None.
ABSTRACT University leaders aim to protect, shape, and promote the missions of their institutions. I evaluated whether top highly cited scientists are likely to occupy these positions. Of the current leaders of 96 U.S. high research activity universities, only 6 presidents or chancellors were found among the 4009 U.S. scientists listed in the ISIHighlyCited.com database. Of the current leaders of 77 UK universities, only 2 vice‐chancellors were found among the 483 UK scientists listed in the same database. In a sample of 100 top‐cited clinical medicine scientists and 100 top‐cited biology and biochemistry scientists, only 1 and 1, respectively, had served at any time as president of a university. Among the leaders of 25 U.S. universities with the highest citation volumes, only 12 had doctoral degrees in life, natural, physical or computer sciences, and 5 of these 12 had a Hirsch citation index m < 1.0. The participation of highly cited scientists in the top leadership of universities is limited. This could have consequences for the research and overall mission of universities.—Ioannidis, J. P. A. Is there a glass ceiling for highly cited scientists at the top of research universities? FASEB J. 24, 4635–4638 (2010). www.fasebj.org
Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
MIPS-X is a 32-b RISC microprocessor implemented in a conservative 2-/spl mu/m, two-level-metal, n-well CMOS technology. High performance is achieved by using a nonoverlapping two-phase 20-MHz clock and executing one instruction every cycle. To reduce its memory bandwidth requirements, MIPS-X includes a 2-kbyte on-chip instruction cache. The authors provide an overview of MIPS-X, focusing on the techniques used to reduce the complexity of the processor and implement the on-chip instruction cache.
BACKGROUND: The allocation of research resources should favor conditions responsible for the greatest disease burden. This is particularly important in pediatric populations, which have been underrepresented in clinical research. Our aim was to measure the association between the focus of pediatric clinical trials and burden of disease and to identify neglected clinical domains. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional study of clinical trials by using trial records in ClinicalTrials.gov. All trials started in 2006 or after and studying patient-level interventions in pediatric populations were included. Age-specific measures of disease burden were obtained for 21 separate conditions for high-, middle-, and low-income countries. We measured the correlation between number of pediatric clinical trials and disease burden for each condition. RESULTS: Neuropsychiatric conditions and infectious diseases were the most studied conditions globally in terms of number of trials (874 and 847 trials, respectively), while intentional injuries (5 trials) and maternal conditions (4 trials) were the least studied. Clinical trials were only moderately correlated with global disease burden (r = 0.58, P = .006). Correlations were also moderate within each of the country income levels, but lowest in low-income countries (r = .47, P = .03). Globally, the conditions most understudied relative to disease burden were injuries (–260 trials for unintentional injuries and –160 trials for intentional injuries), nutritional deficiencies (–175 trials), and respiratory infections (–171 trials). CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric clinical trial activity is only moderately associated with pediatric burden of disease, and least associated in low-income countries. The mismatch between clinical trials and disease burden identifies key clinical areas for focus and investment.
A large number of studies have tried to identify heritable components in the susceptibility to asthma and atopy phenotypes. This review examines the evidence of multigenetic inheritance for these conditions. We identified in the literature at least 372 gene-disease association studies for asthma and 124 for atopy published in the last 6 years. Gene-environment analyses were performed in 41 and 14 articles, respectively, in the same time period. Many postulated associations have been probed with limited sample sizes and will require more extensive replication and large-scale evidence. Meta-analyses have been performed for polymorphisms in 5 genes and provide modest evidence for genetic association of asthma with <i>ADAM33 </i>and <i>TNFA</i> gene polymorphisms. Meta-analyses of linkage studies show that it is unlikely to detect strong linkage peaks for asthma susceptibility. However, linkage was claimed between loci on chromosomes 2, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11 and 15 and total serum IgE levels. Careful definitions and standardization of phenotypes across teams of investigators are important to endorse. New large-scale testing platforms may offer new opportunities for discovering susceptibility gene variants, but they need to be coupled with careful study design, international collaboration, and possibly also dissection of gene-environment interactions.
Our website uses cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing to use our site, or clicking "Continue," you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy | Continue JAMA HomeNew OnlineCurrent IssueFor Authors Podcasts Clinical Reviews Editors' Summary Medical News Author Interviews More Publications JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry (1919-1959) JN Learning / CMESubscribeJobsInstitutions / LibrariansReprints & Permissions Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Accessibility Statement 2023 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved Search All JAMA JAMA Network Open JAMA Cardiology JAMA Dermatology JAMA Forum Archive JAMA Health Forum JAMA Internal Medicine JAMA Neurology JAMA Oncology JAMA Ophthalmology JAMA Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery JAMA Pediatrics JAMA Psychiatry JAMA Surgery Archives of Neurology & Psychiatry Input Search Term Sign In Individual Sign In Sign inCreate an Account Access through your institution Sign In Purchase Options: Buy this article Rent this article Subscribe to the JAMA journal
(Uploaded by Plazi for the Bat Literature Project) Summary There is increasing concern that most current published research findings are false. The probability that a research claim is true may depend on study power and bias, the number of other studies on the same question, and, importantly, the ratio of true to no relationships among the relationships probed in each scientific field. In this framework, a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance. Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true. Moreover, for many current scientific fields, claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias. In this essay, I discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research.
The pneumococcus remains in the antibiotic era a formidable pathogen, capable of atypical, lethal clinical presentations. We report two fatal cases of thoracic aortitis caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae in the setting of bacteremic illness from this pathogen. One case occurred in an aortic graft and the other arose in a native aorta. We also discuss the indolent clinical presentation and the diagnostic failure of transesophageal echocardiography and leukocyte scintigraphy. Persistent pyrexia with atypical chest pain and unexplained blood loss should alert clinicians to the possibility of this uncommon, yet lethal complication of pneumococcal disease.
