial:As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. (NEJM. 2008; 358(24): 2545-59).Microvascular Outcomes of the Glycemia Trial:Intensive therapy did not reduce the risk of advanced measures of microvascular outcomes, but delayed the onset of albuminuria and some measures of eye complications and neuropathy. Microvascular benefits of intensive therapy should be weighed against the risk of increased total and cardiovascular disease-related mortality, increased weight gain, and higher risk for severe hypoglycemia. (Lancet. 2010; 376(9739): 419-30)Lipid Therapy Trial:The combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of fatal cardiovascular events, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke, as compared with simvastatin alone. These results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes (NEJM. 2010; 362(17): 1563–1574).Blood Pressure Trial:In patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, did not reduce the rate of a composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events (NEJM. 2010; 362: 1575-1585).EYE Substudy:Intensive glycemic control and intensive combination treatment of dyslipidemia, but not intensive blood-pressure control, reduced the rate of progression of diabetic retinopathy (NEJM. 2010; 363: 233-244).MIND Substudy:Although significant differences in TBV favored the intensive therapy, cognitive outcomes were not different. Combined with the unfavorable effects on other ACCORD outcomes, MIND findings do not support using intensive therapy to reduce the adverse effects of diabetes on the brain in patients similar to MIND patients (Lancet Neurol. 2011; 10(11): 969–977).

  Study phs003562

• Privacy Notice for Data Access Committee Account

  Privacy Notice for EGA Data Access Committee Account This Privacy Notice explains what personal data is collected by the specific service you are requesting, for what purposes, how it is processed, and how we keep it secure. Note that this service collects personal data directly provided by the user, and also collects personal data from users that is provided by other organisations. 1. Who controls your personal data and how to contact us? European Genome- Phenome Archive - EGA offers a service for permanent archiving and sharing of all types of personally identifiable genetic and phenotypic data resulting from biomedical research projects, jointly managed by European Molecular Biology Laboratory – European Bioinformatics Institute (EMBL-EBI) and Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG). EMBL-EBI and CRG represent joint Data Controllers’ of processing of your personal data. They and their Data protection officers may be contacted for data protection queries and for exercising your rights under Section 8. You may contact EMBL-EBI, represented by Mallory Freeberg, by: email at mfreeberg@ebi.ac.uk , orpost at EMBL-EBI, Wellcome Genome Campus, CB10 1SD Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, UK. EMBL’s Data Protection Officer may be contacted by: email at dpo@embl.org, orpost at EMBL Heidelberg, Data protection officer, Meyerhofstraße 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany. You may contact CRG, whose EGA team is represented by dr. Jordi Rambla de Argila, by: email at jordi.rambla@crg.eu, orpost at Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Dr.Aiguader 88, PRBB Building, 08003 Barcelona, Spain. CRG Data protection officer may be contacted by: email at dpo@crg.eupost at Fundació Centre de Regulació Genòmica - Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), C/ Dr. Aiguader, 88, PRBB Building, 08003 Barcelona, Spain. 2. Which is the lawful basis for processing personal data? We process your personal data on the grounds of important public interest. For monitoring your activities on the website, we process your personal data on the grounds of important public interest. Such legal basis is found in Article 5(1)(a) of EMBL Internal Policy No 68 on General Data Protection (hereinafter IP 68), which is equivalent to Article 6 (1)(e) of the EU General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter GDPR) and upon which personal data are processed for the achievement of the aims laid down in 1973 agreement establishing EMBL, such as the promotion of the cooperation in the fundamental research, in the development of advanced instrumentation and in advanced teaching in molecular biology and dissemination of information. 3. What personal data is collected from users of the service? How do we use this personal data? We collect the following personal data from you: NameEmail addressTitle/PositionOrganisationOrganisational affiliationBusiness addressTelephone numberIP addressesDate and time of a visit to the service websiteOperating systemAmount of data transmittedBrowserUsernamePassword The data controller will use your personal data for the following purposes: To provide DAC user account and authenticated access to the service,To publicly publish some information to facilitate scientific research,To better understand the needs of the data subjects and guide future improvements of the service,To create anonymous usage statistics (from number of DACs, datasets per DAC). 4. Who will have access to your personal data? The personal data will be disclosed to: Authorised staff in the data controller’s institutions acting on data controller`s behalf and instructions (for all user account data),The general public via Internet will get access to your name, email address, business address, telephone number and organisation you belong to. 5. Will your personal data be transferred to third countries (i.e. countries not part of EU/EEA) and/or international organisations? Data categories ‘name`, `email address`, `telephone number`, `business address`; `organisation’ of the DAC user are published on the Internet. They thus become accessible to recipients in countries outside the European Economic Area. Insofar as the second joint controller may be subject to GDPR, data transfer to and from the first joint controller (EMBL-EBI), is necessary for important reasons of public interest embedded in the aims of EMBL and justified in the Article 9(4) of IP 68 (equivalent to Article 49(1)(d) of GDPR) read in conjunction with EMBL`s 1973 establishing agreement and Article 179(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 6. How long do we keep your personal data? Any personal data directly obtained from you will be retained as long as the service is live. Such duration serves the purpose of enabling scientific research and ensures legal compliance and facilitates internal and external audits if they arise. By contrast, the log files for the data categories related to anonymous usage statistics (raw web service logs) are processed only for 30 days and thereafter erased. 7. The joint Data Controllers provide these rights regarding your personal data You have the right to: Not be subject to decisions based solely on an automated processing of data (i.e. without human intervention) without you having your views taken into consideration.Request at reasonable intervals and without excessive delay or expense, information about the personal data processed about you. Under your request we will inform you in writing about, for example, the origin of the personal data or the preservation period.Request information to understand data processing activities when the results of these activities are applied to you. It must be clarified that rights under points 4 and 5 are only available whenever you need support whilst using our website. For other processing based on the grounds of important public interest you cannot exercise your rights to object, rectify or erase your personal data according to the Article 13(2)(a)(b) of IP 68 (equivalent to Article 17(3)(b)(d) and Article 21(6) of the GDPR). 8. Supervisory authority If you wish to complain against the processing of your personal data, you may do so by post at: EMBL Heidelberg, Data Protection Committee, Meyerhofstraße 1, 69117 Heidelberg, Germany, or Autoritat Catalana de Protecció de Dades (Catalan Data Protection Authority), C/Rosselló 214, Esc A, 1r 1a, Barcelona 08008, Spain. Published at: February 6, 2019

