INTERVAL (investigation of NICE technologies for enabling risk-variable-adjusted-length) dental recalls trial: a multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating the best dental recall interval for optimum, cost-effective maintenance of oral health in dentate adults attending dental primary care

Background Traditionally, patients at low risk and high risk of developing dental disease have been encouraged to attend dental recall appointments at regular intervals of six months between appointments. The lack of evidence for the effect that different recall intervals between dental check-ups have on patient outcomes, provider workload and healthcare costs is causing considerable uncertainty for the profession and patients, despite the publication of the NICE Guideline on dental recall. The need for primary research has been highlighted in the Health Technology Assessment Group’s systematic review of routine dental check-ups, which found little evidence to support or refute the practice of encouraging 6-monthly dental check-ups in adults. The more recent Cochrane review on recall interval concluded there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions regarding the potential beneficial or harmful effects of altering the recall interval between dental check-ups. There is therefore an urgent need to assess the relative effectiveness and cost-benefit of different dental recall intervals in a robust, sufficiently powered randomised control trial (RCT) in primary dental care. Methods This is a four year multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment based in dental primary care in the UK. Practitioners will recruit 2372 dentate adult patients. Patient participants will be randomised to one of three groups: fixed-period six month recall, risk-based recall, or fixed-period twenty-four month recall. Outcome data will be assessed through clinical examination, patient questionnaires and NHS databases. The primary outcomes measure gingival inflammation/bleeding on probing and oral health-related quality of life. Discussion INTERVAL will provide evidence for the most clinically-effective and cost-beneficial recall interval for maintaining optimum oral health in dentate adults attending general dental practice

Discovery of a black smoker vent field and vent fauna at the Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge

The Arctic Mid-Ocean Ridge (AMOR) represents one of the most slow-spreading ridge systems on Earth. Previous attempts to locate hydrothermal vent fields and unravel the nature of venting, as well as the provenance of vent fauna at this northern and insular termination of the global ridge system, have been unsuccessful. Here, we report the first discovery of a black smoker vent field at the AMOR. The field is located on the crest of an axial volcanic ridge (AVR) and is associated with an unusually large hydrothermal deposit, which documents that extensive venting and long-lived hydrothermal systems exist at ultraslow-spreading ridges, despite their strongly reduced volcanic activity. The vent field hosts a distinct vent fauna that differs from the fauna to the south along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. The novel vent fauna seems to have developed by local specialization and by migration of fauna from cold seeps and the Pacific

Additional psychometric data for the Spanish Modified Dental Anxiety Scale, and psychometric data for a Spanish version of the Revised Dental Beliefs Survey

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hispanics comprise the largest ethnic minority group in the United States. Previous work with the Spanish Modified Dental Anxiety Scale (MDAS) yielded good validity, but lower test-retest reliability. We report the performance of the Spanish MDAS in a new sample, as well as the performance of the Spanish Revised Dental Beliefs Survey (R-DBS).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>One hundred sixty two Spanish-speaking adults attending Spanish-language church services or an Hispanic cultural festival completed questionnaires containing the Spanish MDAS, Spanish R-DBS, and dental attendance questions, and underwent a brief oral examination. Church attendees completed the questionnaire a second time, for test-retest purposes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The Spanish MDAS and R-DBS were completed by 156 and 136 adults, respectively. The test-retest reliability of the Spanish MDAS was 0.83 (95% CI = 0.60-0.92). The internal reliability of the Spanish R-DBS was 0.96 (95% CI = 0.94-0.97), and the test-retest reliability was 0.86 (95% CI = 0.64-0.94). The two measures were significantly correlated (Spearman's rho = 0.38, p < 0.001). Participants who do not currently go to a dentist had significantly higher MDAS scores (t = 3.40, df = 106, p = 0.003) as well as significantly higher R-DBS scores (t = 2.21, df = 131, p = 0.029). Participants whose most recent dental visit was for pain or a problem, rather than for a check-up, scored significantly higher on both the MDAS (t = 3.00, df = 106, p = 0.003) and the R-DBS (t = 2.85, df = 92, p = 0.005). Those with high dental fear (MDAS score 19 or greater) were significantly more likely to have severe caries (Chi square = 6.644, df = 2, p = 0.036). Higher scores on the R-DBS were significantly related to having more missing teeth (Spearman's rho = 0.23, p = 0.009).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In this sample, the test-retest reliability of the Spanish MDAS was higher. The significant relationships between dental attendance and questionnaire scores, as well as the difference in caries severity seen in those with high fear, add to the evidence of this scale's construct validity in Hispanic samples. Our results also provide evidence for the internal and test-retest reliabilities, as well as the construct validity, of the Spanish R-DBS.</p

