Expert Status and Performance

Expert judgements are essential when time and resources are stretched or we face novel dilemmas requiring fast solutions. Good advice can save lives and large sums of money. Typically, experts are defined by their qualifications, track record and experience [1], [2]. The social expectation hypothesis argues that more highly regarded and more experienced experts will give better advice. We asked experts to predict how they will perform, and how their peers will perform, on sets of questions. The results indicate that the way experts regard each other is consistent, but unfortunately, ranks are a poor guide to actual performance. Expert advice will be more accurate if technical decisions routinely use broadly-defined expert groups, structured question protocols and feedback

Legumes as food ingredient: characterization, processing, and applications

Editores: Jiménez-López, José Carlos (CSIC); Clemente, Alfonso (CSIC

Facial Height and Breadth Relative to Dietary Consistency and Oral Breathing in Two Populations (North India and U.S.)

Differences in total facial height and in bigonial and midfacial breadths are compared in developing North Indian (Punjab) and central Kentucky groups, according to two specific etiologies for narrow or excessively long faces: oral breathing and dietary consistency. We find no differences due to diagnosed chronic oral breathing. On the other hand significant changes result from elevated chewing forces during growth in response to less processed food; the changes, however, vary from higher faces in Punjabis to shorter and broader faces in Kentuekians

The intelligence game: Assessing Delphi groups and structured question formats

In 2010, the US Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity (IARPA) announced a 4-year forecasting "tournament". Five collaborative research teams are attempting to outperform a baseline opinion pool in predicting hundreds of geopolitical, econ

The Association Between Screening for Colorectal Cancer and Mental and Physical Health

Background Colorectal cancer screening reduces colorectal cancer morbidity and mortality. Identifying the factors associated with screening participation is needed to overcome barriers to screening. While several of those factors have been identified, the impact of mental and physical health on screening behaviour is not well understood. Methods This retrospective cohort study compared the self-reported mental and physical health of those who did screen for colorectal cancer and those who did not. Participants of the Australasian Colorectal Cancer Family Registry Cohort that were aged 45-75 years and had never been diagnosed with colorectal cancer were asked to complete a questionnaire detailing their colorectal cancer screening participation in the preceding 5 years, and a validated questionnaire of mental and physical health. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for measured potential confounders. Results Of the 1130 eligible participants, 781 had a family history of colorectal cancer (69.5%), and 819 reported colorectal cancer screening in the past 5 years (72%). After adjusting for potential confounders, there was no evidence that overall mental or physical health was associated with colorectal cancer screening. However, those reporting higher levels of general health were more likely to participate in colorectal cancer screening (OR = 1.02 (100 point scale), 95% CI 1.004, 1.037, P = .014). Conclusion We found limited evidence that mental and physical health were associated with colorectal cancer screening. The high proportion of participants with a family history of colorectal cancer limits the generaliseability of the findings to the general population, although we observed no differences in findings by strength of family history