What Is Traumatic Separation?

You may have a memory of being separated from a parent when you were a child, even just for a few minutes. Maybe you lost them in a crowd or wandered a little too far at the store and felt panicked and afraid.

A moment like this might be among your earliest memories because the feeling was so intense, says Caitlyn Downie, LCSW, the Director of Trauma and Resilience at the Child Mind Institute. That offers some insight into the fear of a child of any age who is separated from a parent or caregiver in a more serious way. The effects of this stress are so powerful they can actually change the way a child develops.

A toddler whose mother goes to prison. A kindergartener whose father is detained and deported. A teen who is placed in foster care. These are a few examples of what experts call traumatic separation, a clinical concept based on the importance of the parent-child bond and the profound effects that can result from breaking it.

What is traumatic separation?

Traumatic separation isn’t a clinical diagnosis, but research shows that it can be profoundly harmful to kids. What makes it traumatic (as opposed to routine partings, like when an adult regularly leaves their child to go to work) is the character of the separation: ones that are sudden, unexpected, or confusing, or those that come about through larger distressing events, like a natural disaster or war. It’s not defined by the time spent apart — both short and long-term separations can be harmful.

Some common examples of separation that can become traumatic include:

  • Parental deportation
  • Immigration (e.g., forced separation at the border)
  • Parental military deployment
  • Parental incarceration
  • Termination of parental rights

Separating from a parent or primary caregiver can be distressing to a child even when it’s deemed necessary for their safety, as in cases where the parent they have been separated from has abused them, says Kimberly Alexander, PsyD, a psychologist at the Child Mind Institute. “There’s still a natural attachment that occurs. And the separation disrupts that relationship, even if it’s for the support and care of the child.”

Why is traumatic separation harmful?

More than eight decades of research has shown the profound developmental importance of the parent-child bond. This is the guiding principle of attachment theory, which was pioneered by a British psychologist who studied children who were evacuated during the Blitz, the aerial bombardment of London in World War II.

Here’s what the research tells us about the harms of traumatic separation:

It can disrupt secure attachment

Think of secure attachment as a “fundamental sense of security and safety” that a child feels with a parent or caregiver, says Dylan Gee, PhD, a psychologist at Yale University who studies how early-life stress affects children’s development.

“Attachment is the lens through which children come to know what they can expect from the world around them,” she explains. “Is this going to be a safe place or a dangerous place? This is foundational to a child’s sense of their ability to navigate the world. Traumatic separation can shatter that sense of safety.”

It can affect neurobiological development

Children’s brains are especially plastic, says Dr. Gee, constantly learning to understand their environment and how to deal with stress. “Trauma that occurs in childhood can be even more consequential than trauma that occurs later in life,” she says, and experiencing these disruptions in childhood can affect the way your brain and body are primed to react to stress later on.

But heightened plasticity is a paradox, she adds. “It confers more vulnerability, but it also confers more potential for resilience — children have heightened potential for supportive intervention and for healing and recovery.”

What do the effects of traumatic separation look like?

There are acute and short-term effects that are common across kids of all ages:

Sleep problems: “It’s often one of the first things that we see: nightmares, trouble falling asleep, or a lot of crying as kids are trying to fall asleep,” Dr. Gee says.

Separation anxiety: This might look like distraction, withdrawal, or clinginess because of fear of being separated from their new caregivers, Dr. Alexander says.

But signs may take weeks or months to show up. Dr. Alexander advises caregivers to consider the child’s baseline — their typical patterns of eating, sleeping, or engaging with others. “If they’re having more trouble with sleep, they’re eating more, eating less, they’re withdrawing or expressing a lot of worried thoughts three or four months later — that’s something worth getting looked at by a clinician,” she says.

Signs of traumatic separation at different ages

“Sometimes people ask, ‘Well, when is separation the most harmful?’ It can be extremely harmful at any age,” Dr. Gee emphasizes. But there are specific signs at different developmental stages:

Infants

Babies may not be as consciously aware of being separated from a parent as older children, “but they’re fundamentally aware that their primary source of regulation and safety is missing,” Dr. Gee says. Because infants are so reliant on caregivers for nurturing and sustenance, the separation “can be experienced as a threat to their survival.” That might look like “crying a lot or becoming withdrawn,” she says. “And at any age we can see intense fear.”