Precision oncology in surgery: patient selection for operable pancreatic cancer

Objective: We aimed to define preoperative clinical and molecular characteristics that would allow better patient selection for operative resection. Background: Although we use molecular selection methods for systemic targeted therapies, these principles are not applied to surgical oncology. Improving patient selection is of vital importance for the operative treatment of pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma). Although surgery is the only chance of long-term survival, 80% still succumb to the disease and approximately 30% die within 1 year, often sooner than those that have unresected local disease. Method: In 3 independent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cohorts (total participants = 1184) the relationship between aberrant expression of prometastatic proteins S100A2 and S100A4 and survival was assessed. A preoperative nomogram based on clinical variables available before surgery and expression of these proteins was constructed and compared to traditional measures, and a postoperative nomogram. Results: High expression of either S100A2 or S100A4 was independent poor prognostic factors in a training cohort of 518 participants. These results were validated in 2 independent patient cohorts (Glasgow, n = 198; Germany, n = 468). Aberrant biomarker expression stratified the cohorts into 3 distinct prognostic groups. A preoperative nomogram incorporating S100A2 and S100A4 expression predicted survival and nomograms derived using postoperative clinicopathological variables. Conclusions: Of those patients with a poor preoperative nomogram score, approximately 50% of patients died within a year of resection. Nomograms have the potential to improve selection for surgery and neoadjuvant therapy, avoiding surgery in aggressive disease, and justifying more extensive resections in biologically favorable disease

Enhancing medical students' communication skills: development and evaluation of an undergraduate training program

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is a relative lack of current research on the effects of specific communication training offered at the beginning of the medical degree program. The newly developed communication training "Basics and Practice in Communication Skills" was pilot tested in 2008 and expanded in the following year at the University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf in Germany. The goal was to promote and improve the communicative skills of participants and show the usefulness of an early offered intervention on patient-physician communication within the medical curriculum.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The students participating in the project and a comparison group of students from the standard degree program were surveyed at the beginning and end of the courses. The survey consisted of a self-assessment of their skills as well as a standardised expert rating and an evaluation of the modules by means of a questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Students who attended the communication skills course exhibited a considerable increase of communication skills in this newly developed training. It was also observed that students in the intervention group had a greater degree of self-assessed competence following training than the medical students in the comparison group. This finding is also reflected in the results from a standardised objective measure.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The empirical results of the study showed that the training enabled students to acquire specialised competence in communication through the course of a newly developed training program. These findings will be used to establish new communication training at the University Medical Centre Hamburg-Eppendorf.</p

Identification of a Novel Class of Farnesylation Targets by Structure-Based Modeling of Binding Specificity

Farnesylation is an important post-translational modification catalyzed by farnesyltransferase (FTase). Until recently it was believed that a C-terminal CaaX motif is required for farnesylation, but recent experiments have revealed larger substrate diversity. In this study, we propose a general structural modeling scheme to account for peptide binding specificity and recapitulate the experimentally derived selectivity profile of FTase in vitro. In addition to highly accurate recovery of known FTase targets, we also identify a range of novel potential targets in the human genome, including a new substrate class with an acidic C-terminal residue (CxxD/E). In vitro experiments verified farnesylation of 26/29 tested peptides, including both novel human targets, as well as peptides predicted to tightly bind FTase. This study extends the putative range of biological farnesylation substrates. Moreover, it suggests that the ability of a peptide to bind FTase is a main determinant for the farnesylation reaction. Finally, simple adaptation of our approach can contribute to more accurate and complete elucidation of peptide-mediated interactions and modifications in the cell

