Can Research Assessments Themselves Cause Bias in Behaviour Change Trials? A Systematic Review of Evidence from Solomon 4-Group Studies

BACKGROUND: The possible effects of research assessments on participant behaviour have attracted research interest, especially in studies with behavioural interventions and/or outcomes. Assessments may introduce bias in randomised controlled trials by altering receptivity to intervention in experimental groups and differentially impacting on the behaviour of control groups. In a Solomon 4-group design, participants are randomly allocated to one of four arms: (1) assessed experimental group; (2) unassessed experimental group (3) assessed control group; or (4) unassessed control group. This design provides a test of the internal validity of effect sizes obtained in conventional two-group trials by controlling for the effects of baseline assessment, and assessing interactions between the intervention and baseline assessment. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate evidence from Solomon 4-group studies with behavioural outcomes that baseline research assessments themselves can introduce bias into trials. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Electronic databases were searched, supplemented by citation searching. Studies were eligible if they reported appropriately analysed results in peer-reviewed journals and used Solomon 4-group designs in non-laboratory settings with behavioural outcome measures and sample sizes of 20 per group or greater. Ten studies from a range of applied areas were included. There was inconsistent evidence of main effects of assessment, sparse evidence of interactions with behavioural interventions, and a lack of convincing data in relation to the research question for this review. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: There were too few high quality completed studies to infer conclusively that biases stemming from baseline research assessments do or do not exist. There is, therefore a need for new rigorous Solomon 4-group studies that are purposively designed to evaluate the potential for research assessments to cause bias in behaviour change trials

Two Antarctic penguin genomes reveal insights into their evolutionary history and molecular changes related to the Antarctic environment

BACKGROUND: Penguins are flightless aquatic birds widely distributed in the Southern Hemisphere. The distinctive morphological and physiological features of penguins allow them to live an aquatic life, and some of them have successfully adapted to the hostile environments in Antarctica. To study the phylogenetic and population history of penguins and the molecular basis of their adaptations to Antarctica, we sequenced the genomes of the two Antarctic dwelling penguin species, the Adélie penguin [Pygoscelis adeliae] and emperor penguin [Aptenodytes forsteri]. RESULTS: Phylogenetic dating suggests that early penguins arose ~60 million years ago, coinciding with a period of global warming. Analysis of effective population sizes reveals that the two penguin species experienced population expansions from ~1 million years ago to ~100 thousand years ago, but responded differently to the climatic cooling of the last glacial period. Comparative genomic analyses with other available avian genomes identified molecular changes in genes related to epidermal structure, phototransduction, lipid metabolism, and forelimb morphology. CONCLUSIONS: Our sequencing and initial analyses of the first two penguin genomes provide insights into the timing of penguin origin, fluctuations in effective population sizes of the two penguin species over the past 10 million years, and the potential associations between these biological patterns and global climate change. The molecular changes compared with other avian genomes reflect both shared and diverse adaptations of the two penguin species to the Antarctic environment