Toddlers and young children (3–6)

Toddlers and young children might become extra clingy with new caregivers or show regressive behaviors like bedwetting or baby talk. Regressive behaviors happen when kids are overwhelmed by stress and can’t express themselves another way, Downie says. “It’s like your nervous system goes kind of haywire,” she explains, “so it uses the body to signal that something is wrong.”

Similarly, kids at this age might act out more, throwing more tantrums, or withdraw. They might develop selective mutism, a condition where kids are too anxious or distressed to speak, even when they want to, in certain situations or with certain people.

School-age children

School-age children might act out or experience separation anxiety. They may also struggle to understand the meaning of the separation, why it happened, or who is at fault for it. Thus, kids at this age are more prone to magical or distorted thinking and feelings of guilt, thinking or saying things like, “I’m the one that caused this” or “This is my fault.”

The weight of these distorted thoughts or other worries, Dr. Alexander says, might make it appear as though a child is struggling to concentrate or that they’re disengaged or distracted. They might withdraw in a group or be averse to stepping outside of their comfort zone.

Children who are school age or older can also experience emotional desensitization — a kind of emptiness of feeling — Downie says, which can look like spikes in irritability, a lack of empathy, not smiling or expressing positive emotions, or an inability to relate to others.

Preteens and teenagers

“I’ve seen teenagers have a lot of mistrust with systems and be very oppositional,” says Downie. “Like, ‘I don’t trust you. I don’t trust my teacher. I don’t trust this child services worker.’” It might make sense that, say, a teen in foster care would be wary of the foster care system. But Downie says it’s often a larger instinct for anger and mistrust, one that extends beyond any specific entity or person.

The teenage years are also when kids are forming their identity, and traumatic separation can fundamentally alter that process. For example, a teen with younger siblings may step into a parent role, taking on new worries and responsibilities. Conversely, teens may become more reckless in a caregiver’s absence, putting them at risk for substance abuse or incarceration.

How to help kids separated from a parent

Adults caring for a child who has been separated from a parent — family members, foster parents, teachers — “can play a profound role in supporting their mental health and resilience,” says Dr. Gee.

Validate feelings

One of the most important things caregivers can do is be present as a child reacts to their experiences, especially if and when scary feelings come up. But be careful not to lead kids or assume they feel a certain way. “You don’t want to make something more distressing to a child if it’s not presenting itself,” says Downie.

If a child expresses guilt, or says something like, “This is my fault,” there are still ways to validate the feeling without endorsing the statement, says Dr. Alexander. You might say something like: “I can understand why that thought comes to mind and how difficult it is to feel that way. When you’re ready, let’s think about other possibilities to this situation.”

Create consistency and stability

One of the hardest things about traumatic separation is the uncertainty — Where did they go? When will they come back? What is happening? Giving kids some sense of consistency and stability can help them feel safe despite the unknowns. So as much as possible, help them stick to any routines: going to school, seeing friends, doing activities they enjoy.

Dr. Alexander advises focusing on things you can control — for example, shielding kids from potentially worrying discussions in a family where a parent has been deported.

“There would likely be a lot of conversations in the home about the situation, maybe a lot of watching the news, maybe making a lot of phone calls to attorneys,” she explains. “So where are you having those conversations, and can you have them in an area or at a time of day where your kid isn’t overhearing the discussions out of context?”

For young kids, it might be as simple as asking them to play in their room. For teens, it might be better to have certain conversations when they are out of the house and invite them to participate directly in others.

Be honest but reassuring

Caregivers might not have all the answers — like knowing when a child’s parent is coming back — but they can create a sense of consistency and stability in how they respond to kids’ questions, too.

Avoid undue reassurance (“Everything is going to be fine”) or over-promising (“They’ll be back in two weeks”) by focusing on what kids can expect, says Dr. Gee. For example: “What I can tell you is that I’m here for you, and I’m going to be with you until he’s back,” or “You’re safe with me, and I’m going to stay with you through this really hard time.”

Model handling stress

Children are sensitive to tone, Dr. Alexander says. “So, if you’re having really big emotions that are out of context for a child, the child is looking at these emotions and trying to understand what’s happening. ‘Am I in danger in this specific moment?’”

She says it helps to have conversations about these moments, especially with younger kids. “Like, ‘I know you noticed mommy crying. We’re feeling really big feelings, and this is how we’re going to deal with those big feelings. I’m going to take a break. I’m going to get a sip of water. Whenever you’re having big feelings, I want you to let me know so that I can help you try doing the same things,’” Dr. Alexander says, explaining the importance of naming the emotion and then teaching kids that there are ways of dealing with it.

