Evaluating Reference Consultations in the Academic Library

In 2015, McGill University Library undertook a project to investigate, propose, and pilot test a method for evaluating the quality and outcomes of reference consultations. The goal of the project was to gather evidence to demonstrate the importance of reference consultations as part of librarians’ core contributions to the university. The evaluation tool was developed based on input from librarians, users, and a review of the literature. The evaluation was sent out to 98 users during the pilot test period. There were 53 responses to the evaluation tool for a response rate of 54%. Though preliminary, the results of the pilot test can be helpful in determining the usefulness of evaluating reference consultations, and the outcomes of engaging in assessment of this core library service. The results from this project suggest that implementing a tool to evaluate consultations can be used to inform services and to demonstrate the value of the library for research, teaching, and learning

Gating-by-tilt of mechanosensitive membrane channels

We propose an alternative mechanism for the gating of biological membrane channels in response to membrane tension that involves a change in the slope of the membrane near the channel. Under biological membrane tensions we show that the energy difference between the closed (tilted) and open (untilted) states can far exceed kBT and is comparable to what is available under simple ilational gating. Recent experiments demonstrate that membrane leaflet asymmetries (spontaneous curvature) can strong effect the gating of some channels. Such a phenomenon would be more easy to explain under gating-by-tilt, given its novel intrinsic sensitivity to such asymmetry.Comment: 10 pages, 2 figure

MscS-like mechanosensitive channels in plants and microbes

The challenge of osmotic stress is something all living organisms must face as a result of environmental dynamics. Over the past three decades, innovative research and cooperation across disciplines have irrefutably established that cells utilize mechanically gated ion channels to release osmolytes and prevent cell lysis during hypoosmotic stress. Early electrophysiological analysis of the inner membrane of Escherichia coli identified the presence of three distinct mechanosensitive activities. The subsequent discoveries of the genes responsible for two of these activities, the mechanosensitive channels of large (MscL) and small (MscS) conductance, led to the identification of two diverse families of mechanosensitive channels. The latter of these two families, the MscS family, consists of members from bacteria, archaea, fungi, and plants. Genetic and electrophysiological analysis of these family members has provided insight into how organisms use mechanosensitive channels for osmotic regulation in response to changing environmental and developmental circumstances. Furthermore, determining the crystal structure of E. coli MscS and several homologues in several conformational states has contributed to our understanding of the gating mechanisms of these channels. Here we summarize our current knowledge of MscS homologues from all three domains of life and address their structure, proposed physiological functions, electrophysiological behaviors, and topological diversity

Individual participant data meta-analysis to compare EPDS accuracy to detect major depression with and without the self-harm item

Item 10 of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) is intended to assess thoughts of intentional self-harm but may also elicit concerns about accidental self-harm. It does not specifically address suicide ideation but, nonetheless, is sometimes used as an indicator of suicidality. The 9-item version of the EPDS (EPDS-9), which omits item 10, is sometimes used in research due to concern about positive endorsements of item 10 and necessary follow-up. We assessed the equivalence of total score correlations and screening accuracy to detect major depression using the EPDS-9 versus full EPDS among pregnant and postpartum women. We searched Medline, Medline In-Process and Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and Web of Science from database inception to October 3, 2018 for studies that administered the EPDS and conducted diagnostic classification for major depression based on a validated semi-structured or fully structured interview among women aged 18 or older during pregnancy or within 12 months of giving birth. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis. We calculated Pearson correlations with 95% prediction interval (PI) between EPDS-9 and full EPDS total scores using a random effects model. Bivariate random-effects models were fitted to assess screening accuracy. Equivalence tests were done by comparing the confidence intervals (CIs) around the pooled sensitivity and specificity differences to the equivalence margin of δ = 0.05. Individual participant data were obtained from 41 eligible studies (10,906 participants, 1407 major depression cases). The correlation between EPDS-9 and full EPDS scores was 0.998 (95% PI 0.991, 0.999). For sensitivity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for cut-offs 7–12 (difference range − 0.02, 0.01) and the equivalence was indeterminate for cut-offs 13–15 (all differences − 0.04). For specificity, the EPDS-9 and full EPDS were equivalent for all cut-offs (difference range 0.00, 0.01). The EPDS-9 performs similarly to the full EPDS and can be used when there are concerns about the implications of administering EPDS item 10. Trial registration: The original IPDMA was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42015024785)

