Project description:Primarily from a measurement standpoint, we question some basic beliefs and procedures characterizing the scientific study of human behavior. The relations between observed and unobserved variables are key to an empirical approach to building explanatory theories and we are especially concerned about how the former are used as proxies for the latter. We believe that behavioral science can profitably reconsider the prevailing version of this arrangement because of its vulnerability to limiting idiosyncratic aspects of observed/unobserved variable relations. We describe a general measurement approach that takes into account idiosyncrasies that should be irrelevant to the measurement process but can intrude and may invalidate it in ways that distort and weaken relations among theoretically important variables. To clarify further our major concerns, we briefly describe one version of the measurement approach that fundamentally supports the individual as the primary unit of analysis orientation that we believe should be preeminent in the scientific study of human behavior.
Project description:IntroductionDespite the increasingly evidenced positive impacts of green space on human physical and mental health, green spaces remain inequitably distributed across different socioeconomic groups. Urban planning and design should prioritise the development and maintenance of urban green spaces, especially for vulnerable and marginalised populations while thinking about protecting them from the effects of green gentrification. This scoping review will explore how the concepts of equity, diversity and inclusion are integrated into the design, the planning and policy development of urban green spaces. Also, we will explore what are the efforts made to incorporate equity, diversity, and inclusion concepts into the planning, design and policy development of urban green spaces to make them equitable for vulnerable and marginalised populations.Methods and analysisThis protocol is based on the methodology developed by Arksey and O'Malley and improved by Levac et al. The search will be done in conjunction with a professional librarian, to include studies in all languages. The review will include multidisciplinary databases: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and GeoBase. The search will be done from each database's inception to February 2024. We will present our results narratively and will conduct a thematic analysis using the urban green equity framework. This framework will guide our understanding of the interplay between the spatial distribution of urban green spaces and the recognition of diverse voices in urban greening decision-making.Ethics and disseminationThis scoping review will not require ethical approval since it will be collected from publicly available documents. The results of this scoping review will be presented as a scientific article, social media and public health or environmental conferences organised by environmental organisations or academic institutions.
Project description:Pregnant and lactating women (PLW) have historically been excluded from vaccine research, creating inequities in vaccine access and uptake for PLW. US federal research policies create the framework for inclusion of diverse populations, including PLW, in research. We conducted a policy analysis and interviews (n = 29) with experts in vaccine research for PLW to characterize the existing policy landscape and to identify policy strategies to promote inclusion of PLW in vaccine trials. We integrated policy analysis and interview results to inform 5 policy recommendations. Current federal policy does not require or incentivize the inclusion of PLW in vaccine trials. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on inclusion of PLW in vaccine and other clinical research is nonbinding and lacks clarity. Extant policies do not adequately allay liability concerns among vaccine developers. To address these concerns, we recommend that US Congress pass legislation authorizing the FDA to require inclusion of PLW in vaccine research; incentivize sponsors to complete timely vaccine studies in PLW; create a national no-fault compensation program for clinical research participants, including PLW; remove pregnancy from the "vulnerable population" designation in FDA human subjects regulations; and clarify existing federal regulations pertaining to clinical research with PLW.
Project description:Tendons connect muscles to bones, ensuring joint movement. With advanced age, tendons become more prone to degeneration followed by injuries. Tendon repair often requires lengthy periods of rehabilitation, especially in elderly patients. Existing medical and surgical treatments often fail to regain full tendon function.The development of novel treatment methods has been hampered due to limited understanding of basic tendon biology. Recently, it was discovered that tendons, similar to other mesenchymal tissues, contain tendon stem/progenitor cells (TSPCs) which possess the common stem cell properties.The current strategies for enhancing tendon repair consist mainly of applying stem cells, growth factors, natural and artificial biomaterials alone or in combination. In this review, we summarise the basic biology of tendon tissues and provide an update on the latest repair proposals for tendon tears. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2017;2:332-342. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.2.160075.
Project description:ObjectivesTo test effects of the Community of Voices choir intervention on the health, well-being, and health care costs of racial/ethnically diverse older adults.MethodTwelve Administration-on-Aging-supported senior centers were cluster randomized into two groups: the intervention group started the choir immediately and a wait-list control group began the choir 6 months later. The choir program was designed for community-dwelling adults aged 60 years and older. The multimodal intervention comprises activities that engage participants cognitively, physically, and socially. Outcome measures assessed these three domains as well as health care utilization and costs. The intention-to-treat comparison was at 6 months.ResultsThe sample (N = 390) had a mean age of 71.3 years (SD = 7.2); 65% were nonwhite. Six-month retention was 92%. Compared to controls, intervention group members experienced significantly greater improvements in loneliness (p = .02; standardized effect size [ES = 0.34] and interest in life (p = .008, ES = 0.39). No significant group differences were observed for cognitive or physical outcomes or for health care costs.DiscussionFindings support adoption of community choirs for reducing loneliness and increasing interest in life among diverse older adults. Further efforts need to examine the mechanisms by which engagement in choirs improves aspects of well-being and reduces health disparities among older adults, including potential longer-term effects.Clinicaltrials.gov registrationNCT01869179 registered January 9, 2013.