Long-term risks of traumatic separation

The effects of traumatic separation can persist even after a child and their caregiver are reunited. Traumatic separation, like other adverse childhood experiences, puts kids at risk for a host of long-term medical and mental health conditions, including depression, anxiety, attention issues, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

But Downie notes that not everyone who experiences traumatic separation develops PTSD. “Just because someone’s experiencing trauma now doesn’t mean that it’s going to become a PTSD diagnosis,” she says. “A lot of the behaviors that we’re talking about are normal and expected. There’s an adjustment period when a separation happens.” But if symptoms persist or escalate over several months, a child may need more serious support.

Treatment for a trauma diagnosis

While not every child who experiences a separation may receive a trauma diagnosis or require treatment, cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) — and the more specific trauma-focused cognitive behavioral therapy (TF-CBT) — is the “gold standard,” says Downie. TF-CBT is specifically for children experiencing trauma-related symptoms. An important component of TF-CBT is creating a trauma narrative, where kids create a story about what happened to help them process it. “But if you have a child who is not ready to process and integrate that trauma, you can’t force the pacing of the treatment,” she says.

In short, a good clinician will follow a child’s lead — even if that means just sitting in the same room with them to build trust. “People really need to feel like they’re being heard and that they can trust someone,” Downie says. Which is why a supportive caregiver or trusted adult can make a big difference.

“If people can take anything away from this, it’s that you want to make kids understand that that they’re not responsible for what’s happened and that people do care about them,” Downie says. “Kids are really resilient, and they can adapt in a good-enough environment. They don’t have to have everything to be successful.”

The post What Is Traumatic Separation? appeared first on Child Mind Institute.

Explainable AI for Well-Being Prediction From Lifestyle Data: 2-Study Design

Background: Well-being is a cornerstone of public health and social progress; yet, its determinants are multifaceted and dynamic. As behavioral data become increasingly available and artificial intelligence (AI) systems gain prominence, scalable assessments of well-being are becoming more feasible. However, to be useful in practice, such systems must remain understandable to the people they aim to support. Explainable AI is therefore essential to foster trust and enable reflection. Objective: This research aimed to investigate (1) the extent to which modifiable lifestyle and contextual factors can predict subjective well-being, and (2) how different explanation modalities influence users’ satisfaction when interpreting AI-generated well-being feedback. Methods: We conducted a 2-stage, application-grounded investigation. First, we developed a parsimonious regularized linear model using a small set of lifestyle-related predictors to estimate individual well-being. Second, we experimentally compared multiple explanation modalities (visual, interactive, textual, quantitative, and population-comparison) against a no-explanation control to evaluate how each format shapes end users’ satisfaction with the AI-generated assessment. Results: Across conditions, providing any explanation increased users’ satisfaction relative to the no-explanation control in the final sample (n=1252 participants). Visual (B=0.915, SE 0.077; <.001) and interactive (B=0.914, SE 0.076; <.001) explanations produced the highest satisfaction scores, while textual (B=0.850, SE 0.076; <.001) and quantitative (B=0.782, SE 0.077; <.001) formats also showed strong positive effects. Population-comparison (contextual) feedback yielded a smaller effect (B=0.218, SE 0.077; =.005) and was consistently the least preferred and least effective at conveying why the model produced a given assessment. Conclusions: The findings suggest that well-being tools should combine simple, interpretable models with visual or interactive explanations that foreground actionable behavioral levers rather than emphasizing population norms. These insights offer design guidance for deploying explainable AI in well-being tools to support user satisfaction.

ASGCT CEO David Barrett Previews the Upcoming Conference in Boston

The 29th American Society of Gene & Cell Therapy (ASGCT) meeting kicks off in Boston next week. The annual event will be a whirlwind of sessions, keynotes, fireside chats, posters, and exhibitors.

For the second year in a row, GEN spoke with David Barrett, JD, who has been the CEO of ASGCT since 2016. In this interview, we discuss his perspective on the event, if there is anything new that attendees should be looking out for, and what he, personally, is most looking forward to.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

LeMieux: The ASGCT meeting is an annual event. What are some of the things that will make this year’s meeting special?

Barrett: There is a lot that is special this year. First and foremost, it feels like a bit of a homecoming which is really exciting. The last time we were in Boston was in 2008. And Boston is a city and community where gene therapy, biotech, and research are all located. You can feel it when you’re in Cambridge and I think you are absolutely going to feel that when you’re inside the convention center.