Overestimation of Postpartum Depression Prevalence Based on a 5-item Version of the EPDS:Systematic Review and Individual Participant Data Meta-analysis

Objective:The Maternal Mental Health in Canada, 2018/2019, survey reported that 18% of 7,085 mothers who recently gave birth reported "feelings consistent with postpartum depression" based on scores >= 7 on a 5-item version of the Edinburgh Postpartum Depression Scale (EPDS-5). The EPDS-5 was designed as a screening questionnaire, not to classify disorders or estimate prevalence; the extent to which EPDS-5 results reflect depression prevalence is unknown. We investigated EPDS-5 >= 7 performance relative to major depression prevalence based on a validated diagnostic interview, the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID).Methods:We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, PsycINFO, and the Web of Science Core Collection through June 2016 for studies with data sets with item response data to calculate EPDS-5 scores and that used the SCID to ascertain depression status. We conducted an individual participant data meta-analysis to estimate pooled percentage of EPDS-5 >= 7, pooled SCID major depression prevalence, and the pooled difference in prevalence.Results:A total of 3,958 participants from 19 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence of SCID major depression was 9.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 6.0% to 13.7%), pooled percentage of participants with EPDS-5 >= 7 was 16.2% (95% CI 10.7% to 23.8%), and pooled difference was 8.0% (95% CI 2.9% to 13.2%). In the 19 included studies, mean and median ratios of EPDS-5 to SCID prevalence were 2.1 and 1.4 times.Conclusions:Prevalence estimated based on EPDS-5 >= 7 appears to be substantially higher than the prevalence of major depression. Validated diagnostic interviews should be used to establish prevalence

Comparison of major depression diagnostic classification probability using the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews among women in pregnancy or postpartum: An individual participant data meta-analysis

Objectives A previous individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) identified differences in major depression classification rates between different diagnostic interviews, controlling for depressive symptoms on the basis of the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. We aimed to determine whether similar results would be seen in a different population, using studies that administered the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS) in pregnancy or postpartum. Methods Data accrued for an EPDS diagnostic accuracy IPDMA were analysed. Binomial generalised linear mixed models were fit to compare depression classification odds for the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI), and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID), controlling for EPDS scores and participant characteristics. Results Among fully structured interviews, the MINI (15 studies, 2,532 participants, 342 major depression cases) classified depression more often than the CIDI (3 studies, 2,948 participants, 194 major depression cases; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 3.72, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.21, 11.43]). Compared with the semistructured SCID (28 studies, 7,403 participants, 1,027 major depression cases), odds with the CIDI (interaction aOR = 0.88, 95% CI [0.85, 0.92]) and MINI (interaction aOR = 0.95, 95% CI [0.92, 0.99]) increased less as EPDS scores increased. Conclusion Different interviews may not classify major depression equivalently

Depression prevalence using the HADS-D compared to SCID major depression classification:An individual participant data meta-analysis

