Microfluidic Perfusion for Regulating Diffusible Signaling in Stem Cells

Background Autocrine & paracrine signaling are widespread both in vivo and in vitro, and are particularly important in embryonic stem cell (ESC) pluripotency and lineage commitment. Although autocrine signaling via fibroblast growth factor-4 (FGF4) is known to be required in mouse ESC (mESC) neuroectodermal specification, the question of whether FGF4 autocrine signaling is sufficient, or whether other soluble ligands are also involved in fate specification, is unknown. The spatially confined and closed-loop nature of diffusible signaling makes its experimental control challenging; current experimental approaches typically require prior knowledge of the factor/receptor in order to modulate the loop. A new approach explored in this work is to leverage transport phenomena at cellular resolution to downregulate overall diffusible signaling through the physical removal of cell-secreted ligands. Methodology/Principal Findings We develop a multiplex microfluidic platform to continuously remove cell-secreted (autocrine\paracrine) factors to downregulate diffusible signaling. By comparing cell growth and differentiation in side-by-side chambers with or without added cell-secreted factors, we isolate the effects of diffusible signaling from artifacts such as shear, nutrient depletion, and microsystem effects, and find that cell-secreted growth factor(s) are required during neuroectodermal specification. Then we induce FGF4 signaling in minimal chemically defined medium (N2B27) and inhibit FGF signaling in fully supplemented differentiation medium with cell-secreted factors to determine that the non-FGF cell-secreted factors are required to promote growth of differentiating mESCs. Conclusions/Significance Our results demonstrate for the first time that flow can downregulate autocrine\paracrine signaling and examine sufficiency of extracellular factors. We show that autocrine\paracrine signaling drives neuroectodermal commitment of mESCs through both FGF4-dependent and -independent pathways. Overall, by uncovering autocrine\paracrine processes previously hidden in conventional culture systems, our results establish microfluidic perfusion as a technique to study and manipulate diffusible signaling in cell systems.National Institutes of Health (U.S.) (NIH grant No. EB007278)Swiss National Science FoundationSwiss National Science Foundatio

Publication bias in gastroenterological research – a retrospective cohort study based on abstracts submitted to a scientific meeting

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine the determinants of publication and whether publication bias occurred in gastroenterological research. METHODS: A random sample of abstracts submitted to DDW, the major GI meeting (1992–1995) was evaluated. The publication status was determined by database searches, complemented by a mailed survey to abstract authors. Determinants of publication were examined by Cox proportional hazards model and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: The sample included abstracts on 326 controlled clinical trials (CCT), 336 other clinical research reports (OCR), and 174 basic science studies (BSS). 392 abstracts (47%) were published as full papers. Acceptance for presentation at the meeting was a strong predictor of subsequent publication for all research types (overall, 54% vs. 34%, OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.7 to 3.1). In the multivariate analysis, multi-center status was found to predict publication (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.6–4.9). There was no significant association between direction of study results and subsequent publication. Studies were less likely to be published in high impact journals if the results were not statistically significant (OR 0.5, 95 CI 95% 0.3–0.6). The author survey identified lack of time or interest as the main reason for failure to publish. CONCLUSIONS: Abstracts which were selected for presentation at the DDW are more likely to be followed by full publications. The statistical significance of the study results was not found to be a predictor of publication but influences the chances for high impact publication

