13 research outputs found
University Student-Athletes’ Experiences of Facilitators and Barriers to Contribution: A Narrative Account
University student-athletes’ contributions in the form of volunteering, community engagement, and civic engagement have been the subject of recent research; however, no studies have specifically examined the factors that facilitate or serve as barriers to contribution in this population. As such, the purpose of this study is to explore the facilitators and barriers relating to university student-athletes’ contributions. Individual semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight university student-athletes (two males, six females) between 18 and 21 years of age (M = 19.25) from two Canadian universities. The analysis led to the identification of two qualitatively distinct profiles regarding how facilitators and barriers to contributions were experienced: (a) the first-year student-athletes and (b) the sustained contributors. Although the participants in each profile identified teammates, coaches, and athletics department staff as facilitators to contribution, they differed in their interpretation of how these individuals facilitated contributions. First-year student-athletes were more reliant than sustained contributors on having facilitators create contribution opportunities. The profiles also differed in regards to how time constraints were overcome. First-year student-athletes utilized less complex, individual time-management strategies, while sustained contributors collaboratively made use of more advanced time-management strategies to optimize their time
Significant benefits of AIP testing and clinical screening in familial isolated and young-onset pituitary tumors
Context
Germline mutations in the aryl hydrocarbon receptor-interacting protein (AIP) gene are responsible for a subset of familial isolated pituitary adenoma (FIPA) cases and sporadic pituitary neuroendocrine tumors (PitNETs).
Objective
To compare prospectively diagnosed AIP mutation-positive (AIPmut) PitNET patients with clinically presenting patients and to compare the clinical characteristics of AIPmut and AIPneg PitNET patients.
Design
12-year prospective, observational study.
Participants & Setting
We studied probands and family members of FIPA kindreds and sporadic patients with disease onset ≤18 years or macroadenomas with onset ≤30 years (n = 1477). This was a collaborative study conducted at referral centers for pituitary diseases.
Interventions & Outcome
AIP testing and clinical screening for pituitary disease. Comparison of characteristics of prospectively diagnosed (n = 22) vs clinically presenting AIPmut PitNET patients (n = 145), and AIPmut (n = 167) vs AIPneg PitNET patients (n = 1310).
Results
Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut PitNET patients had smaller lesions with less suprasellar extension or cavernous sinus invasion and required fewer treatments with fewer operations and no radiotherapy compared with clinically presenting cases; there were fewer cases with active disease and hypopituitarism at last follow-up. When comparing AIPmut and AIPneg cases, AIPmut patients were more often males, younger, more often had GH excess, pituitary apoplexy, suprasellar extension, and more patients required multimodal therapy, including radiotherapy. AIPmut patients (n = 136) with GH excess were taller than AIPneg counterparts (n = 650).
Conclusions
Prospectively diagnosed AIPmut patients show better outcomes than clinically presenting cases, demonstrating the benefits of genetic and clinical screening. AIP-related pituitary disease has a wide spectrum ranging from aggressively growing lesions to stable or indolent disease course
The Role of Organisational Culture in the Merger of English Local Authorities into a Single Unitary Authority
Estrogen-like and tissue-selective effects of 7-methoxycoumarin from Ficus umbellata (Moraceae): an in vitro and in vivo study
Platelet-Rich Plasma: Review of Current Literature on its Use for Tendon and Ligament Pathology
Recommended from our members
POPULATION GENETICS. Genomic evidence for the Pleistocene and recent population history of Native Americans.
How and when the Americas were populated remains contentious. Using ancient and modern genome-wide data, we found that the ancestors of all present-day Native Americans, including Athabascans and Amerindians, entered the Americas as a single migration wave from Siberia no earlier than 23 thousand years ago (ka) and after no more than an 8000-year isolation period in Beringia. After their arrival to the Americas, ancestral Native Americans diversified into two basal genetic branches around 13 ka, one that is now dispersed across North and South America and the other restricted to North America. Subsequent gene flow resulted in some Native Americans sharing ancestry with present-day East Asians (including Siberians) and, more distantly, Australo-Melanesians. Putative "Paleoamerican" relict populations, including the historical Mexican Pericúes and South American Fuego-Patagonians, are not directly related to modern Australo-Melanesians as suggested by the Paleoamerican Model