The fact that the meeting is in Boston this year is also special for me because one of the very first things I did when I joined ASGCT in 2016, was to source the location for the 2020 annual meeting at the Hynes Convention Center in Boston. I was very excited and it was the first time we were going to take up an entire convention center. But that meeting, of course, did not happen; it had to be canceled because of COVID. So that makes this meeting in Boston particularly special. We finally get to have the meeting in Boston that I’ve been hoping for since 2016!

And we are growing. We are at the bigger of the two convention centers in Boston. We are going to surpass the total number of people that we had last year and I have every expectation that we’ll see significant growth year over year.

As far as other things that are that are new and interesting this year… I said this last year, but it’s worth adding it again—the science is always different. It is very consistent that we will have great science every year, and it is a wonderfully fun question mark of what exactly that science is going to look like. It’s always exciting because the science is always different year after year. So, by its very nature, it will be an exciting new conference this year.

Also, we’ll have a puppy park in the exhibit hall, so that’s really fun!

LeMieux: What are some things that will be highlighted at the meeting that ASGCT has been working on over the past year?

Barrett: ASGCT has done a lot this year. There is a lot that we have been very vocal about so far, and there is a lot that we’ll be sharing during the annual meeting.

Number one is that we partnered with Orphan Therapeutics Accelerator (OTXL) to found CGTxchange—the first and only clearing house and marketplace of its kind for cell and gene therapy assets. It is being built as we speak and we’ll have some exciting announcements during the annual meeting about assets that will hopefully be in the CGTxchange by that point. It is the culmination of a lot of work on what to do about commercially pre-viable (not non-viable) cell and gene therapies and the work that we’re doing to make those more commercially possible.

Also, ASGCT is hosting its Momentum Gala—the first formal gala at our annual meeting. That event has resonated really well with sponsors and donors. In fact, it is sold out! That event is going to be used to celebrate the launch of ASGCT Foundation, which is a separately incorporated 501C3 charitable foundation to support ASGCT’s mission to advance early career researchers and enable the development of cell and gene therapies. Also at the gala, we’ll be announcing some new initiatives to support patient access and reduce barriers to diagnosis, clinical trial participation, and treatment with cell and gene therapies.

Another major thing that’s going on is a considerable expansion of our educational activities. We recently launched a new e-learning tool and platform—the ASGCT Learning Center—a really fun project that we’ve been working on to expand how we we are getting new content to our new and expanding audiences.

We recognize that we have a really broad audience at ASGCT that is made up of cell and gene therapy basic science researchers, translational researchers, physician scientists and others in the ecosystem of drug development and administration for cell and gene therapies. And we’re looking at new ways to provide content that can help satisfy the learning needs of that really broad audience. The learning center is a big tool in our quiver to be able to do that.

LeMieux: What do you hope people take away from the meeting?

Barrett: I hope they take away a couple of things… number one, I hope they take knowledge, education, and awareness of what’s going on in the space and what has been happening over the course of the last 12 months. I hope that they take that back to their individual place of work. And I hope that, generally speaking, we fulfill our mission by expanding that knowledge base among all of the stakeholders in cell and gene therapy. Another thing that I hope people take away from this is that, after a lot of ups and downs and undulations in this field over the course of the past two to three years, that there is an extraordinary sense of excitement about the next phases in the development of cell and gene therapy drugs.

We have some really exciting new regulatory pathways. We have a lot of development of personalized gene editing technologies and techniques that can bring gene therapies much more quickly and effectively to patients who need them. We have seen significant advancements in more traditional or classic AAV gene therapies that are allowing these to be safer and more efficacious. And we’re seeing an expansion of cell-based gene therapies through an ever-expanding portfolio of indications that are reached by CAR Ts, primarily in cancer, but in an expanding outlook for the use of CAR Ts outside of cancer as well. So, I am hopeful that attendees come away with a renewed energy and vigor for the development of satellite gene therapies.

LeMieux: Is there anything specific planned at the meeting to touch on the concerns of the challenges that the scientific community is facing right now—with funding or other barriers?

Barrett: We are very excited to have Katherine Szarama, PhD—who was recently named acting director of FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER)—participating in a fireside chat, addressing regulatory uncertainties. [Szarama replaced Vinay Prasad, MD, MPH, on May 1st.]

We have two other fireside chats focused on regulation, as well. The three fireside chats will offer attendees an opportunity to learn a little more, ask some questions, and hear from some of the individuals in those sessions specifically.