To what extent do nurses use research in clinical practice? A systematic review

Background : In the past forty years, many gains have been made in our understanding of the concept of research utilization. While numerous studies exist on professional nurses\u27 use of research in practice, no attempt has been made to systematically evaluate and synthesize this body of literature with respect to the extent to which nurses use research in their clinical practice. The objective of this study was to systematically identify and analyze the available evidence related to the extent to which nurses use research findings in practice. Methods : This study was a systematic review of published and grey literature. The search strategy included 13 online bibliographic databases: Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, HAPI, Web of Science, SCOPUS, OCLC Papers First, OCLC WorldCat, ABI Inform, Sociological Abstracts, and Dissertation Abstracts. The inclusion criteria consisted of primary research reports that assess professional nurses\u27 use of research in practice, written in the English or Scandinavian languages. Extent of research use was determined by assigning research use scores reported in each article to one of four quartiles: low, moderate-low, moderate-high, or high. Results : Following removal of duplicate citations, a total of 12,418 titles were identified through database searches, of which 133 articles were retrieved. Of the articles retrieved, 55 satisfied the inclusion criteria. The 55 final reports included cross-sectional/survey (n = 51) and quasi-experimental (n = 4) designs. A sensitivity analysis, comparing findings from all reports with those rated moderate (moderate-weak and moderate-strong) and strong quality, did not show significant differences. In a majority of the articles identified (n = 38, 69%), nurses reported moderate-high research use. Conclusions : According to this review, nurses\u27 reported use of research is moderate-high and has remained relatively consistent over time until the early 2000\u27s. This finding, however, may paint an overly optimistic picture of the extent to which nurses use research in their practice given the methodological problems inherent in the majority of studies. There is a clear need for the development of standard measures of research use and robust well-designed studies examining nurses\u27 use of research and its impact on patient outcomes. The relatively unchanged self-reports of moderate-high research use by nurses is troubling given that over 40 years have elapsed since the first studies in this review were conducted and the increasing emphasis in the past 15 years on evidence-based practice. More troubling is the absence of studies in which attempts are made to assess the effects of varying levels of research use on patient outcomes.<br /

Study protocol for the translating research in elder care (TREC): building context – an organizational monitoring program in long-term care project (project one)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>While there is a growing awareness of the importance of organizational context (or the work environment/setting) to successful knowledge translation, and successful knowledge translation to better patient, provider (staff), and system outcomes, little empirical evidence supports these assumptions. Further, little is known about the factors that enhance knowledge translation and better outcomes in residential long-term care facilities, where care has been shown to be suboptimal. The project described in this protocol is one of the two main projects of the larger five-year Translating Research in Elder Care (TREC) program.</p> <p>Aims</p> <p>The purpose of this project is to establish the magnitude of the effect of organizational context on knowledge translation, and subsequently on resident, staff (unregulated, regulated, and managerial) and system outcomes in long-term care facilities in the three Canadian Prairie Provinces (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba).</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>This study protocol describes the details of a multi-level – including provinces, regions, facilities, units within facilities, and individuals who receive care (residents) or work (staff) in facilities – and longitudinal (five-year) research project. A stratified random sample of 36 residential long-term care facilities (30 urban and 6 rural) from the Canadian Prairie Provinces will comprise the sample. Caregivers and care managers within these facilities will be asked to complete the TREC survey – a suite of survey instruments designed to assess organizational context and related factors hypothesized to be important to successful knowledge translation and to achieving better resident, staff, and system outcomes. Facility and unit level data will be collected using standardized data collection forms, and resident outcomes using the Resident Assessment Instrument-Minimum Data Set version 2.0 instrument. A variety of analytic techniques will be employed including descriptive analyses, psychometric analyses, multi-level modeling, and mixed-method analyses.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Three key challenging areas associated with conducting this project are discussed: sampling, participant recruitment, and sample retention; survey administration (with unregulated caregivers); and the provision of a stable set of study definitions to guide the project.</p

Regulation of immunity during visceral Leishmania infection

Unicellular eukaryotes of the genus Leishmania are collectively responsible for a heterogeneous group of diseases known as leishmaniasis. The visceral form of leishmaniasis, caused by L. donovani or L. infantum, is a devastating condition, claiming 20,000 to 40,000 lives annually, with particular incidence in some of the poorest regions of the world. Immunity to Leishmania depends on the development of protective type I immune responses capable of activating infected phagocytes to kill intracellular amastigotes. However, despite the induction of protective responses, disease progresses due to a multitude of factors that impede an optimal response. These include the action of suppressive cytokines, exhaustion of specific T cells, loss of lymphoid tissue architecture and a defective humoral response. We will review how these responses are orchestrated during the course of infection, including both early and chronic stages, focusing on the spleen and the liver, which are the main target organs of visceral Leishmania in the host. A comprehensive understanding of the immune events that occur during visceral Leishmania infection is crucial for the implementation of immunotherapeutic approaches that complement the current anti-Leishmania chemotherapy and the development of effective vaccines to prevent disease.The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme under grant agreement No.602773 (Project KINDRED). VR is supported by a post-doctoral fellowship granted by the KINDReD consortium. RS thanks the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) for an Investigator Grant (IF/00021/2014). This work was supported by grants to JE from ANR (LEISH-APO, France), Partenariat Hubert Curien (PHC) (program Volubilis, MA/11/262). JE acknowledges the support of the Canada Research Chair Program