Objectives: Validated diagnostic interviews are required to classify depression status and estimate prevalence of disorder, but screening tools are often used instead. We used individual participant data meta-analysis to compare prevalence based on standard Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale – depression subscale (HADS-D) cutoffs of ≥8 and ≥11 versus Structured Clinical Interview for DSM (SCID) major depression and determined if an alternative HADS-D cutoff could more accurately estimate prevalence. Methods: We searched Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations via Ovid, PsycINFO, and Web of Science (inception-July 11, 2016) for studies comparing HADS-D scores to SCID major depression status. Pooled prevalence and pooled differences in prevalence for HADS-D cutoffs versus SCID major depression were estimated. Results: 6005 participants (689 SCID major depression cases) from 41 primary studies were included. Pooled prevalence was 24.5% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 20.5%, 29.0%) for HADS-D ≥8, 10.7% (95% CI: 8.3%, 13.8%) for HADS-D ≥11, and 11.6% (95% CI: 9.2%, 14.6%) for SCID major depression. HADS-D ≥11 was closest to SCID major depression prevalence, but the 95% prediction interval for the difference that could be expected for HADS-D ≥11 versus SCID in a new study was −21.1% to 19.5%. Conclusions: HADS-D ≥8 substantially overestimates depression prevalence. Of all possible cutoff thresholds, HADS-D ≥11 was closest to the SCID, but there was substantial heterogeneity in the difference between HADS-D ≥11 and SCID-based estimates. HADS-D should not be used as a substitute for a validated diagnostic interview.This study was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR, KRS-144045 & PCG 155468). Ms. Neupane was supported by a G.R. Caverhill Fellowship from the Faculty of Medicine, McGill University. Drs. Levis and Wu were supported by Fonds de recherche du Québec - Santé (FRQS) Postdoctoral Training Fellowships. Mr. Bhandari was supported by a studentship from the Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre. Ms. Rice was supported by a Vanier Canada Graduate Scholarship. Dr. Patten was supported by a Senior Health Scholar award from Alberta Innovates, Health Solutions. The primary study by Scott et al. was supported by the Cumming School of Medicine and Alberta Health Services through the Calgary Health Trust, and funding from the Hotchkiss Brain Institute. The primary study by Amoozegar et al. was supported by the Alberta Health Services, the University of Calgary Faculty of Medicine, and the Hotchkiss Brain Institute. The primary study by Cheung et al. was supported by the Waikato Clinical School, University of Auckland, the Waikato Medical Research Foundation and the Waikato Respiratory Research Fund. The primary study by Cukor et al. was supported in part by a Promoting Psychological Research and Training on Health-Disparities Issues at Ethnic Minority Serving Institutions Grants (ProDIGs) awarded to Dr. Cukor from the American Psychological Association. The primary study by De Souza et al. was supported by Birmingham and Solihull Mental Health Foundation Trust. The primary study by Honarmand et al. was supported by a grant from the Multiple Sclerosis Society of Canada. The primary study by Fischer et al. was supported as part of the RECODEHF study by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01GY1150). The primary study by Gagnon et al. was supported by the Drummond Foundation and the Department of Psychiatry, University Health Network. The primary study by Akechi et al. was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research (11−2) from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and a Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (B) from the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology. The primary study by Kugaya et al. was supported in part by a Grant-in-Aid for Cancer Research (9–31) and the Second-Term Comprehensive 10-year Strategy for Cancer Control from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. The primary study Ryan et al. was supported by the Irish Cancer Society (Grant CRP08GAL). The primary study by Keller et al. was supported by the Medical Faculty of the University of Heidelberg (grant no. 175/2000). The primary study by Love et al. (2004) was supported by the Kathleen Cuningham Foundation (National Breast Cancer Foundation), the Cancer Council of Victoria and the National Health and Medical Research Council. The primary study by Love et al. (2002) was supported by a grant from the Bethlehem Griffiths Research Foundation. The primary study by Löwe et al. was supported by the medical faculty of the University of Heidelberg, Germany (Project 121/2000). The primary study by Navines et al. was supported in part by the Spanish grants from the Fondo de Investigación en Salud, Instituto de Salud Carlos III (EO PI08/90869 and PSIGEN-VHC Study: FIS-E08/00268) and the support of FEDER (one way to make Europe). The primary study by O'Rourke et al. was supported by the Scottish Home and Health Department, Stroke Association, and Medical Research Council. The primary study by Sanchez-Gistau et al. was supported by a grant from the Ministry of Health of Spain (PI040418) and in part by Catalonia Government, DURSI 2009SGR1119. The primary study by Gould et al. was supported by the Transport Accident Commission Grant. The primary study by Rooney et al. was supported by the NHS Lothian Neuro-Oncology Endowment Fund. The primary study by Schwarzbold et al. was supported by PRONEX Program (NENASC Project) and PPSUS Program of Fundaçao de Amparo a esquisa e Inovacao do Estado de Santa Catarina (FAPESC) and the National Science and Technology Institute for Translational Medicine (INCT-TM). The primary study by Simard et al. was supported by IDEA grants from the Canadian Prostate Cancer Research Initiative and the Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance, as well as a studentship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The primary study by Singer et al. (2009) was supported by a grant from the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (no. 01ZZ0106). The primary study by Singer et al. (2008) was supported by grants from the German Federal Ministry for Education and Research (# 7DZAIQTX) and of the University of Leipzig (# formel. 1–57). The primary study by Meyer et al. was supported by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). The primary study by Stone et al. was supported by the Medical Research Council, UK and Chest Heart and Stroke, Scotland. The primary study by Turner et al. was supported by a bequest from Jennie Thomas through Hunter Medical Research Institute. The primary study by Walterfang et al. was supported by Melbourne Health. Drs. Benedetti and Thombs were supported by FRQS researcher salary awards. No other authors reported funding for primary studies or for their work on this study. No funder had any role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication

