Windows to the soul: A heuristic inquiry into the use of the eyes as portals to innate presence

This qualitative study explored the subjective experience of mutual eye-gazing functioning as a pathway to unitive consciousness through shared awareness. Research on the unitive consciousness is primarily viewed as an individual experience, rather than as two individuals engaged in shared awareness. In addition, eye-gazing is primarily viewed as eye contact using the physical apparatus rather than eye-gazing as a transpersonal occurrence. The participants of this pioneer study consisted of 12 exemplar spiritual guides who were recruited to explore the experience: 7 men and 5 women from 50 to 70 years old; 9 were from the United States, 1 from Mexico, 1 from Canada, and 1 from the United Kingdom. Based on the heuristic method, data were collected via semistructured interviews to obtain participant’s subjective experience of mutual eye-gazing. Qualitative thematic analysis was used for data analysis to identify common themes on mutual eye-gazing across the group of participants. Seven themes identified from the data set included (a) experience of shared awareness through eye-gazing, (b) interplay between thought and awareness, (c) hindrance of eye-gazing, (d) presence of divine nature, (e) dynamics of energy, (f) sensory experience, and (g) feeling of love. Results showed that mutual eye-gazing functioned as a vehicle for shared awareness, potentially leading to a higher state of consciousness in which the personal and Divine selves are realized as one. Transpersonal elements included transformational understanding of self and with other and reduced influence of the ego achieved by allowing for a broader perspective than a purely individual one. The most marked discovery was the emergence of a transpersonal movement towards unity that evolved into a 4-step process that could be used as a guideline for the realization of shared awareness. The shared process of mutual eye-gazing may be a useful spiritual application to anyone interested in psychological or spiritual well-being and transformation

Considerations and recommendations for selection and utilization of upper extremity clinical outcome assessments in human spinal cord injury trials.

Study designThis is a focused review article.ObjectivesThis review presents important features of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) in human spinal cord injury research. Considerations for COAs by trial phase and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health are presented as well as strengths and recommendations for upper extremity COAs for research. Clinical trial tools and designs to address recruitment challenges are identified.MethodsThe methods include a summary of topics discussed during a two-day workshop, conceptual discussion of upper extremity COAs and additional focused literature review.ResultsCOAs must be appropriate to trial phase and particularly in mid-late-phase trials, should reflect recovery vs. compensation, as well as being clinically meaningful. The impact and extent of upper vs. lower motoneuron disease should be considered, as this may affect how an individual may respond to a given therapeutic. For trials with broad inclusion criteria, the content of COAs should cover all severities and levels of SCI. Specific measures to assess upper extremity function as well as more comprehensive COAs are under development. In addition to appropriate use of COAs, methods to increase recruitment, such as adaptive trial designs and prognostic modeling to prospectively stratify heterogeneous populations into appropriate cohorts should be considered.ConclusionsWith an increasing number of clinical trials focusing on improving upper extremity function, it is essential to consider a range of factors when choosing a COA.SponsorsCraig H. Neilsen Foundation, Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor

Considerations and recommendations for selection and utilization of upper extremity clinical outcome assessments in human spinal cord injury trials.

This is a focused review article.This review presents important features of clinical outcomes assessments (COAs) in human spinal cord injury research. Considerations for COAs by trial phase and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health are presented as well as strengths and recommendations for upper extremity COAs for research. Clinical trial tools and designs to address recruitment challenges are identified.The methods include a summary of topics discussed during a two-day workshop, conceptual discussion of upper extremity COAs and additional focused literature review.COAs must be appropriate to trial phase and particularly in mid-late-phase trials, should reflect recovery vs. compensation, as well as being clinically meaningful. The impact and extent of upper vs. lower motoneuron disease should be considered, as this may affect how an individual may respond to a given therapeutic. For trials with broad inclusion criteria, the content of COAs should cover all severities and levels of SCI. Specific measures to assess upper extremity function as well as more comprehensive COAs are under development. In addition to appropriate use of COAs, methods to increase recruitment, such as adaptive trial designs and prognostic modeling to prospectively stratify heterogeneous populations into appropriate cohorts should be considered.With an increasing number of clinical trials focusing on improving upper extremity function, it is essential to consider a range of factors when choosing a COA.Craig H. Neilsen Foundation, Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor