Towards a framework for attention cueing in instructional animations: Guidelines for research and design

This paper examines the transferability of successful cueing approaches from text and static visualization research to animations. Theories of visual attention and learning as well as empirical evidence for the instructional effectiveness of attention cueing are reviewed and, based on Mayer’s theory of multimedia learning, a framework was developed for classifying three functions for cueing: (1) selection—cues guide attention to specific locations, (2) organization—cues emphasize structure, and (3) integration—cues explicate relations between and within elements. The framework was used to structure the discussion of studies on cueing in animations. It is concluded that attentional cues may facilitate the selection of information in animations and sometimes improve learning, whereas organizational and relational cueing requires more consideration on how to enhance understanding. Consequently, it is suggested to develop cues that work in animations rather than borrowing effective cues from static representations. Guidelines for future research on attention cueing in animations are presented

Antiinflammatory Therapy with Canakinumab for Atherosclerotic Disease

Background: Experimental and clinical data suggest that reducing inflammation without affecting lipid levels may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease. Yet, the inflammatory hypothesis of atherothrombosis has remained unproved. Methods: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial of canakinumab, a therapeutic monoclonal antibody targeting interleukin-1β, involving 10,061 patients with previous myocardial infarction and a high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level of 2 mg or more per liter. The trial compared three doses of canakinumab (50 mg, 150 mg, and 300 mg, administered subcutaneously every 3 months) with placebo. The primary efficacy end point was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: At 48 months, the median reduction from baseline in the high-sensitivity C-reactive protein level was 26 percentage points greater in the group that received the 50-mg dose of canakinumab, 37 percentage points greater in the 150-mg group, and 41 percentage points greater in the 300-mg group than in the placebo group. Canakinumab did not reduce lipid levels from baseline. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, the incidence rate for the primary end point was 4.50 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group, 4.11 events per 100 person-years in the 50-mg group, 3.86 events per 100 person-years in the 150-mg group, and 3.90 events per 100 person-years in the 300-mg group. The hazard ratios as compared with placebo were as follows: in the 50-mg group, 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.07; P = 0.30); in the 150-mg group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74 to 0.98; P = 0.021); and in the 300-mg group, 0.86 (95% CI, 0.75 to 0.99; P = 0.031). The 150-mg dose, but not the other doses, met the prespecified multiplicity-adjusted threshold for statistical significance for the primary end point and the secondary end point that additionally included hospitalization for unstable angina that led to urgent revascularization (hazard ratio vs. placebo, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.95; P = 0.005). Canakinumab was associated with a higher incidence of fatal infection than was placebo. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio for all canakinumab doses vs. placebo, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.06; P = 0.31). Conclusions: Antiinflammatory therapy targeting the interleukin-1β innate immunity pathway with canakinumab at a dose of 150 mg every 3 months led to a significantly lower rate of recurrent cardiovascular events than placebo, independent of lipid-level lowering. (Funded by Novartis; CANTOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01327846.

Protocol of an expertise based randomized trial comparing surgical Venae Sectio versus radiological Puncture of Vena Subclavia for insertion of Totally Implantable Access Port in oncological patients

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Totally Implantable Access Ports (TIAP) are being extensively used world-wide and can be expected to gain further importance with the introduction of new neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatments in oncology. Two different techniques for the implantation can be selected: A direct puncture of a central vein and the utilization of a Seldinger device or the surgical Venae sectio. It is still unclear which technique has the optimal benefit/risk ratio for the patient.</p> <p>Design</p> <p>A single-center, expertise based randomized, controlled superiority trial to compare two different TIAP implantation techniques. 100 patients will be included and randomized pre-operatively. All patients aged 18 years or older scheduled for primary elective implantation of a TIAP under local anesthesia who signed the informed consent will be included. The primary endpoint is the primary success rate of the randomized technique. Control Intervention: Venae Sectio will be employed to insert a TIAP by a surgeon; Experimental intervention: Punction of V. Subclavia will be used to place a TIAP by a radiologist. Duration of study: Approximately 10 months, follow up time: 90 days.</p> <p>Organisation/Responsibility</p> <p>The PORTAS 2 – Trial will be conducted in accordance with the protocol and in compliance with the moral, ethical, and scientific principles governing clinical research as set out in the Declaration of Helsinki (1989) and Good Clinical Practice (GCP). The Center of Clinical Trials at the Department of Surgery, University Hospital Heidelberg is responsible for design and conduct of the trial including randomization and documentation of patients' data. Data management and statistical analysis will be performed by the independent Institute for Medical Biometry and Informatics (IMBI), University of Heidelberg.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00600444).</p

Impulsivity and Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder: Subtype Classification Using the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale

This study examined the classification accuracy of the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale (UPPS) in discriminating several attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) subtypes, including predominantly inattentive type (ADHD/I), combined type (ADHD/C), and combined type with behavioral problems (ADHD/ODD), between each other and a non-ADHD control group using logistic regression analyses. The sample consisted of 88 children ranging in age from 9.0 years to 12.8 years, with a mean of 10.9 years. Children were predominantly male (74%) and Caucasian (86%) and in grades 3–7. Results indicated that the UPPS performed well in classifying ADHD subtypes relative to traditional diagnostic measures. In addition, analyses indicated that differences in symptoms between subtypes can be explained by specific pathways to impulsivity. Implications for the assessment of ADHD and conceptual issues are discussed