But I think that people will also see, more broadly, the ongoing work that ASGCT is doing to continue to create a partnership and a positive working relationship with the FDA to support those regulatory concerns.

LeMieux: What are you most looking forward to?

Barrett: I think I said this last year, but it really is one of my favorite components of the annual meeting. Every year, I look forward to taking some time to watch the exhibit hall being built. When the rope drops and people enter the exhibit hall for that very first reception, the hall is in pristine condition. And one of my favorite parts is watching it get to that pristine condition because it is just so exciting to see everything being built and come to a head, to have the whole field enter all at one space, and to be able to see an industry live and in person. Because so much of what we do is at our computer screens—and what we read about, hear about, or listen to people talk about. But when you actually see the field of gene and cell therapy on display, it is really exciting and satisfying.

Lastly, I will add that I’m looking forward to eating too much clam chowder while in Boston (chuckling).

The post ASGCT CEO David Barrett Previews the Upcoming Conference in Boston appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

ASGCT Honors Mohamed Abou‑el‑Enein as Outstanding New Investigator

Some scientists build tools. Others build bridges. Mohamed Abou‑el‑Enein, MD, PhD, does both—engineering a high‑dimensional platform that temporally maps CAR T cells, while constructing the translational infrastructure needed to move them from concept to clinic. That dual lens has now earned him two of the American Society of Gene and Cell Therapy’s (ASGCT) top honors: the 2026 Outstanding New Investigator Award and, to his lab, the Best of Molecular Therapy Award, which features the contributions of leading early-career authors to the Molecular Therapy family of journals.

This year’s Molecular Therapy recognition highlights a study from Abou‑el‑Enein’s lab, published in May 2025, that uses spectral flow cytometry to map how CAR T cells remodel during manufacturing, revealing a five‑day window when the cells are most potent. The work reflects a core principle of his group: you cannot rationally engineer what you cannot precisely measure. Their high‑dimensional analytical tools are designed to simultaneously capture the full profile of each engineered cell, information that directly shapes how next‑generation therapies are built.

“Spending my career bridging scientific discovery and patient care, both by supporting others and through our own research, makes this dual recognition especially meaningful,” said Abou‑el‑Enein. “The contribution of translational scientists has long been underestimated and under‑acknowledged, and having a committee of peers recognize its value means a great deal to me.”

Mohamed Abou-el-Enein and Amaia Cadinanos-Garai [Anson Cheung]

As a physician‑scientist, Abou‑el‑Enein brings comprehensive training to the problems of cell and gene therapy translation, a trajectory shaped across leading institutions globally. His path spans clinical medicine, regulatory science, biomanufacturing, and data science—training that now converges at the University of Southern California (USC), where he leads the USC/Children’s Hospital Los Angeles Cell Therapy Program and directs the institution’s cGMP manufacturing facility. His team has built a platform capable of producing a wide range of advanced therapies, from viral vectors to stem‑cell–based products. As USC’s Chuck Murry, MD, PhD, director of the Eli and Edythe Broad Center for Regenerative Medicine and Stem Cell Research noted, he brings “an eclectic mix of cell biology, biomanufacturing, and patient‑centered humanity” to the role.

The Abou‑el‑Enein lab extends that mission by developing computational platforms that unify analytical data with predictive modeling. Their newest effort—UNICORN (UNIfying Cell Therapy Outcome prediction and Regulatory Navigation)—integrates high‑dimensional analytics with machine learning to forecast therapeutic performance and streamline regulatory decision‑making for pediatric cancers and rare diseases. It’s a natural evolution of the group’s earlier work, which established a powerful analytical framework for tracking CAR T cell states over time.

Their broader analytical ecosystem includes tools for single‑cell characterization, computational modeling, and non‑viral precision genome engineering, all designed to support translation from the earliest stages of design.

As he prepares to deliver his Outstanding New Investigator lecture in Boston, Abou‑el‑Enein said the meeting is a chance to reconnect with the community that shaped his translational philosophy.

“These awards are catalysts that give me motivation to keep going,” he said. “I always remind my team… we do science because we believe that what we do will make a difference. It’s really about helping patients and making sure they have a real chance.”

The post ASGCT Honors Mohamed Abou‑el‑Enein as Outstanding New Investigator appeared first on GEN – Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News.

The Download: AI malaise and babymaking tech

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

We’ve entered the era of AI malaise

AI is spreading everywhere, and it is not going away. But what will it do? What effect will it have on our society? Will it make life better, or worse? How will we know? What’s the plan?