Project description:Sexual minority women (SMW) experience an elevated risk of mental health problems compared to heterosexual women. However, knowledge gaps remain regarding whether cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) interventions meet SMW's mental health needs. Further, virtually no studies have integrated stakeholder (i.e., researchers with content expertise in SMW's health and clinical providers who work with SMW) and community member (i.e., SMW) perspectives to identify CBT approaches that address SMW-specific issues. This study used qualitative data gathered from 39 SMW who reported depression, anxiety, suicidality, and heavy drinking in the past 3 months and 16 content experts and clinical providers to obtain information relevant to enhancing CBT for SMW. In addition, we used thematic analysis to identify themes related to the adaptation and delivery of CBT for SMW. Building on prior literature, this study's findings revealed seven considerations for delivering mental health services to SMW: (1) attending to SMW's diverse gender identities and expressions; (2) focusing on SMW's nonbinary stressors; (3) formulating SMW's gender-based stressors within a feminist framework; (4) applying intersectionality frameworks; (5) incorporating issues of diversity, multiculturalism, and social justice; (6) addressing the role of trauma exposure; and (7) addressing the role of alcohol use in SMW's lives. These considerations are reviewed in terms of their implications for clinical practice, with a focus on enhancing applications of existing CBT interventions, to best respond to the unique needs of this population.
Project description:Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is an important cause of liver-related morbidity and mortality. There are no approved therapies, and the results of clinical trials have been difficult to compare due to inconsistent definitions of relevant disease parameters in patients with NASH. The natural course of the disease has not been rigorously characterized, particularly with respect to the contributions of underlying obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other comorbidities and the treatments provided for these comorbidities. Efforts to perform analyses of pooled data are limited by heterogeneous case definitions used across studies to define disease states. There remains a major unmet need in the field to develop standardized definitions for populations for interventional trials. Such definitions are expected to impact how endpoints for clinical trials are constructed. The Liver Forum is a multistakeholder effort including US and European regulatory agencies, academic investigators, professional and patient representative organizations, and industry to catalyze therapeutic development for NASH by developing potential solutions to barriers to development. The Case Definitions Working Group was established by The Liver Forum to evaluate the validity of case definitions for populations to be included in clinical trials for NASH from a regulatory science perspective. Based on such analyses, specific recommendations are provided noting the strengths and weaknesses of the case definitions along with knowledge gaps that require additional study. (Hepatology 2018;67:2001-2012).
Project description:The Lisbon Strategy was adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the European Union (EU) in 2000. By moving science into a central position for the development of a European knowledge-based economy and society, its adoption at political level seems to have been a powerful catalyst for the increased involvement of scientists in science policy in the EU. Recognising the need for scientists to act collectively in order to contribute to shape the future of science policy in Europe, a pioneering group of European science organisations leaders and representatives, as well as other scientists, initiated a European, interdisciplinary, inclusive movement leading to the creation of the European Research Council (ERC) to support basic research of the highest quality. Having scientists' campaign for the funding of bottom-up research by the EU Framework Programmes exclusively on scientific grounds, and for an ERC, was a unique event in the recent history of European science policy. For the first time, the scientific community acted collectively and across disciplinary or national boundaries as a political actor for the sake of a better science policy for Europe. As is often the case when first-hand experience is gained through the creation of a new organization, novel forms of collaboration arise. The European biomedical community has recently proposed the creation of a strategic action plan for health research (the European Council of Health Research; EuCHR), provisionally translated at present into a Scientific Panel for Health (SPH) research in Horizon 2020, the EU's research-funding programme for the period 2014-2020. The creation of such Scientific Panel should be viewed as an important contribution by the biomedical community as a major political agreement has been reached on the need for a comprehensive and long-term scientific strategy to accelerate research and facilitate innovation at EU level. It is our belief that describing and analyzing the process leading to the creation of the ERC and SPH (2002-2014) should be widely shared with the research community in general, as this may contribute to the understanding of the evolving relations between scientists and science-policy making.