Body composition in females with 21-hydroxylase deficiency: comparison of anthropometric methods and bioelectric impedance in relation to a control group

OBJECTIVE: To estimate body composition by evaluating skinfold thickness (ST) and electric bioimpedance (EB) in a group of women with congenital adrenal hyperplasia due to classical 21-hydroxylase deficiency (CAH-C-21OHD) in relation to a control group. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Sixteen patients and 26 controls were evaluated, all female, with age varying from 8 to 18 years. Fat (FM) and lean (LM) masses were evaluated by ST and EB. FM and LM data were analyzed in relative (%) and absolute (kg) values, and in relation to stature (FMI and LMI). RESULTS: There were no observed significant differences between the two methods in each group. In relation to the control group, CAH-C-21OHD patients showed higher values for FM (%) EB, FMI EB and LMI ST but lower values for FM (%) EB. Positive and high correlation values were observed for all parameters analyzed. CONCLUSION: ST and EB results observed were similar in this sample of females with CAH-C-21OHD, but controversial in relation to the control group, suggesting caution when using these methods to evaluate body composition in this population.OBJETIVO: Estimar a composição corporal avaliada pela espessura de dobras cutâneas (EDC) e pela impedância bioelétrica (BIA) em um grupo de mulheres com hiperplasia adrenal congênita, forma clássica por deficiência da enzima 21-hidroxilase (HAC-C-D21OH) e em relação ao um grupo controle. PACIENTES E MÉTODOS: Foram avaliadas 16 pacientes com HAC-C-D21OH e 26 controles, todas do sexo feminino, com idades de 8 a 18 anos. Foram estimadas as massas gorda (MG) e magra (MM) utilizando EDC e BIA. Os dados das MG e MM foram analisados de forma relativa (%), absoluta (kg) e em relação à estatura (IMG e IMM). RESULTADOS: Não foram encontradas diferenças significativas entre os dois métodos em cada grupo avaliado. Em relação ao grupo controle, as pacientes com HAC-C-D21OH apresentaram valores maiores de MG (%) BIA, IMG BIA e IMM EDC e menores de MM (%) BIA. Foi verificada correlação positiva e alta em todos os parâmetros analisados. CONCLUSÃO: Os resultados observados pelos métodos de EDC e BIA foram semelhantes nesta amostra de mulheres com HAC-CD21OH, porém controversos em relação ao grupo controle, sugerindo que se tenha cautela no uso desses métodos de avaliação da composição corporal nessa população.274281Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES

Preliminary comparision between phalangeal quantitative ultrassonography and bone densitometry for bone mass evaluation in adolescents

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between quantitative ultrasonography at hand phalanges (QUS) and dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), and between these methods with food intake and history of bone fractures. SUBJECTS AND METHODS:After two years of follow up of 270 schoolchildren, 10 of them, who showed bone mass below - 2 SD in QUS, were included in the present study. Laboratory results and DXA data were analyzed. RESULTS: Bone mass evaluated by DXA at L1-L4 ranged from -2.8 to -1.1 SDS, and whole body bone mass, from -2.9 to -1.2 SDS. Three children had history of non-pathological bone fractures. Dietary assessment showed low intake of calcium in 10 cases, of phosphorus in 6, and of vitamin D in 8 cases. There were no differences among the cases of bone mass below-2 SD in any of the three used methods. There was no association between history of bone fractures and food intake, and between these evaluations and bone mass. CONCLUSION: In this small group of schoolchildren there was an association between the methods QUS and DXA. However, there was no association between bone mass and the history of bone fractures, or calcium, phosphorus and vitamin D intake.OBJETIVO: Avaliar associação entre ultrassonografia quantitativa de falanges da mão (QUS) e a densitometria por absorção de raio-X de dupla energia (DXA) e desses com os históricos alimentar e de fraturas. SUJEITOS E MÉTODOS: Após dois anos de acompanhamento de 270 escolares, 10 com massa óssea por QUS abaixo de -2 DP foram incluídos no estudo e avaliados com DXA. RESULTADOS: A massa óssea por DXA de L1-L4 variou de -2,8 a -1,1 DP e de corpo inteiro -2,9 e -1,2. Três estudantes apresentaram fraturas. Baixa ingestão de cálcio foi observada nos 10 casos, de fósforo em 6 e de vitamina D em 8. Não houve diferença entre os casos com massa abaixo de -2 DP nos três métodos de avaliação. Não foi observada associação entre as fraturas e o histórico alimentar, nem com os valores de massa óssea. CONCLUSÃO: Neste pequeno grupo de adolescentes houve associação entre QUS e DXA, porém sem associação entre essas avaliações e as fraturas e a ingestão de cálcio, fósforo e vitamina D.1924Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES

