Fitting a 3D Morphable Model to Edges: A Comparison Between Hard and Soft Correspondences

We propose a fully automatic method for fitting a 3D morphable model to single face images in arbitrary pose and lighting. Our approach relies on geometric features (edges and landmarks) and, inspired by the iterated closest point algorithm, is based on computing hard correspondences between model vertices and edge pixels. We demonstrate that this is superior to previous work that uses soft correspondences to form an edge-derived cost surface that is minimised by nonlinear optimisation.Comment: To appear in ACCV 2016 Workshop on Facial Informatic

Deficiencies in the transfer and availability of clinical trials evidence: A review of existing systems and standards

Background: Decisions concerning drug safety and efficacy are generally based on pivotal evidence provided by clinical trials. Unfortunately, finding the relevant clinical trials is difficult and their results are only available in text-based reports. Systematic reviews aim to provide a comprehensive overview of the evidence in a specific area, but may not provide the data required for decision making. Methods: We review and analyze the existing information systems and standards for aggregate level clinical trials information from the perspective of systematic review and evidence-based decision making. Results: The technology currently used has major shortcomings, which cause deficiencies in the transfer, traceability and availability of clinical trials information. Specifically, data available to decision makers is insufficiently structured, and consequently the decisions cannot be properly traced back to the underlying evidence. Regulatory submission, trial publication, trial registration, and systematic review produce unstructured datasets that are insufficient for supporting evidence-based decision making. Conclusions: The current situation is a hindrance to policy decision makers as it prevents fully transparent decision making and the development of more advanced decision support systems. Addressing the identified deficiencies would enable more efficient, informed, and transparent evidence-based medical decision making

Reporting of Methodologic Information on Trial Registries for Quality Assessment: A Study of Trial Records Retrieved from the WHO Search Portal

Background: Although randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard of evidence, their reporting is often suboptimal. Trial registries have the potential to contribute important methodologic information for critical appraisal of study results. Methods and Findings: The objective of the study was to evaluate the reporting of key methodologic study characteristics in trial registries. We identified a random sample (n = 265) of actively recruiting RCTs using the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal in 2008. We assessed the reporting of relevant domains from the Cochrane Collaboration’s ‘Risk of bias’ tool and other key methodological aspects. Our primary outcomes were the proportion of registry records with adequate reporting of random sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding, and trial outcomes. Two reviewers independently assessed each record. Weighted overall proportions in the ICTRP search portal for adequate reporting of sequence generation, allocation concealment, blinding (including and excluding open label RCT) and primary outcomes were 5.7% (95% CI 3.0–8.4%), 1.4% (0–2.8%), 41% (35–47%), 8.4% (4.1–13%), and 66% (60–72%), respectively. The proportion of adequately reported RCTs was higher for registries that used specific methodological fields for describing methods of randomization and allocation concealment compared to registries that did not. Concerning other key methodological aspects, weighted overall proportions of RCTs with adequately reported items were as follows: eligibility criteria (81%), secondary outcomes (46%), harm (5%) follow-up duration (62%), description of the interventions (53%) and sample size calculation (1%). Conclusions: Trial registries currently contain limited methodologic information about registered RCTs. In order to permit adequate critical appraisal of trial results reported in journals and registries, trial registries should consider requesting details on key RCT methods to complement journal publications. Full protocols remain the most comprehensive source of methodologic information and should be made publicly available

Biofilter aquaponic system for nutrients removal from fresh market wastewater

Aquaponics is a significant wastewater treatment system which refers to the combination of conventional aquaculture (raising aquatic organism) with hydroponics (cultivating plants in water) in a symbiotic environment. This system has a high ability in removing nutrients compared to conventional methods because it is a natural and environmentally friendly system (aquaponics). The current chapter aimed to review the possible application of aquaponics system to treat fresh market wastewater with the intention to highlight the mechanism of phytoremediation occurs in aquaponic system. The literature revealed that aquaponic system was able to remove nutrients in terms of nitrogen and phosphorus

