159 research outputs found

    Evaluation of problem-solving skills: what we really do

    Get PDF
    Abstract no. 1394published_or_final_versio

    Recent Decisions

    Get PDF
    Comments on recent decisions by Thomas B. McNeill, Patrick F. McCartan, R. L. Cousineau, William J. Harte, William D. Bailey, Jr., John E. Kennedy, and Daniel W. Hammer

    MRI findings in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer: does dutasteride make MRI visible lesions less conspicuous? Results from a placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial

    Get PDF
    Objectives To investigate changes in the Apparent Diffusion Coefficient (ADC) using diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) in men on active surveillance for prostate cancer taking dutasteride 0.5 mg or placebo. Methods We analysed 37 men, randomised to 6 months of daily dutasteride (n = 18) or placebo (n = 19), undergoing 3T multi-parametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (mpMRI) scans at baseline and 6 months. Images were reviewed blind to treatment allocation and clinical information. Mean ADC of peripheral (PZ) and transition (TZ) zones, and MR-suspicious lesions were compared between groups over 6 months. Conspicuity was defined as the PZ divided by tumour ADC, and its change over 6 months was assessed. Results A decrease in mean conspicuity in the dutasteride group (but not the controls) was seen over 6 months (1.54 vs 1.38; p = 0.025). Absolute changes in ADC and conspicuity were significantly different between placebo and dutasteride groups at 6 months: (-0.03 vs 0.08, p = 0.033) and (0.11 vs –0.16, p = 0.012), as were percentage changes in the same parameters: (-2.27% vs 8.56% p = 0.048) and (9.25% vs -9.89% p = 0.013). Conclusions Dutasteride was associated with increased tumour ADC and reduced conspicuity. A lower threshold for triggering biopsy might be considered in men on dutasteride undergoing mpMRI for prostate cancer

    Can "presumed consent" justify the duty to treat infectious diseases? An analysis

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>AIDS, SARS, and the recent epidemics of the avian-flu have all served to remind us the debate over the limits of the moral duty to care. It is important to first consider the question of whether or not the "duty to treat" might be subject to contextual constraints. The purpose of this study was to investigate the opinions and beliefs held by both physicians and dentists regarding the occupational risks of infectious diseases, and to analyze the argument that the notion of "presumed consent" on the part of professionals may be grounds for supporting the duty to treat.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>For this cross-sectional survey, the study population was selected from among physicians and dentists in Ankara. All of the 373 participants were given a self-administered questionnaire.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In total, 79.6% of the participants said that they either had some degree of knowledge about the risks when they chose their profession or that they learned of the risks later during their education and training. Of the participants, 5.2% said that they would not have chosen this profession if they had been informed of the risks. It was found that 57% of the participants believed that there is a standard level of risk, and 52% of the participants stated that certain diseases would exceed the level of acceptable risk unless specific protective measures were implemented.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>If we use the presumed consent argument to establish the duty of the HCW to provide care, we are confronted with problems ranging over the difficulty of choosing a profession autonomously, the constant level of uncertainty present in the medical profession, the near-impossibility of being able to evaluate retrospectively whether every individual was informed, and the seemingly inescapable problem that this practice would legitimize, and perhaps even foster, discrimination against patients with certain diseases. Our findings suggest that another problem can be added to the list: one-fifth of the participants in this study either lacked adequate knowledge of the occupational risks when they chose the medical profession or were not sufficiently informed of these risks during their faculty education and training. Furthermore, in terms of the moral duty to provide care, it seems that most HCWs are more concerned about the availability of protective measures than about whether they had been informed of a particular risk beforehand. For all these reasons, the presumed consent argument is not persuasive enough, and cannot be used to justify the duty to provide care. It is therefore more useful to emphasize justifications other than presumed consent when defining the duty of HCWs to provide care, such as the social contract between society and the medical profession and the fact that HCWs have a greater ability to provide medical aid.</p

    Discussing atypical sexual harassment as a controversial issue in bystander programmes: One UK campus study

    Get PDF
    This research emanates from an anti-sexual violence bystander programme delivered at an English university. Fifteen students were identified through purposive and convenience sampling to take part in focus groups. Discussions emerged regarding atypical sexual harassment. There is a gap in the literature exploring sexual harassment outside of the male perpetrator and female victim narrative which this paper contributes to. This paper considers four conversational themes: ‘unwanted touching: women to men’, ‘sexual banter: women to men’, ‘sexual stereotypes: women and men’, and ‘developing stronger ethical subjectivity’. This paper recognises most sexual harassment occurs from men to women, and acknowledges criticism of focussing otherwise when resources are limited, noting this risks obscuring the enduring power differentials between the sexes. It contends that exploring a controversial issue, such as male experience of sexual harassment, might help bystander programmes by developing ethical subjectivity in undergraduate students. Exploring sexual behaviour as a spectrum may lead to counter hegemonic discourses to emerge

    The “Is mpMRI Enough” or IMRIE Study: A Multicentre Evaluation of Prebiopsy Multiparametric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Compared with Biopsy

    Get PDF
    Background: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) is now recommended prebiopsy in numerous healthcare regions based on the findings of high-quality studies from expert centres. Concern remains about reproducibility of mpMRI to rule out clinically significant prostate cancer (csPCa) in real-world settings. / Objective: To assess the diagnostic performance of mpMRI for csPCa in a real-world setting. / Design, setting, and participants: A multicentre, retrospective cohort study, including men referred with raised prostate-specific antigen (PSA) or an abnormal digital rectal examination who had undergone mpMRI followed by transrectal or transperineal biopsy, was conducted. Patients could be biopsy naïve or have had previous negative biopsies. / Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary definition for csPCa was International Society of Urological Pathology (ISUP) grade group (GG) ≥2 (any Gleason ≥7); the accuracy for other definitions was also evaluated. / Results and limitations: Across ten sites, 2642 men were included (January 2011–November 2018). Mean age and PSA were 65.3 yr (standard deviation [SD] 7.8 yr) and 7.5 ng/ml (SD 3.3 ng/ml), respectively. Of the patients, 35.9% had “negative MRI” (scores 1–2); 51.9% underwent transrectal biopsy and 48.1% had transperineal biopsy, with 43.4% diagnosed with csPCa overall. The sensitivity and negative predictive value (NPV) for ISUP GG ≥ 2 were 87.3% and 87.5%, respectively. The NPVs were 87.4% and 88.1% for men undergoing transrectal and transperineal biopsy, respectively. Specificity and positive predictive value of MRI were 49.8% and 49.2%, respectively. The sensitivity and NPV increased to 96.6% and 90.6%, respectively, when a PSA density threshold of 0.15 ng/ml/ml was used in MRI scores 1–2; these metrics increased to 97.5% and 91.2%, respectively, for PSA density 0.12 ng/ml/ml. ISUP GG ≥ 3 (Gleason ≥4 + 3) was found in 2.4% (15/617) of men with MRI scores 1–2. They key limitations of this study are the heterogeneity and retrospective nature of the data. / Conclusions: Multiparametric MRI when used in real-world settings is able to rule out csPCa accurately, suggesting that about one-third of men might avoid an immediate biopsy. Men should be counselled about the risk of missing some significant cancers. / Patient summary: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a useful tool for ruling out prostate cancer, especially when combined with prostate-specific antigen density (PSAD). Previous results published from specialist centres can be reproduced at smaller institutions. However, patients and their clinicians must be aware that an early diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer could be missed in nearly 10% of patients by relying on MRI and PSAD alone

    Haloperidol differentially modulates prepulse inhibition and p50 suppression in healthy humans stratified for low and high gating levels