A Unified Model of the GABA(A) Receptor Comprising Agonist and Benzodiazepine Binding Sites

We present a full-length α(1)β(2)γ(2) GABA receptor model optimized for agonists and benzodiazepine (BZD) allosteric modulators. We propose binding hypotheses for the agonists GABA, muscimol and THIP and for the allosteric modulator diazepam (DZP). The receptor model is primarily based on the glutamate-gated chloride channel (GluCl) from C. elegans and includes additional structural information from the prokaryotic ligand-gated ion channel ELIC in a few regions. Available mutational data of the binding sites are well explained by the model and the proposed ligand binding poses. We suggest a GABA binding mode similar to the binding mode of glutamate in the GluCl X-ray structure. Key interactions are predicted with residues α(1)R66, β(2)T202, α(1)T129, β(2)E155, β(2)Y205 and the backbone of β(2)S156. Muscimol is predicted to bind similarly, however, with minor differences rationalized with quantum mechanical energy calculations. Muscimol key interactions are predicted to be α(1)R66, β(2)T202, α(1)T129, β(2)E155, β(2)Y205 and β(2)F200. Furthermore, we argue that a water molecule could mediate further interactions between muscimol and the backbone of β(2)S156 and β(2)Y157. DZP is predicted to bind with interactions comparable to those of the agonists in the orthosteric site. The carbonyl group of DZP is predicted to interact with two threonines α(1)T206 and γ(2)T142, similar to the acidic moiety of GABA. The chlorine atom of DZP is placed near the important α(1)H101 and the N-methyl group near α(1)Y159, α(1)T206, and α(1)Y209. We present a binding mode of DZP in which the pending phenyl moiety of DZP is buried in the binding pocket and thus shielded from solvent exposure. Our full length GABA(A) receptor is made available as Model S1

Campylobacter jejuni transcriptome changes during loss of culturability in water

Background: Water serves as a potential reservoir for Campylobacter, the leading cause of bacterial gastroenteritis in humans. However, little is understood about the mechanisms underlying variations in survival characteristics between different strains of C. jejuni in natural environments, including water. Results: We identified three Campylobacter jejuni strains that exhibited variability in their ability to retain culturability after suspension in tap water at two different temperatures (4°C and 25°C). Of the three strains C. jejuni M1 exhibited the most rapid loss of culturability whilst retaining viability. Using RNAseq transcriptomics, we characterised C. jejuni M1 gene expression in response to suspension in water by analyzing bacterial suspensions recovered immediately after introduction into water (Time 0), and from two sampling time/temperature combinations where considerable loss of culturability was evident, namely (i) after 24 h at 25°C, and (ii) after 72 h at 4°C. Transcript data were compared with a culture-grown control. Some gene expression characteristics were shared amongst the three populations recovered from water, with more genes being up-regulated than down. Many of the up-regulated genes were identified in the Time 0 sample, whereas the majority of down-regulated genes occurred in the 25°C (24 h) sample. Conclusions: Variations in expression were found amongst genes associated with oxygen tolerance, starvation and osmotic stress. However, we also found upregulation of flagellar assembly genes, accompanied by down-regulation of genes involved in chemotaxis. Our data also suggested a switch from secretion via the sec system to via the tat system, and that the quorum sensing gene luxS may be implicated in the survival of strain M1 in water. Variations in gene expression also occurred in accessory genome regions. Our data suggest that despite the loss of culturability, C. jejuni M1 remains viable and adapts via specific changes in gene expression

Erratum to: Methods for evaluating medical tests and biomarkers

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s41512-016-0001-y.]