Interaction effects on common measures of sensitivity:Choice of measure, type I error, and power

Here we use simulation to assess previously unaddressed problems in the assessment of statistical interactions in detection and recognition tasks. The proportion of hits and false-alarms made by an observer on such tasks is affected by both their sensitivity and bias, and numerous measures have been developed to separate out these two factors. Each of these measures makes different assumptions regarding the underlying process and different predictions as to how false-alarm and hit rates should covary. Previous simulations have shown that choice of an inappropriate measure can lead to inflated type I error rates, or reduced power, for main effects, provided there are differences in response bias between the conditions being compared. Interaction effects pose a particular problem in this context. We show that spurious interaction effects in analysis of variance can be produced, or true interactions missed, even in the absence of variation in bias. Additional simulations show that variation in bias complicates patterns of type I error and power further. This under-appreciated fact has the potential to greatly distort the assessment of interactions in detection and recognition experiments. We discuss steps researchers can take to mitigate their chances of making an error

Neurogenic inflammation after traumatic brain injury and its potentiation of classical inflammation

Background: The neuroinflammatory response following traumatic brain injury (TBI) is known to be a key secondary injury factor that can drive ongoing neuronal injury. Despite this, treatments that have targeted aspects of the inflammatory pathway have not shown significant efficacy in clinical trials. Main body: We suggest that this may be because classical inflammation only represents part of the story, with activation of neurogenic inflammation potentially one of the key initiating inflammatory events following TBI. Indeed, evidence suggests that the transient receptor potential cation channels (TRP channels), TRPV1 and TRPA1, are polymodal receptors that are activated by a variety of stimuli associated with TBI, including mechanical shear stress, leading to the release of neuropeptides such as substance P (SP). SP augments many aspects of the classical inflammatory response via activation of microglia and astrocytes, degranulation of mast cells, and promoting leukocyte migration. Furthermore, SP may initiate the earliest changes seen in blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability, namely the increased transcellular transport of plasma proteins via activation of caveolae. This is in line with reports that alterations in transcellular transport are seen first following TBI, prior to decreases in expression of tight-junction proteins such as claudin-5 and occludin. Indeed, the receptor for SP, the tachykinin NK1 receptor, is found in caveolae and its activation following TBI may allow influx of albumin and other plasma proteins which directly augment the inflammatory response by activating astrocytes and microglia. Conclusions: As such, the neurogenic inflammatory response can exacerbate classical inflammation via a positive feedback loop, with classical inflammatory mediators such as bradykinin and prostaglandins then further stimulating TRP receptors. Accordingly, complete inhibition of neuroinflammation following TBI may require the inhibition of both classical and neurogenic inflammatory pathways.Frances Corrigan, Kimberley A. Mander, Anna V. Leonard and Robert Vin

Allopregnanolone Promotes Regeneration and Reduces β-Amyloid Burden in a Preclinical Model of Alzheimer's Disease

Previously, we demonstrated that allopregnanolone (APα) promoted proliferation of rodent and human neural progenitor cells in vitro. Further, we demonstrated that APα promoted neurogenesis in the hippocampal subgranular zone (SGZ) and reversed learning and memory deficits in the male triple transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's (3xTgAD). In the current study, we determined the efficacy of APα to promote the survival of newly generated neural cells while simultaneously reducing Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology in the 3xTgAD male mouse model. Comparative analyses between three different APα treatment regimens indicated that APα administered 1/week for 6 months was maximally efficacious for simultaneous promotion of neurogenesis and survival of newly generated cells and reduction of AD pathology. We further investigated the efficacy of APα to impact Aβ burden. Treatment was initiated either prior to or post intraneuronal Aβ accumulation. Results indicated that APα administered 1/week for 6 months significantly increased survival of newly generated neurons and simultaneously reduced Aβ pathology with greatest efficacy in the pre-pathology treatment group. APα significantly reduced Aβ generation in hippocampus, cortex, and amygdala, which was paralleled by decreased expression of Aβ-binding-alcohol-dehydrogenase. In addition, APα significantly reduced microglia activation as indicated by reduced expression of OX42 while increasing CNPase, an oligodendrocyte myelin marker. Mechanistic analyses indicated that pre-pathology treatment with APα increased expression of liver-X-receptor, pregnane-X-receptor, and 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA-reductase (HMG-CoA-R), three proteins that regulate cholesterol homeostasis and clearance from brain. Together these findings provide preclinical evidence for the optimal treatment regimen of APα to achieve efficacy as a disease modifying therapeutic to promote regeneration while simultaneously decreasing the pathology associated with Alzheimer's disease