A systematic review of the psychometric properties of self-report research utilization measures used in healthcare

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In healthcare, a gap exists between what is known from research and what is practiced. Understanding this gap depends upon our ability to robustly measure research utilization.</p> <p>Objectives</p> <p>The objectives of this systematic review were: to identify self-report measures of research utilization used in healthcare, and to assess the psychometric properties (acceptability, reliability, and validity) of these measures.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review of literature reporting use or development of self-report research utilization measures. Our search included: multiple databases, ancestry searches, and a hand search. Acceptability was assessed by examining time to complete the measure and missing data rates. Our approach to reliability and validity assessment followed that outlined in the <it>Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing</it>.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 42,770 titles screened, 97 original studies (108 articles) were included in this review. The 97 studies reported on the use or development of 60 unique self-report research utilization measures. Seven of the measures were assessed in more than one study. Study samples consisted of healthcare providers (92 studies) and healthcare decision makers (5 studies). No studies reported data on acceptability of the measures. Reliability was reported in 32 (33%) of the studies, representing 13 of the 60 measures. Internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha) reliability was reported in 31 studies; values exceeded 0.70 in 29 studies. Test-retest reliability was reported in 3 studies with Pearson's <it>r </it>coefficients > 0.80. No validity information was reported for 12 of the 60 measures. The remaining 48 measures were classified into a three-level validity hierarchy according to the number of validity sources reported in 50% or more of the studies using the measure. Level one measures (n = 6) reported evidence from any three (out of four possible) <it>Standards </it>validity sources (which, in the case of single item measures, was all applicable validity sources). Level two measures (n = 16) had evidence from any two validity sources, and level three measures (n = 26) from only one validity source.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This review reveals significant underdevelopment in the measurement of research utilization. Substantial methodological advances with respect to construct clarity, use of research utilization and related theory, use of measurement theory, and psychometric assessment are required. Also needed are improved reporting practices and the adoption of a more contemporary view of validity (<it>i.e.</it>, the <it>Standards</it>) in future research utilization measurement studies.</p

Architecture and Gender : Lessons from Building Archaeology in Africa

Peer reviewe

To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review

Background : In the past forty years, many gains have been made in our understanding of the concept of research utilization. While numerous studies exist on professional nurses\u27 use of research in practice, no attempt has been made to systematically evaluate and synthesize this body of literature with respect to the extent to which nurses use research in their clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and analyze the available evidence related to the extent to which nurses use research findings in practice. Methods : This study was a systematic review of published and grey literature. The search strategy included 13 online bibliographic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, HAPI, Web of Science, SCOPUS, OCLC Papers First, OCLC WorldCat, ABI Inform, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts. The inclusion criteria consisted of primary research reports that assess professional nurses\u27 use of research in practice, written in the English or Scandinavian languages. Extent of research use was determined by assigning research use scores reported in each article to one of four quartiles: low, moderate-low, moderate-high, or high. Results : Following removal of duplicate citations, a total of 12,418 titles were identified through database searches, of which 133 articles were retrieved. Of the articles retrieved, 55 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The 55 final reports included cross-sectional/survey (n = 51) and quasi-experimental (n = 4) designs. A sensitivity analysis, comparing findings from all reports with those rated moderate (moderate-weak and moderate-strong) and strong quality, did not show significant differences. In a majority of the articles identified (n = 38, 69%), nurses reported moderate-high research use. Conclusions : According to this review, nurses\u27 reported use of research is moderate-high and has remained relatively consistent over time until the early 2000\u27s. This finding, however, may paint an overly optimistic picture of the extent to which nurses use research in their practice given the methodological problems inherent in the majority of studies. There is a clear need for the development of standard measures of research use and robust well-designed studies examining nurses\u27 use of research and its impact on patient outcomes. The relatively unchanged self-reports of moderate-high research use by nurses is troubling given that over 40 years have elapsed since the first studies in this review were conducted and the increasing emphasis in the past 15 years on evidence-based practice. More troubling is the absence of studies in which attempts are made to assess the effects of varying levels of research use on patient outcomes.<br /