Geospatial distribution and population substructure of subgroups of US ethnic minorities: implications for perpetuation of health disparities and paucity of precision medicine

Substructure due to familial-associated divisions exists in all large populations. Geographical heterogeneity in US ethnic minorities is a function of historical, social, political, and economic factors overlaying regional geographical biodiversity. Using geospatial, historical, demographic, genetic, and epidemiological databases, we identify 40 US microethnic isolates across the US, the “minorities within ethnic minorities” and locate their geospatial distributions within the US. Key components of the environment relevant to health disparities are identified and elaborated in terms of their impact on genomics. US ethnic minority microethnic isolates often have distinct genetic and social histories from the US ethnic majority that put these isolates at a disadvantage in the quest for access to relevant, precision medicine because of the magnitude of imbedded (North Atlantic Euro-American) bias in the existing databases. However, these microethnic isolates are also at a disadvantage when simply aggregated with their nearest ethnic minority macroethnic group (e.g., generic African American). The use of geospatial and ethnographic analyses has the potential to accelerate the accurate identification of heretofore disadvantaged subgroups of ethnic minority groups, bringing them into the mainstream of genomic diversity studies and healthcare acces

Prognostic Value of Computed Tomography : Measured Parameters of Body Composition in Primary Operable Gastrointestinal Cancers

Professor Graeme Murray, Department of Pathology, University of Aberdeen provided us access to the colorectal cancer pathology databases from which the colorectal component of the research was based. Conflict of interest There are no conflicts of interest.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Are We Legislating Away Our Scientific Future? The Database Debate

The ambiguity of the present copyright laws governing the protection of databases creates a situation where database owners, unsure of how IP laws safeguard their information, overprotect their data with oppressive licenses and technological mechanisms (condoned by the DMCA) that impede interoperation. Databases are fundamental to scientific research, yet the lack of interoperability between databases and limited access inhibits this research. The US Congress, spurred by the European Database Directive, and heavily lobbied by the commercial database industry, is presently considering ways to legislate database protections; most of the present suggestions for legislation will be detrimental to scientific progress. The author agrees that new legislation is necessary, but not to provide extra-copyright protections, as database owners would like, but to create an environment wherein data is easily accessible to academic research and interoperability is encouraged; yet simultaneously providing database owners with incentives to produce new databases. One possibility would be to introduce standardized compulsory licensing of databases to academics following an embargo period where databases could be sold at free-market prices (to recoup costs). Databases would be given some sort of intellectual property protection both during and after this embargo in return for a limiting of technical safeguards and conforming to interoperability standards

Communitywide Database Designs for Tracking Innovation Impact: COMETS, STARS and Nanobank

Data availability is arguably the greatest impediment to advancing the science of science and innovation policy and practice (SciSIPP). This paper describes the contents, methodology and use of the public online COMETS (Connecting Outcome Measures in Entrepreneurship Technology and Science) database spanning all sciences, technologies, and high-tech industries; its parent COMETSandSTARS database which adds more data at organization and individual scientist-inventor-entrepreneur level restricted by vendor licenses to onsite use at NBER and/or UCLA; and their prototype Nanobank covering only nano-scale sciences and technologies. Some or all of these databases include or will include: US patents (granted and applications); NIH, NSF, SBIR, STTR Grants; Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge; ISI Highly Cited; US doctoral dissertations; IPEDS/HEGIS universities; all firms and other organizations which ever publish in ISI listed journals beginning in 1981, are assigned US patents (from 1975), or are listed on a covered grant; additional nanotechnology firms based on web search. Ticker/CUSIP codes enable linking public firms to the major databases covering them. A major matching/disambiguation effort assigns unique identifiers for an organization or individual so that their appearances are linked within and across the constituent legacy databases. Extensive geographic coding enables analysis at country, region, state, county, or city levels. The databases provide very flexible sources of data for serious research on many issues in the study of organizations in innovation systems in the development and spread of knowledge, and the economics of science. Enabling the study of these topics, among others, COMETS contributes substantially to the science of science and technology.

Missing Data Imputation and Corrected Statistics for Large-Scale Behavioral Databases

This paper presents a new methodology to solve problems resulting from missing data in large-scale item performance behavioral databases. Useful statistics corrected for missing data are described, and a new method of imputation for missing data is proposed. This methodology is applied to the DLP database recently published by Keuleers et al. (2010), which allows us to conclude that this database fulfills the conditions of use of the method recently proposed by Courrieu et al. (2011) to test item performance models. Two application programs in Matlab code are provided for the imputation of missing data in databases, and for the computation of corrected statistics to test models.Comment: Behavior Research Methods (2011) in pres

Are all Credit Default Swap databases equal?

The presence of different prices in different databases for the same securities can impair the comparability of research efforts and seriously damage the management decisions based upon such research. In this study we compare the six major sources of corporate Credit Default Swap prices: GFI, Fenics, Reuters EOD, CMA, Markit and JP Morgan, using the most liquid single name 5-year CDS of the components of the leading market indexes, iTraxx (European firms) and CDX (US firms) for the period from 2004 to 2010. We find systematic differences between the data sets implying that deviations from the common trend among prices in the different databases are not purely random but are explained by idiosyncratic factors as well as liquidity, global risk and other trading factors. The lower is the amount of transaction prices available the higher is the deviation among databases. Our results suggest that the CMA database quotes lead the price discovery process in comparison with the quotes provided by other databases. Several robustness tests confirm these results.Credit Default Swap prices, Databases, Liquidity