Effectiveness of manual therapies: the UK evidence report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The purpose of this report is to provide a succinct but comprehensive summary of the scientific evidence regarding the effectiveness of manual treatment for the management of a variety of musculoskeletal and non-musculoskeletal conditions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The conclusions are based on the results of systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), widely accepted and primarily UK and United States evidence-based clinical guidelines, plus the results of all RCTs not yet included in the first three categories. The strength/quality of the evidence regarding effectiveness was based on an adapted version of the grading system developed by the US Preventive Services Task Force and a study risk of bias assessment tool for the recent RCTs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>By September 2009, 26 categories of conditions were located containing RCT evidence for the use of manual therapy: 13 musculoskeletal conditions, four types of chronic headache and nine non-musculoskeletal conditions. We identified 49 recent relevant systematic reviews and 16 evidence-based clinical guidelines plus an additional 46 RCTs not yet included in systematic reviews and guidelines.</p> <p>Additionally, brief references are made to other effective non-pharmacological, non-invasive physical treatments.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Spinal manipulation/mobilization is effective in adults for: acute, subacute, and chronic low back pain; migraine and cervicogenic headache; cervicogenic dizziness; manipulation/mobilization is effective for several extremity joint conditions; and thoracic manipulation/mobilization is effective for acute/subacute neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for cervical manipulation/mobilization alone for neck pain of any duration, and for manipulation/mobilization for mid back pain, sciatica, tension-type headache, coccydynia, temporomandibular joint disorders, fibromyalgia, premenstrual syndrome, and pneumonia in older adults. Spinal manipulation is not effective for asthma and dysmenorrhea when compared to sham manipulation, or for Stage 1 hypertension when added to an antihypertensive diet. In children, the evidence is inconclusive regarding the effectiveness for otitis media and enuresis, and it is not effective for infantile colic and asthma when compared to sham manipulation.</p> <p>Massage is effective in adults for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. The evidence is inconclusive for knee osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, myofascial pain syndrome, migraine headache, and premenstrual syndrome. In children, the evidence is inconclusive for asthma and infantile colic.</p

The effect of noise-induced variance on parameter recovery from reaction times

BACKGROUND: Technical noise can compromise the precision and accuracy of the reaction times collected in psychological experiments, especially in the case of Internet-based studies. Although this noise seems to have only a small impact on traditional statistical analyses, its effects on model fit to reaction-time distributions remains unexplored. RESULTS: Across four simulations we study the impact of technical noise on parameter recovery from data generated from an ex-Gaussian distribution and from a Ratcliff Diffusion Model. Our results suggest that the impact of noise-induced variance tends to be limited to specific parameters and conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Although we encourage researchers to adopt all measures to reduce the impact of noise on reaction-time experiments, we conclude that the typical amount of noise-induced variance found in these experiments does not pose substantial problems for statistical analyses based on model fitting

Bayesian inference for psychology, part IV: parameter estimation and Bayes factors.

In the psychological literature, there are two seemingly different approaches to inference: that from estimation of posterior intervals and that from Bayes factors. We provide an overview of each method and show that a salient difference is the choice of models. The two approaches as commonly practiced can be unified with a certain model specification, now popular in the statistics literature, called spike-and-slab priors. A spike-and-slab prior is a mixture of a null model, the spike, with an effect model, the slab. The estimate of the effect size here is a function of the Bayes factor, showing that estimation and model comparison can be unified. The salient difference is that common Bayes factor approaches provide for privileged consideration of theoretically useful parameter values, such as the value corresponding to the null hypothesis, while estimation approaches do not. Both approaches, either privileging the null or not, are useful depending on the goals of the analyst