Imaging in assessing hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer: a systematic review

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hepatic and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer are operation contraindications. Systematic review to provide an overview of imaging in predicting the status of liver and peritoneum pre-therapeuticly is essential.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A systematic review of relevant literatures was performed in Pubmed/Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library and the China Biological Medicine Databases. QUADAS was used for assessing the methodological quality of included studies and the bivariate model was used for this meta-analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Totally 33 studies were included (8 US studies, 5 EUS studies, 22 CT studies, 2 MRI studies and 5 18F-FDG PET studies) and the methodological quality of included studies was moderate. The result of meta-analysis showed that CT is the most sensitive imaging method [0.74 (95% CI: 0.59-0.85)] with a high rate of specificity [0.99 (95% CI: 0.97-1.00)] in detecting hepatic metastasis, and EUS is the most sensitive imaging modality [0.34 (95% CI: 0.10-0.69) ] with a specificity of 0.96 (95% CI: 0.87-0.99) in detecting peritoneal metastasis. Only two eligible MRI studies were identified and the data were not combined. The two studies found that MRI had both high sensitivity and specificity in detecting liver metastasis.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>US, EUS, CT and ¹⁸F-FDG PET did not obtain consistently high sensitivity and specificity in assessing liver and peritoneal metastases of gastric cancer. The value of laparoscopy, PET/CT, DW-MRI, and new PET tracers such as ¹⁸F-FLT needs to be studied in future.</p

A systematic review of tests of empathy in medicine

Abstract Background Empathy is frequently cited as an important attribute in physicians and some groups have expressed a desire to measure empathy either at selection for medical school or during medical (or postgraduate) training. In order to do this, a reliable and valid test of empathy is required. The purpose of this systematic review is to determine the reliability and validity of existing tests for the assessment of medical empathy. Methods A systematic review of research papers relating to the reliability and validity of tests of empathy in medical students and doctors. Journal databases (Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO) were searched for English-language articles relating to the assessment of empathy and related constructs in applicants to medical school, medical students, and doctors. Results From 1147 citations, we identified 50 relevant papers describing 36 different instruments of empathy measurement. As some papers assessed more than one instrument, there were 59 instrument assessments. 20 of these involved only medical students, 30 involved only practising clinicians, and three involved only medical school applicants. Four assessments involved both medical students and practising clinicians, and two studies involved both medical school applicants and students. Eight instruments demonstrated evidence of reliability, internal consistency, and validity. Of these, six were self-rated measures, one was a patient-rated measure, and one was an observer-rated measure. Conclusion A number of empathy measures available have been psychometrically assessed for research use among medical students and practising medical doctors. No empathy measures were found with sufficient evidence of predictive validity for use as selection measures for medical school. However, measures with a sufficient evidential base to support their use as tools for investigating the role of empathy in medical training and clinical care are available.</p

The effect of regular walks on various health aspects in older people with dementia: protocol of a randomized-controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Physical activity has proven to be beneficial for physical functioning, cognition, depression, anxiety, rest-activity rhythm, quality of life (QoL), activities of daily living (ADL) and pain in older people. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of walking regularly on physical functioning, the progressive cognitive decline, level of depression, anxiety, rest-activity rhythm, QoL, ADL and pain in older people with dementia.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>This study is a longitudinal randomized controlled, single blind study. Ambulatory older people with dementia, who are regular visitors of daily care or living in a home for the elderly or nursing home in the Netherlands, will be randomly allocated to the experimental or control condition. Participants of the experimental group make supervised walks of 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week, as part of their daily nursing care. Participants of the control group will come together three times a week for tea or other sedentary activities to control for possible positive effects of social interaction. All dependent variables will be assessed at baseline and after 6 weeks, and 3, 6, 9, 12 and 18 months of intervention.</p> <p>The dependent variables include neuropsychological tests to assess cognition, physical tests to determine physical functioning, questionnaires to assess ADL, QoL, level of depression and anxiety, actigraphy to assess rest-activity rhythm and pain scales to determine pain levels. Potential moderating variables at baseline are: socio-demographic characteristics, body mass index, subtype of dementia, apolipoprotein E (ApoE) genotype, medication use and comorbidities.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study evaluates the effect of regular walking as a treatment for older people with dementia. The strength of this study is that 1) it has a longitudinal design with multiple repeated measurements, 2) we assess many different health aspects, 3) the intervention is not performed by research staff, but by nursing staff which enables it to become a routine in usual care. Possible limitations of the study are that 1) only active minded institutions are willing to participate creating a selection bias, 2) the drop-out rate will be high in this population, 3) not all participants will be able to perform/understand all tests.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p><a href="http://www.trialregister.nl/trialreg/admin/rctview.asp?TC=1482">NTR1482</a></p

LISS panel > Calibrating Twitter Data: Issue Salience and Issue Ownership in Social Media and in Surveys

This questionnaire consists of questions about the knowledge of the views of different political parties and the use of Twitter for voicing political opinions

The primary care diagnosis of dementia in Europe: an analysis using multidisciplinary, multinational expert groups.

Contains fulltext : 70685.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)OBJECTIVES: To explore the extent of variation in the detection of dementia in primary care across Europe, and the potential for the development of European guidelines. METHOD: A mixture of focus group and adapted nominal group methods involving 23 experts of different disciplines and from eight European countries. RESULTS: The diagnosis of dementia should be 'timely' rather than 'early'. Timeliness has an impact on the patient, on the caregiver, on healthcare professionals, and on society. Ethical and moral issues may interfere with the aim of timely diagnosis. Guidelines may be important for facilitating a timely diagnosis of dementia, but were infrequently used and not even available in three of the eight countries. Referral pathways often depended on health care system characteristics, differing throughout the eight European countries, whilst diagnostic strategies differed due to varied cultural influences. There was consensus that national variations can be reduced and timely diagnosis enhanced by combining simple tests using a systematic stepwise case-finding strategy, in conjunction with a strong infrastructure of multidisciplinary collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified three key themes that should be considered in harmonizing European approaches to the diagnosis of dementia in primary care: (1) a focus on timely diagnosis, (2) the need for the development and implementation of guidelines, and (3) the identification of appropriate referral pathways and diagnostic strategies including multi-professional collaboration. The content of guidelines may be determined by the perspectives of the guideline developers