A systematic review of the psychometric properties of self-report research utilization measures used in healthcare

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In healthcare, a gap exists between what is known from research and what is practiced. Understanding this gap depends upon our ability to robustly measure research utilization.</p> <p>Objectives</p> <p>The objectives of this systematic review were: to identify self-report measures of research utilization used in healthcare, and to assess the psychometric properties (acceptability, reliability, and validity) of these measures.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a systematic review of literature reporting use or development of self-report research utilization measures. Our search included: multiple databases, ancestry searches, and a hand search. Acceptability was assessed by examining time to complete the measure and missing data rates. Our approach to reliability and validity assessment followed that outlined in the <it>Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing</it>.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of 42,770 titles screened, 97 original studies (108 articles) were included in this review. The 97 studies reported on the use or development of 60 unique self-report research utilization measures. Seven of the measures were assessed in more than one study. Study samples consisted of healthcare providers (92 studies) and healthcare decision makers (5 studies). No studies reported data on acceptability of the measures. Reliability was reported in 32 (33%) of the studies, representing 13 of the 60 measures. Internal consistency (Cronbach's Alpha) reliability was reported in 31 studies; values exceeded 0.70 in 29 studies. Test-retest reliability was reported in 3 studies with Pearson's <it>r </it>coefficients > 0.80. No validity information was reported for 12 of the 60 measures. The remaining 48 measures were classified into a three-level validity hierarchy according to the number of validity sources reported in 50% or more of the studies using the measure. Level one measures (n = 6) reported evidence from any three (out of four possible) <it>Standards </it>validity sources (which, in the case of single item measures, was all applicable validity sources). Level two measures (n = 16) had evidence from any two validity sources, and level three measures (n = 26) from only one validity source.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This review reveals significant underdevelopment in the measurement of research utilization. Substantial methodological advances with respect to construct clarity, use of research utilization and related theory, use of measurement theory, and psychometric assessment are required. Also needed are improved reporting practices and the adoption of a more contemporary view of validity (<it>i.e.</it>, the <it>Standards</it>) in future research utilization measurement studies.</p

Hospital organizational context and delivery of evidence-based stroke care: A cross-sectional study

Background: Organizational context is one factor influencing the translation of evidence into practice, but data pertaining to patients with acute stroke are limited. We aimed to determine the associations of organizational context in relation to four important evidence-based stroke care processes. Methods: This was a mixed methods cross-sectional study. Among 19 hospitals in Queensland, Australia, a survey was conducted of the perceptions of stroke clinicians about their work using the Alberta Context Tool (ACT), a validated measure covering 10 concepts of organizational context, and with additional stroke-specific contextual questions. These data were linked to the Australian Stroke Clinical Registry (AuSCR) to determine the relationship with receipt of evidence-based acute stroke care (acute stroke unit admission, use of thrombolysis for those with acute ischemic stroke, receipt of a written care plan on discharge, and prescription of antihypertensive medications on discharge) using quantile regression. Exploratory cluster analysis was used to categorize hospitals into high and low context groups based on all of the 10 ACT concepts. Differences in adherence to care processes between the two groups were examined. Results: A total of 215 clinicians completed the survey (50% nurses, 37% allied health staff, 10% medical practitioners), with 81% being in their current role for at least 1 year. There was good reliability (∞ 0.83) within the cohort to allow pooling of professional groups. Greater ACT scores, especially for social capital (μ 9.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 4.86 to 13.14) and culture (μ 7.33, 95% CI 2.05 to 12.62), were associated with more patients receiving stroke unit care. There was no correlation between ACT concepts and other care processes. Working within higher compared to lower context environments was associated with greater proportions of patients receiving stroke unit care (88.5% vs. 69.0%) and being prescribed antihypertensive medication at discharge (62.5% vs. 52.0%). Staff from higher context hospitals were more likely to value medical and/or nursing leadership and stroke care protocols. Conclusions: Overall organizational context, and in particular aspects of culture and social capital, are associated with the delivery of some components of evidence-based stroke care, offering insights into potential pathways for improving the implementation of proven therapies