Supplementary Material for: Use of Mobile Devices to Measure Outcomes in Clinical Research, 2010–2016: A Systematic Literature Review

<b><i>Background:</i></b> The use of mobile devices in clinical research has advanced substantially in recent years due to the rapid pace of technology development. With an overall aim of informing the future use of mobile devices in interventional clinical research to measure primary outcomes, we conducted a systematic review of the use of and clinical outcomes measured by mobile devices (mobile outcomes) in observational and interventional clinical research. <b><i>Method:</i></b> We conducted a PubMed search using a range of search terms to retrieve peer-reviewed articles on clinical research published between January 2010 and May 2016 in which mobile devices were used to measure study outcomes. We screened each publication for specific inclusion and exclusion criteria. We then identified and qualitatively summarized the use of mobile outcome assessments in clinical research, including the type and design of the study, therapeutic focus, type of mobile device(s) used, and specific mobile outcomes reported. <b><i>Results:</i></b> The search retrieved 2,530 potential articles of interest. After screening, 88 publications remained. Twenty-five percent of the publications (<i>n</i> = 22) described mobile outcomes used in interventional research, and the rest (<i>n</i> = 66) described observational clinical research. Thirteen therapeutic areas were represented. Five categories of mobile devices were identified: (1) inertial sensors, (2) biosensors, (3) pressure sensors and walkways, (4) medication adherence monitors, and (5) location monitors; inertial sensors/accelerometers were most common (reported in 86% of the publications). Among the variety of mobile outcomes, various assessments of physical activity were most common (reported in 74% of the publications). Other mobile outcomes included assessments of sleep, mobility, and pill adherence, as well as biomarkers assessed using a mobile device, including cardiac measures, glucose, gastric reflux, respiratory measures, and intensity of head-related injury. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Mobile devices are being widely used in clinical research to assess outcomes, although their use in interventional research to assess therapeutic effectiveness is limited. For mobile devices to be used more frequently in pivotal interventional research – such as trials informing regulatory decision-making – more focus should be placed on: (1) consolidating the evidence supporting the clinical meaningfulness of specific mobile outcomes, and (2) standardizing the use of mobile devices in clinical research to measure specific mobile outcomes (e.g., data capture frequencies, placement of device). To that aim, this manuscript offers a broad overview of the various mobile outcome assessments currently used in observational and interventional research, and categorizes and consolidates this information for researchers interested in using mobile devices to assess outcomes in interventional research

Expression and localization of cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator in the rat endocrine pancreas.

Impaired glucose tolerance and overt diabetes mellitus are becoming increasingly common complications of cystic fibrosis (CF), most probably merely as a result of increased life expectancy. In order to understand the pathophysiology of cystic fibrosis-related diabetes (CFRD), knowledge on the possible expression and cell distribution of the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) protein within the endocrine pancreas is required. In this report, we establish the first evidence for expression of CFTR protein in rat pancreatic islets by using independent techniques. First reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) amplification showed that CFTR mRNA is present in isolated islets of Langerhans. Furthermore, the analysis of flow cytometry-separated islet cells indicated that the level of CFTR transcripts is significantly higher in the non-beta than in beta-cell populations. The expression of CFTR protein in rat islet cells was also demonstrated by Western blotting and the level of expression was also found significantly higher in the non-beta than in beta-cell populations. Last, in situ immunocytochemistry studies with two monoclonal antibodies recognizing different CFTR epitopes indicated that CFTR expression occurs mainly in glucagon-secreting alpha-cells.Journal ArticleResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe

Middle powers in the Indo-Pacific: Potential pacifiers guarantying stability in the Indo-Pacific?

The article examines the potential of middle powers’ cooperation to establish communities of practice to reinforce their ability to influence world affairs. Illustrating the argument with three case studies—Australia, Indonesia, and South Korea—we assert that middle powers play key roles in structuring the world order. We test the following hypotheses: (i) middle powers do not look, nor do they need to look to great powers for leadership, and can influence events by forging new regional relationships; (ii) when leadership topples or tensions emerge between great powers, with a potential or nascent leadership vacuum, the initiative to guarantee the status quo (i.e., a liberal order) can be provided by middle powers. While rooted in IR theories, the research mostly builds upon the framework of communities of practice and management theories, linking them to highlight the importance of existing interactions, the opportunity for and advantage of greater cooperation and its potential systemic impact