  Documentation data-protection/privacy-notice/ega-dac

• International Age-Related Macular Degeneration Genomics Consortium - Exome Chip Experiment

  Advanced age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is the leading cause of blindness in the elderly, with limited therapeutic options. To further our understanding of AMD genetics, we examined the contribution of common and rare genetic variation in the International AMD Genomics Consortium that included ~50,000 samples of 26 AMD case - control cohorts that were jointly genotyped. Analyzing 16,144 patients with late stage AMD and 17,832 controls, we identified 52 independently associated common and rare variants distributed across 34 loci. Besides these single variant signals, we also observed gene-based enrichment of very rare coding variants (frequency < 0.1%) in cases that implicated causal roles for CFH, CFI and TIMP3 in three of the known AMD risk loci. Our results support the hypothesis that rare coding variants can pinpoint causal genes within known genetic loci and illustrate that applying the approach systematically to detect new loci requires extremely large sample sizes.

  Study phs001039

• Rapid Acceleration of Diagnostics - Digital Health Technologies (RADx-DHT): NIH Digital Health Solutions for COVID-19: Team SAE

  The goal of this project is to develop a smartphone-based platform to monitor and support individuals with COVID-19 symptoms (who may need testing) and those who have already tested positive. The app will integrate a Bluetooth-enabled thermometer and pulse oximeter into an approach uniquely designed for low-resource settings and underserved populations. This project will focus on the American Indian/Alaskan Native (AI/AN) underserved population and will determine the feasibility of the digital health solution to collect symptom survey data and vital data including temperature, pulse, and oxygen saturation level. The complete study will include 300 participants 100% medically underserved with at least 51% from the AI/AN community. A combination of hard and soft data will be collected consisting of vital data, medical history and questionnaire data, and participant COVID-19 viral and antibody testing results collected during the study.DOI: https://rapids.ll.mit.edu/10.57895/wv88-by98

  Study phs002534