    Full text link
    Schizophrenia patients exhibit deficits in sensory gating as indexed by reduced prepulse inhibition (PPI) and P50 suppression, which have been linked to psychotic symptom formation and cognitive deficits. Although recent evidence suggests that atypical antipsychotics might be superior over typical antipsychotics in reversing PPI and P50 suppression deficits not only in schizophrenia patients, but also in healthy volunteers exhibiting low levels of PPI, the impact of typical antipsychotics on these gating measures is less clear. To explore the impact of the dopamine D2-like receptor system on gating and cognition, the acute effects of haloperidol on PPI, P50 suppression, and cognition were assessed in 26 healthy male volunteers split into subgroups having low vs high PPI or P50 suppression levels using a placebo-controlled within-subject design. Haloperidol failed to increase PPI in subjects exhibiting low levels of PPI, but attenuated PPI in those subjects with high sensorimotor gating levels. Furthermore, haloperidol increased P50 suppression in subjects exhibiting low P50 gating and disrupted P50 suppression in individuals expressing high P50 gating levels. Independently of drug condition, high PPI levels were associated with superior strategy formation and execution times in a subset of cognitive tests. Moreover, haloperidol impaired spatial working memory performance and planning ability. These findings suggest that dopamine D2-like receptors are critically involved in the modulation of P50 suppression in healthy volunteers, and to a lesser extent also in PPI among subjects expressing high sensorimotor gating levels. Furthermore, the results suggest a relation between sensorimotor gating and working memory performance

    The SmartTarget Biopsy Trial: A Prospective, Within-person Randomised, Blinded Trial Comparing the Accuracy of Visual-registration and Magnetic Resonance Imaging/Ultrasound Image-fusion Targeted Biopsies for Prostate Cancer Risk Stratification

    Get PDF
    Background: Multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI)-targeted prostate biopsies can improve detection of clinically significant prostate cancer and decrease the overdetection of insignificant cancers. It is unknown whether visual-registration targeting is sufficient or augmentation with image-fusion software is needed. Objective: To assess concordance between the two methods. Design, setting, and participants: We conducted a blinded, within-person randomised, paired validating clinical trial. From 2014 to 2016, 141 men who had undergone a prior (positive or negative) transrectal ultrasound biopsy and had a discrete lesion on mpMRI (score 3–5) requiring targeted transperineal biopsy were enrolled at a UK academic hospital; 129 underwent both biopsy strategies and completed the study. Intervention: The order of performing biopsies using visual registration and a computer-assisted MRI/ultrasound image-fusion system (SmartTarget) on each patient was randomised. The equipment was reset between biopsy strategies to mitigate incorporation bias. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The proportion of clinically significant prostate cancer (primary outcome: Gleason pattern ≥3 + 4 = 7, maximum cancer core length ≥4 mm; secondary outcome: Gleason pattern ≥4 + 3 = 7, maximum cancer core length ≥6 mm) detected by each method was compared using McNemar's test of paired proportions. Results and limitations: The two strategies combined detected 93 clinically significant prostate cancers (72% of the cohort). Each strategy detected 80/93 (86%) of these cancers; each strategy identified 13 cases missed by the other. Three patients experienced adverse events related to biopsy (urinary retention, urinary tract infection, nausea, and vomiting). No difference in urinary symptoms, erectile function, or quality of life between baseline and follow-up (median 10.5 wk) was observed. The key limitations were lack of parallel-group randomisation and a limit on the number of targeted cores. Conclusions: Visual-registration and image-fusion targeting strategies combined had the highest detection rate for clinically significant cancers. Targeted prostate biopsy should be performed using both strategies together. Patient summary: We compared two prostate cancer biopsy strategies: visual registration and image fusion. A combination of the two strategies found the most clinically important cancers and should be used together whenever targeted biopsy is being performed. Image-fusion results in a clinically significant prostate cancer detection rate were similar to those of visual registration performed by an experienced operator. Detection could be improved by 14% with no adverse effect on patient safety by adding image fusion to conventional visual-registration targeting
    corecore