Educomunicação, Transformação Social e Desenvolvimento Sustentável

Esta publicação apresenta os principais trabalhos dos GTs do II Congresso Internacional de Comunicação e Educação nos temas Transformação social, com os artigos que abordam principalmente Educomunicação e/ou Mídia-Educação, no contexto de políticas de diversidade, inclusão e equidade; e, em Desenvolvimento Sustentável os artigos que abordam os avanços da relação comunicação/educação no contexto da educação ambiental e desenvolvimento sustentável

Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil: setting the baseline knowledge on the animal diversity in Brazil

The limited temporal completeness and taxonomic accuracy of species lists, made available in a traditional manner in scientific publications, has always represented a problem. These lists are invariably limited to a few taxonomic groups and do not represent up-to-date knowledge of all species and classifications. In this context, the Brazilian megadiverse fauna is no exception, and the Catálogo Taxonômico da Fauna do Brasil (CTFB) (http://fauna.jbrj.gov.br/), made public in 2015, represents a database on biodiversity anchored on a list of valid and expertly recognized scientific names of animals in Brazil. The CTFB is updated in near real time by a team of more than 800 specialists. By January 1, 2024, the CTFB compiled 133,691 nominal species, with 125,138 that were considered valid. Most of the valid species were arthropods (82.3%, with more than 102,000 species) and chordates (7.69%, with over 11,000 species). These taxa were followed by a cluster composed of Mollusca (3,567 species), Platyhelminthes (2,292 species), Annelida (1,833 species), and Nematoda (1,447 species). All remaining groups had less than 1,000 species reported in Brazil, with Cnidaria (831 species), Porifera (628 species), Rotifera (606 species), and Bryozoa (520 species) representing those with more than 500 species. Analysis of the CTFB database can facilitate and direct efforts towards the discovery of new species in Brazil, but it is also fundamental in providing the best available list of valid nominal species to users, including those in science, health, conservation efforts, and any initiative involving animals. The importance of the CTFB is evidenced by the elevated number of citations in the scientific literature in diverse areas of biology, law, anthropology, education, forensic science, and veterinary science, among others

Guidelines on how to assess the validity of results presented in subgroup analysis of clinical trials

Submitted by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2015-03-31T16:45:50Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Guidelines....pdf: 39032 bytes, checksum: fd5d7cf953a13217c725a02957e28919 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2015-03-31T17:33:14Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Guidelines....pdf: 39032 bytes, checksum: fd5d7cf953a13217c725a02957e28919 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-31T17:33:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Guidelines....pdf: 39032 bytes, checksum: fd5d7cf953a13217c725a02957e28919 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2002Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Associação Obras Sociais Irmã Dulce. Núcleo de Apoio à Pesquisa. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Associação Obras Sociais Irmã Dulce. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Escola Bahiana de Medicina e Saúde Pública. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Hospital São Rafael. Salvador, BA, Brasil.Columbia University. School of Public Health. Division of Epidemiology. New York, NY, USA.In observational studies, identification of associations within particular subgroups is the usual method of investigation. As an exploratory method, it is the bread and butter of epidemiological research. Nearly everything that has been learned in epidemiology has been derived from the analysis of subgroups. In a randomized clinical trial, the entire purpose is the comparison of the test subjects and the controls, and when there is particular interest in the results of treatment in a certain section of trial participants, a subgroup analysis is performed. These subgroups are examined to see if they are liable to a greater benefit or risk from treatment. Thus, analyzing patient subsets is a natural part of the process of improving therapeutic knowledge through clinical trials. Nevertheless, the reliability of subgroup analysis can often be poor because of problems of multiplicity and limitations in the numbers of patients studied. The naive interpretation of the results of such examinations is a cause of great confusion in the therapeutic literature. We emphasize the need for readers to be aware that inferences based on comparisons between subgroups in randomized clinical trials should be approached more cautiously than those based on the main comparison. That is, subgroup analysis results derived from a sound clinical trial are not necessarily valid; one must not jump to conclusions and accept the validity of subgroup analysis results without an appropriate judgment

Reporting on methods of subgroup analysis in clinical trials: a survey of four scientific journals.

Submitted by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2012-09-11T21:12:17Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira ED Jr Reporting on methods of ....pdf: 37039 bytes, checksum: 2fb7c4e9518b874f5071b119d9a04071 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2012-09-11T21:12:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira ED Jr Reporting on methods of ....pdf: 37039 bytes, checksum: 2fb7c4e9518b874f5071b119d9a04071 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2001Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, BrasilColumbia University. Department of Psychiatry. New York, NY, United States of AmericaColumbia University. School of Public Health. Division of Epidemiology. New York, NY,United States of AmericaResults of subgroup analysis (SA) reported in randomized clinical trials (RCT) cannot be adequately interpreted without information about the methods used in the study design and the data analysis. Our aim was to show how often inaccurate or incomplete reports occur. First, we selected eight methodological aspects of SA on the basis of their importance to a reader in determining the confidence that should be placed in the author’s conclusions regarding such analysis. Then, we reviewed the current practice of reporting these methodological aspects of SA in clinical trials in four leading journals, i.e., the New England Journal of Medicine, the Journal of the American Medical Association, the Lancet, and the American Journal of Public Health. Eight consecutive reports from each journal published after July 1, 1998 were included. Of the 32 trials surveyed, 17 (53%) had at least one SA. Overall, the proportion of RCT reporting a particular methodological aspect ranged from 23 to 94%. Information on whether the SA preceded/followed the analysis was reported in only 7 (41%) of the studies. Of the total possible number of items to be reported, NEJM, JAMA, Lancet and AJPH clearly mentioned 59, 67, 58 and 72%, respectively. We conclude that current reporting of SA in RCT is incomplete and inaccurate. The results of such SA may have harmful effects on treatment recommendations if accepted without judicious scrutiny. We recommend that editors improve the reporting of SA in RCT by giving authors a list of the important items to be reported