This technology may very well take our jobs—or just crash the economy instead. Our apps are all getting injections of AI, like it or not. And it is increasingly impossible to tell whether we are relying too much on AI or not using it enough.

We’re all sitting uncomfortably with AI right now. Read our essay on the strange, uncertain mood of the moment.

The era of AI malaise is an essay written by our editor-in-chief Mat Honan. It accompanies MIT Technology Review’s 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, our list of the big ideas, trends, and advances in the field that are driving progress today—and will shape what’s possible tomorrow.

Here’s how technology transformed babymaking

Technology is changing the way we make babies. Clinicians have improved hormonal treatments. Embryologists have devised ways to culture embryos in the lab for longer. IVF clinics today offer multiple genetic tests for embryos.

The technology has also had a huge social impact, allowing for changes in the structure of families and providing more reproductive choices for would-be parents. Now, AI and robots are set to usher in another new era for IVF.

Here’s how technology is reshaping babymaking.

—Jessica Hamzelou

This story is from The Checkup, our weekly newsletter giving you the inside track on all things biotech. Sign up to receive it in your inbox every Thursday.

How robots learn: a brief, contemporary history

For decades, researchers have been inspired by science fiction robots that can move through the world, adapt to different environments, and interact with people. But bringing these devices into the messiness of the real world has proved incredibly difficult.

Now, advances in AI are changing that. Instead of relying on rigid rules, robots are learning through trial and error, simulations, and huge amounts of real-world data. The progress represents a revolution in how machines interact with their surroundings.

It also means that Silicon Valley roboticists are dreaming big again. Here’s how we got here. 

—James O’Donnell

This story is from the latest issue of our print magazine, which is all about nature. Subscribe now to read it in full.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 ICE plans to develop its own smart glasses
The “ICE Glasses” would identify people in real time. (404 Media)
+ ICE already uses an app with facial recognition to track citizens. (NYT $)
+ A new lawsuit wants to stop ICE using DNA to track critics. (Ars Technica)

2 AI is distorting key economic signals
It makes growth look better and the job market look worse. (WSJ $)
+ Welcome to the economic singularity. (MIT Technology Review)

3 A cyberattack paralyzed thousands of schools
And stole 275 million people’s data from edtech platform Canvas. (NYT $)
+ The digital learning software is used across the US. (CNN)
+ It’s the worst case scenario from an attack on one education platform. (Wired $)

4 The US suspects Nvidia chips were smuggled to Alibaba via Thailand
Super Micro servers containing Nvidia chips were allegedly smuggled. (Bloomberg $)
+ Through a firm linked to Thailand’s national AI initiative. (Reuters $)

5 China’s affordable AI models are increasingly worrying Silicon Valley
They’re often cheaper and more adaptable than US rivals. (Bloomberg $)
+ China is betting big on open source. (MIT Technology Review)

6 Scientists developed a new energy storage system inspired by sunburn
It stores solar energy by mimicking molecular changes in damaged DNA. (BBC)
+ Solar and wind with battery storage are becoming cost-competitive. (Reuters $)
+ Here are three other breakthrough climate technologies. (MIT Technology Review)

7 Russia’s internet crackdown is hobbling small businesses
App restrictions and internet outages are causing headaches. (Reuters $)

8 Younger researchers are more likely to produce “disruptive” science
A new study found more experience led to fewer breakthroughs. (Nature)

9 Why Richard Dawkins was mistaken to believe Claude has feelings
But his line of inquiry wasn’t altogether foolish. (The Atlantic $)
+ Why it’ll be hard to tell if AI ever becomes conscious. (MIT Technology Review)

10 The Golden Globes have new AI rules (and they’re looser than the Oscars’)
AI is permitted as an enhancement, but not as a replacement. (Gizmodo)
+ Last week, the Oscars banned AI actors and writing. (NPR)

Quote of the day

“When I am talking to these astonishing creatures, I totally forget that they are machines. I treat them exactly as I would treat a very intelligent friend.” 

—Evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins reflects on his interactions with advanced AI systems in an essay published in Unherd.

One More Thing

VIRGINIA HANUSIK


How to stop a state from sinking

In a 10-month span in 2020 and 2021, southwest Louisiana saw five climate-related disasters, including two destructive hurricanes and flash floods. But there could be a better way to protect the area: elevation.

