Creative Problem Solving Using Visual Thinking

Creative Problem Solving Using Visual Thinking This project explores the concept of visual and semantic thinking and how they can be incorporated into Creative Problem Solving sessions. Visual thinking is the ability to conjure mental images as part of the thinking process. This type of thinking is hard-wired into the human brain and can be seen in individual behavior and language. Meanwhile, semantic thinking is using language and grammar to convey meaning. It is a sequential process that depends on cultural and social references. The project argues that both types of thinking are essential and recommends specific guidelines for including visual thinkers in Creative Problem Solving sessions. These guidelines are based on the understanding that all individuals fall on a spectrum, from highly visual to highly semantic thinkers. We can all benefit from including visual thinking in problem-solving sessions

Progression and CSF Inflammation after Eradication of Oligoclonal Bands in an MS Patient Treated with Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Follicular Lymphoma

Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) has been proposed as treatment for multiple sclerosis (MS) and other autoimmune diseases. Aims: To describe the effects of allo-HCT on the course of MS in a 49-year-old woman with longstanding progressive MS who was treated with allo-HCT for follicular lymphoma. Methods: Non-myeloablative conditioning allo-HCT, examination for IgG oligoclonal bands and measurement of CXCL13 and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9) concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). Results: Despite the disappearance of oligoclonal bands in CSF, disease progression and CSF inflammation was observed. Conclusions: We hypothesize that CXCL13 and MMP-9 detected in CSF may reflect ongoing, pathogenic immune activation even after the eradication of intrathecal IgG synthesis. This suggests that progressive MS may depend more on innate than on adaptive immune activation

Effect of natalizumab on disease progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (ASCEND). a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with an open-label extension

Background: Although several disease-modifying treatments are available for relapsing multiple sclerosis, treatment effects have been more modest in progressive multiple sclerosis and have been observed particularly in actively relapsing subgroups or those with lesion activity on imaging. We sought to assess whether natalizumab slows disease progression in secondary progressive multiple sclerosis, independent of relapses. Methods: ASCEND was a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (part 1) with an optional 2 year open-label extension (part 2). Enrolled patients aged 18–58 years were natalizumab-naive and had secondary progressive multiple sclerosis for 2 years or more, disability progression unrelated to relapses in the previous year, and Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) scores of 3·0–6·5. In part 1, patients from 163 sites in 17 countries were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 300 mg intravenous natalizumab or placebo every 4 weeks for 2 years. Patients were stratified by site and by EDSS score (3·0–5·5 vs 6·0–6·5). Patients completing part 1 could enrol in part 2, in which all patients received natalizumab every 4 weeks until the end of the study. Throughout both parts, patients and staff were masked to the treatment received in part 1. The primary outcome in part 1 was the proportion of patients with sustained disability progression, assessed by one or more of three measures: the EDSS, Timed 25-Foot Walk (T25FW), and 9-Hole Peg Test (9HPT). The primary outcome in part 2 was the incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events. Efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01416181. Findings: Between Sept 13, 2011, and July 16, 2015, 889 patients were randomly assigned (n=440 to the natalizumab group, n=449 to the placebo group). In part 1, 195 (44%) of 439 natalizumab-treated patients and 214 (48%) of 448 placebo-treated patients had confirmed disability progression (odds ratio [OR] 0·86; 95% CI 0·66–1·13; p=0·287). No treatment effect was observed on the EDSS (OR 1·06, 95% CI 0·74–1·53; nominal p=0·753) or the T25FW (0·98, 0·74–1·30; nominal p=0·914) components of the primary outcome. However, natalizumab treatment reduced 9HPT progression (OR 0·56, 95% CI 0·40–0·80; nominal p=0·001). In part 1, 100 (22%) placebo-treated and 90 (20%) natalizumab-treated patients had serious adverse events. In part 2, 291 natalizumab-continuing patients and 274 natalizumab-naive patients received natalizumab (median follow-up 160 weeks [range 108–221]). Serious adverse events occurred in 39 (13%) patients continuing natalizumab and in 24 (9%) patients initiating natalizumab. Two deaths occurred in part 1, neither of which was considered related to study treatment. No progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy occurred. Interpretation: Natalizumab treatment for secondary progressive multiple sclerosis did not reduce progression on the primary multicomponent disability endpoint in part 1, but it did reduce progression on its upper-limb component. Longer-term trials are needed to assess whether treatment of secondary progressive multiple sclerosis might produce benefits on additional disability components. Funding: Biogen

USER PARTICIPATION IN WATERSHED MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH

Many watershed development projects around the world have performed poorly because they failed to take into account the needs, constraints, and practices of local people. Participatory watershed management—in which users help to define problems, set priorities, select technologies and policies, and monitor and evaluate impacts—is expected to improve performance. User participation in watershed management raises new questions for watershed research, including how to design appropriate mechanisms for organizing stakeholders and facilitating collective action. Management of a complex system such as a watershed may also require user participation in the research process itself. An increasing number of watershed research projects are already participatory, however challenges remain to institutionalizing user participation in both watershed management and research