Obstacles to researching the researchers: A case study of the ethical challenges of undertaking methodological research investigating the reporting of randomised controlled trials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Recent cohort studies of randomised controlled trials have provided evidence of within-study selective reporting bias; where statistically significant outcomes are more likely to be more completely reported compared to non-significant outcomes. Bias resulting from selective reporting can impact on meta-analyses, influencing the conclusions of systematic reviews, and in turn, evidence based clinical practice guidelines.</p> <p>In 2006 we received funding to investigate if there was evidence of within-study selective reporting in a cohort of RCTs submitted to New Zealand Regional Ethics Committees in 1998/99. This research involved accessing ethics applications, their amendments and annual reports, and comparing these with corresponding publications. We did not plan to obtain informed consent from trialists to view their ethics applications for practical and scientific reasons.</p> <p>In November 2006 we sought ethical approval to undertake the research from our institutional ethics committee. The Committee declined our application on the grounds that we were not obtaining informed consent from the trialists to view their ethics application. This initiated a seventeen month process to obtain ethical approval. This publication outlines what we planned to do, the issues we encountered, discusses the legal and ethical issues, and presents some potential solutions.</p> <p>Discussion and conclusion</p> <p>Methodological research such as this has the potential for public benefit and there is little or no harm for the participants (trialists) in undertaking it. Further, in New Zealand, there is freedom of information legislation, which in this circumstance, unambiguously provided rights of access and use of the information in the ethics applications. The decision of our institutional ethics committee defeated this right and did not recognise the nature of this observational research.</p> <p>Methodological research, such as this, can be used to develop processes to improve quality in research reporting. Recognition of the potential benefit of this research in the broader research community, and those who sit on ethics committees, is perhaps needed. In addition, changes to the ethical review process which involve separation between those who review proposals to undertake methodological research using ethics applications, and those with responsibility for reviewing ethics applications for trials, should be considered. Finally, we contend that the research community could benefit from quality improvement approaches used in allied sectors.</p

Transplantation of canine olfactory ensheathing cells producing chondroitinase ABC promotes chondroitin sulphate proteoglycan digestion and axonal sprouting following spinal cord injury

Olfactory ensheathing cell (OEC) transplantation is a promising strategy for treating spinal cord injury (SCI), as has been demonstrated in experimental SCI models and naturally occurring SCI in dogs. However, the presence of chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans within the extracellular matrix of the glial scar can inhibit efficient axonal repair and limit the therapeutic potential of OECs. Here we have used lentiviral vectors to genetically modify canine OECs to continuously deliver mammalian chondroitinase ABC at the lesion site in order to degrade the inhibitory chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans in a rodent model of spinal cord injury. We demonstrate that these chondroitinase producing canine OECs survived at 4 weeks following transplantation into the spinal cord lesion and effectively digested chondroitin sulphate proteoglycans at the site of injury. There was evidence of sprouting within the corticospinal tract rostral to the lesion and an increase in the number of corticospinal axons caudal to the lesion, suggestive of axonal regeneration. Our results indicate that delivery of the chondroitinase enzyme can be achieved with the genetically modified OECs to increase axon growth following SCI. The combination of these two promising approaches is a potential strategy for promoting neural regeneration following SCI in veterinary practice and human patients

Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Registration of clinical trials has been introduced largely to reduce bias toward statistically significant results in the trial literature. Doubts remain about whether advance registration alone is an adequate measure to reduce selective publication, selective outcome reporting, and biased design. One of the first areas of medicine in which registration was widely adopted was oncology, although the bulk of registered oncology trials remain unpublished. The net influence of registration on the literature remains untested. This study compares the prevalence of favorable results and conclusions among published reports of registered and unregistered randomized controlled trials of new oncology drugs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional study of published original research articles reporting clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of drugs newly approved for antimalignancy indications by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 2000 through 2005. Drugs receiving first-time approval for indications in oncology were identified using the FDA web site and Thomson Centerwatch. Relevant trial reports were identified using PubMed and the Cochrane Library. Evidence of advance trial registration was obtained by a search of clinicaltrials.gov, WHO, ISRCTN, NCI-PDQ trial databases and corporate trial registries, as well as articles themselves. Data on blinding, results for primary outcomes, and author conclusions were extracted independently by two coders. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression identified associations between favorable results and conclusions and independent variables including advance registration, study design characteristics, and industry sponsorship.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 137 original research reports from 115 distinct randomized trials assessing 25 newly approved drugs for treating cancer, the 54 publications describing data from trials registered prior to publication were as likely to report statistically significant efficacy results and reach conclusions favoring the test drug (for results, OR = 1.77; 95% CI = 0.87 to 3.61) as reports of trials not registered in advance. In multivariate analysis, reports of prior registered trials were again as likely to favor the test drug (OR = 1.29; 95% CI = 0.54 to 3.08); large sample sizes and surrogate outcome measures were statistically significant predictors of favorable efficacy results at p < 0.05. Subgroup analysis of the main reports from each trial (n = 115) similarly indicated that registered trials were as likely to report results favoring the test drug as trials not registered in advance (OR = 1.11; 95% CI = 0.44 to 2.80), and also that large trials and trials with nonstringent blinding were significantly more likely to report results favoring the test drug.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Trial registration alone, without a requirement for full reporting of research results, does not appear to reduce a bias toward results and conclusions favoring new drugs in the clinical trials literature. Our findings support the inclusion of full results reporting in trial registers, as well as protocols to allow assessment of whether results have been completely reported.</p

Trial Publication after Registration in ClinicalTrials.Gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis

Joseph Ross and colleagues examine publication rates of clinical trials and find low rates of publication even following registration in Clinicaltrials.gov

Lack of Association between Y-Chromosomal Haplogroups and Prostate Cancer in the Korean Population

The Y chromosome has recently been suggested to have an association with prostate cancer risk in human populations. Since this chromosome is haploid and lacks recombination over most of its length, haplotypes constructed from binary markers throughout the chromosome can be used for association studies. To assess the possible Y-chromosomal contribution to prostate cancer risk, we have therefore analyzed 14 Y-chromosomal binary markers in 106 prostate cancer cases and 110 controls from the Korean population. In contrast to previous findings in the Japanese population, no statistically significant difference in the distribution of Y-chromosomal haplogroup frequencies was observed between the case and control groups of Koreans. Thus, our data imply that the previously reported associations between Y-chromosomal lineages and a predisposition to, or protection against, prostate cancer might be explained by statistical fluctuations, or by genetic effects that are seen only in some environments

Vitamin D deficiency and anemia: a cross-sectional study

Vitamin D has been suggested to have an effect on erythropoiesis. We sought to evaluate the prevalence of anemia in a population of individuals with vitamin D deficiency compared with those with normal levels in a population of a large integrated healthplan. A cross-sectional analysis in the period 1 January 2004 through 31 December 2006 of subjects with documented concurrent levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and hemoglobin were evaluated. Vitamin D deficiency was defined as <30 ng/mL and anemia was defined as a hemoglobin <11 g/dL. A total of 554 subjects were included in the analysis. Anemia was present in 49% of 25-hydroxyvitamin D-deficient subjects compared with 36% with normal 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels (p < 0.01). Odds ratio for anemia in subjects with 25-hydroxyvitamin D deficiency using logistic regressions and controlling for age, gender, and chronic kidney disease was 1.9 (95% CI 1.3–2.7). 25-hydroxyvitamin D-deficient subjects had a lower mean Hb (11.0 vs. 11.7; p = 0.12 ) and a higher prevalence of erythrocyte stimulating agent use (47% vs. 24%; p < 0.05). This study demonstrates an association of vitamin D deficiency and a greater risk of anemia, lower mean hemoglobin, and higher usage of erythrocyte-stimulating agents. Future randomized studies are warranted to examine whether vitamin D directly affects erythropoiesis