The $6.8 billion Southwest Coastal Louisiana Project is betting that raising buildings while restoring coastal boundary lands that have long acted as natural barriers can preserve this slice of coastline. 

Here’s how officials hope to protect vulnerable communities by lifting homes out of the floodplain.

—Xander Peters

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun, and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)

+ Soaking in a hot tub might offer even more health benefits than a sauna.
+ A court has officially protected America’s largest rainforest from future logging.
+ Experience the majesty of the world’s largest owl collection through these intimate, high-detail portraits.
+ A dad has turned his toddler’s random stories into high-production pop songs that are surprisingly catchy.

Two-year longitudinal neuropsychological monitoring after unilateral and staged bilateral subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation

IntroductionDeep brain stimulation (DBS) is an increasingly popular therapeutic method for treating motor symptoms in Parkinson’s disease, but its impact on non-motor symptoms in long-term follow-up remains debated.MethodThe primary objective of this study was to monitor the cognitive functioning, mood, and quality of life in 2 years of unilateral and staged bilateral subthalamic nucleus DBS. A cohort of 30 patients was evaluated at three intervals: before DBS surgery, at 6 months, and 24 months post-surgery. The time points of neuropsychological assessments were set to control the impact of unilateral and bilateral DBS throughout the treatment. Two selected groups, unilateral and bilateral DBS, were also analyzed. The study employed a combination of computerized and paper-based tests to assess cognitive functions, alongside questionnaires to gauge emotional state and quality of life. The cognitive evaluation focused on three domains critical for daily activities: attention and processing speed, learning and episodic memory, and executive functions, including working memory and cognitive flexibility.ResultsAnalysis of the entire cohort from baseline through the two follow-up assessments revealed no decline in cognitive function, mood, or quality of life, alongside significant motor improvement. Additional analyses of the two subgroups—unilateral DBS and staged bilateral DBS—also showed no overall decline in any assessed domain over the 2-year follow-up period. However, comparison of cognitive outcomes with normative data indicated a higher proportion of patients meeting criteria for cognitive decline at the 24-month follow-up in the staged bilateral DBS group compared with the unilateral DBS group.ConclusionThe findings support the long-term overall stability of cognitive function, mood, and quality of life following unilateral and staged bilateral subthalamic DBS. Subgroup analyses did not reveal any significant decline in cognitive measures over time. Nevertheless, individual comparisons with normative data showed a higher proportion of patients with memory deficits in the staged bilateral DBS group after the two-year follow-up.

Sleep and circadian rhythm disruptions in animal models of temporal lobe epilepsy

Temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE) is frequently accompanied by disruptions to sleep and circadian rhythms, which substantially contribute to disease burden. Human studies are often confounded by antiseizure medications, limiting insight into underlying mechanisms. Animal models therefore provide critical opportunities to examine causal interactions, yet their translational validity has not been systematically evaluated. In this review, we first outline the relevance of rodent models for studying epilepsy- and sleep-related processes. We then examine current evidence for sleep and circadian disturbances across three commonly used TLE models: the pilocarpine (PILO) model, the kainic acid (KA) model, and the traumatic brain injury (TBI) model. We summarize circadian patterns of seizure occurrence, alterations in sleep–wake architecture, and changes in core circadian clock gene expression, as well as alterations in subcortical brain regions involved in sleep–wake regulation. Across models, sleep is consistently fragmented, and circadian molecular machinery is profoundly disrupted, although the direction and magnitude of changes vary by species, protocol, and epilepsy stage. By comparing findings across animal models and patient studies, this review highlights convergences, discrepancies, and key research gaps. Despite variability, animal models remain indispensable for probing the bidirectional links between epilepsy and sleep–circadian regulation.

Can exercise combined with transcranial direct current stimulation improve cognitive function in older adults? A systematic review and meta-analysis