Epidemiology of chronic pain and neuropathic pain: Developing a questionnaire for population-based surveys

Submitted by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2017-06-19T18:58:06Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Epidemiologia da dor....pdf: 171099 bytes, checksum: 7ee4fae6bb8935711fa33d7f1b54b4fc (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2017-06-19T19:13:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Epidemiologia da dor....pdf: 171099 bytes, checksum: 7ee4fae6bb8935711fa33d7f1b54b4fc (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-19T19:13:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Moreira Jr ED Epidemiologia da dor....pdf: 171099 bytes, checksum: 7ee4fae6bb8935711fa33d7f1b54b4fc (MD5) Previous issue date: 2003PfizerUniversidade de Columbia. Nova York, EUA / Fundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Núcleo de Epidemiologia e Estatística. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Obras Sociais Irmã Dulce. Núcleo de Apoio à Pesquisa. Salvador, BA, Brasil / Hospital São Rafael. Salvador, BA, BrasilUniversidade de São Paulo. Faculdade de Medicina. São Paulo, SP, Brasil / Laboratórios Pfizer. São Paulo, SP, BrasilA prevalência da dor crônica na população brasileira não foi ainda suficientemente estudada. Atualmente, o conhecimento epidemiológico sobre a dor crônica se baseia, em grande parte, em inquéritos realizados em serviços especializados de dor, cujas características de atendimento impedem uma estimativa mais próxima da realidade do que ocorre com a população geral. O presente trabalho faz uma breve revisão de importantes aspectos relacionados ao estudo epidemiológico da dor crônica e dor neuropática e também propõe um questionário para realização de inquéritos populacionais

Quadrivalent vaccine against human papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions

Submitted by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2015-03-24T14:14:21Z No. of bitstreams: 1 The Future II study group Quadrivalent....pdf: 245062 bytes, checksum: cc78ffb9658cdb697b5d4af677ca39b4 (MD5)Approved for entry into archive by Ana Maria Fiscina Sampaio ([email protected]) on 2015-03-24T16:17:29Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 The Future II study group Quadrivalent....pdf: 245062 bytes, checksum: cc78ffb9658cdb697b5d4af677ca39b4 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-24T16:17:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 The Future II study group Quadrivalent....pdf: 245062 bytes, checksum: cc78ffb9658cdb697b5d4af677ca39b4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2007Females United to Unilaterally Disease Reduce Endo/Ectocervical DiseaseFundação Oswaldo Cruz. Centro de Pesquisas Gonçalo Moniz. Salvador, BA, BrasilBACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus types 16 (HPV-16) and 18 (HPV-18) cause approximately 70% of cervical cancers worldwide. A phase 3 trial was conducted to evaluate a quadrivalent vaccine against HPV types 6, 11, 16, and 18 (HPV-6/11/16/18) for the prevention of high-grade cervical lesions associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind trial, we assigned 12,167 women between the ages of 15 and 26 years to receive three doses of either HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine or placebo, administered at day 1, month 2, and month 6. The primary analysis was performed for a per-protocol susceptible population that included 5305 women in the vaccine group and 5260 in the placebo group who had no virologic evidence of infection with HPV-16 or HPV-18 through 1 month after the third dose (month 7). The primary composite end point was cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or 3, adenocarcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer related to HPV-16 or HPV-18. RESULTS: Subjects were followed for an average of 3 years after receiving the first dose of vaccine or placebo. Vaccine efficacy for the prevention of the primary composite end point was 98% (95.89% confidence interval [CI], 86 to 100) in the per-protocol susceptible population and 44% (95% CI, 26 to 58) in an intention-to-treat population of all women who had undergone randomization (those with or without previous infection). The estimated vaccine efficacy against all high-grade cervical lesions, regardless of causal HPV type, in this intention-to-treat population was 17% (95% CI, 1 to 31). CONCLUSIONS: In young women who had not been previously infected with HPV-16 or HPV-18, those in the vaccine group had a significantly lower occurrence of high-grade cervical intraepithelial neoplasia related to HPV-16 or HPV-18 than did those in the placebo group. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00092534 [ClinicalTrials.go