ObjectiveThis study investigated whether combining exercise with transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improves overall cognition, memory, and executive function in older adults.MethodsFollowing PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched databases including PubMed, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wan Fang for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) examining the combined effect of exercise and tDCS on cognitive function in older adults. Used RStudio (version 4.2.0) to merge effect sizes and represent them as SMD with a 95% confidence interval (CI). The main effects are synthesized using a random effects model, and heterogeneity sources are explored through subgroup regression and sensitivity analysis.ResultsThe combined exercise and tDCS intervention significantly improved global cognitive function in older adults (SMD = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.89, p < 0.0001). Significant enhancements were observed in executive function (SMD = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.92, p = 0.005) and general cognitive ability (SMD = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.21 to 1.30, p = 0.006), while memory showed a non-significant improvement (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI: −0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.063). Both interventions lasting less than 6 weeks (SMD = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.27, p < 0.0001) and those lasting 6 weeks or longer (SMD = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.10 to 0.37, p = 0.0006) positively impacted cognitive function. However, the effect size was larger for cognitively healthy older adults (SMD = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.20 to 1.18, p = 0.006) compared to those with cognitive impairment (SMD = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.92, p = 0.0002). The combination of tDCS and integrated exercise produced the largest effect size (SMD = 1.74), despite high heterogeneity, while the combination of tDCS and Tai Chi produced the smallest but most robust effect (SMD = 0.25, I 2 = 0%), indicating that exercise type significantly regulates the intervention effect of tDCS (p = 0.0015). Regression analysis shows that tDCS stimulation time has a significant positive regulatory effect on cognitive function in elderly people (p = 0.0002), while the combined intervention period (p = 0.030) and single exercise time (p = 0.034) both have a significant negative regulatory effect.ConclusionBased on limited evidence, we found that a combined intervention of exercise and tDCS is a potentially effective means of improving cognitive function in older adults. However, the extent of improvement varies with the cognitive domain, baseline performance level, and intervention plan.

Development and validation of machine learning models for predicting functional outcome after low-dose alteplase in the extended time window for acute ischemic stroke

BackgroundThis study aims to develop machine learning (ML) models to predict 90-day functional outcomes for acute ischemic stroke (AIS) patients receiving thrombolysis with low-dose alteplase at 0.6 mg/kg between 4.5 and 9 h after symptom onset.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of AIS patients receiving thrombolysis between August 1, 2019 and August 31, 2023. Eligible patients were randomly divided into training and validation sets in a 7:3 ratio. Good functional prognosis at 90 days were defined as modified Rankin scale score (mRS) ≤2. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator (LASSO) regression was used to select optimal features. Five ML algorithms were employed to construct prediction models. Model performance was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, area under the curve (AUC) value, decision curve analysis (DCA), and calibration curves. SHapley Additive exPlanations (SHAP) plot was applied to interpret the model predictions.ResultsA total of 202 patients were randomly divided into training (n = 142) and validation (n = 60) sets. The rate of poor functional prognosis at 90 days was 56.34% in the training set and 56.67% in the validation set. Random Forest (RF) model showed the best discriminative ability with the highest AUC of 0.854 in the validation set. Key predictive features included age, baseline systolic blood pressure, white blood cell count, baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score, wake-up stroke, the absolute difference volume between the ischemic infarct and the penumbra, intracranial hemorrhage, hemorrhagic transformation classification, and occurrence of pneumonia.ConclusionThe RF-based ML model demonstrated clinical utility for post-intravenous thrombolysis risk stratification by identifying patients at higher risk of poor functional outcomes.

A multichannel MEG time–frequency analysis framework for detecting stage -specific effects of spatial distraction in visual-spatial working memory

IntroductionSpatial distraction can disrupt visual-spatial working memory (VSWM), but its stage-dependent effects on multichannel neural dynamics remain insufficiently characterized. This study presents a multichannel magnetoencephalography (MEG) time—frequency analysis framework to detect stage-specific oscillatory responses to spatial distraction during a VSWM task.MethodsMEG signals were recorded from healthy participants under Distractor and No-distractor conditions and analyzed across encoding, maintenance, and retrieval/decision epochs. Time–frequency power was estimated in the delta, theta, alpha, beta, and gamma bands, and condition differences were evaluated using sensor-level spatiotemporal cluster-based permutation testing and Bonferroni correction within each predefined epoch.ResultsThe proposed analysis revealed a clear stage-specific pattern, with the most prominent modulation occurring during maintenance. Specifically, distraction induced robust and sustained increases in theta-, alpha-, and beta-band power during the retention interval (all cluster-level p < 0.01). Theta activity increased rapidly after maintenance onset and remained elevated throughout the full maintenance period over bilateral temporal, and widespread parieto-occipital sensors, while alpha and beta enhancements also showed temporally continuous and spatially stable patterns across widespread sensor networks.DiscussionThese findings highlight sustained large-scale oscillatory modulation as a key neural signature of distraction during mnemonic maintenance. The study provides an interpretable multichannel signal-analysis perspective on distraction effects in working memory and offers a practical framework for stage-resolved analysis of brain dynamics in cognitive tasks.