You have accessJournal of Urology1 Apr 2009PRIMARY BLADDER NECK DYSFUNCTION IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS: RESULTS OF LONG TERM ALPHA BLOCKER THERAPY Jason P Van Batavia, Andrew J Combs, Mark Horowitz, and Kenneth I. Glassberg Jason P Van BataviaJason P Van Batavia More articles by this author , Andrew J CombsAndrew J Combs More articles by this author , Mark HorowitzMark Horowitz More articles by this author , and Kenneth I. GlassbergKenneth I. Glassberg More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5347(09)60887-9AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookLinked InTwitterEmail "PRIMARY BLADDER NECK DYSFUNCTION IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS: RESULTS OF LONG TERM ALPHA BLOCKER THERAPY." The Journal of Urology, 181(4S), pp. 311–312 © 2009 by American Urological AssociationFiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 181Issue 4SApril 2009Page: 311-312 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2009 by American Urological AssociationMetrics Author Information Jason P Van Batavia More articles by this author Andrew J Combs More articles by this author Mark Horowitz More articles by this author Kenneth I. Glassberg More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Multiple-context processors have been proposed as an architectural technique to mitigate the effects of large memory latency in multiprocessors. In this paper, we examine two schemes for implementing multiple-context processors. The first scheme switches between...
The credibility and replication of research findings evolve over time, as data accumulate. However, translation of postulated research promises to real-life biomedical applications is uncommon. In some fields of research, we may observe diminishing effects for the strength of research findings and rapid alternations of exaggerated claims and extreme contradictions--the "Proteus Phenomenon." While these phenomena are probably more prominent in the basic sciences, similar manifestations have been documented even in clinical trials and they may undermine the credibility of clinical research. Significance-chasing bias may be in part responsible, but the greatest threat may come from the poor relevance and scientific rationale and thus low pre-study odds of success of research efforts. Given that we currently have too many research findings, often with low credibility, replication and rigorous evaluation become as important as or even more important than discovery. Credibility, replication, and translation are all desirable properties of research findings, but are only modestly correlated. In this essay, I discuss some of the evidence (or lack thereof) for the process of evolution and translation of research findings, with emphasis on the biomedical sciences.
Division of Geographic Medicine and Infectious Diseases and Division of Clinical Care Research and Biostatistics Research Center, New England Medical Center Hospitals, Tufts University School of Medicine, 750 Washington St, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
A substantial proportion, but not all, of the associations with borderline genome-wide significance represent replicable, possibly genuine associations. Our empirical evaluation suggests a possible relaxation in the current GWS threshold.
Abstract The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic has entered its endemic phase and we observe significantly declining infection fatality rates due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS‐CoV‐2). On this background, it is crucial but challenging to define current and future vaccine policy in a population with a high immunity against SARS‐CoV‐2 conferred by previous infections and/or vaccinations. Vaccine policy must consider the magnitude of the risks conferred by new infection(s) with current and evolving SARS‐CoV‐2 variants, how these risks vary in different groups of individuals, how to balance these risks against the apparently small, but existent, risks of harms of vaccination, and the cost–benefit of different options. More evidence from randomized controlled trials and continuously accumulating national health data is required to inform shared decision‐making with people who consider vaccination options. Vaccine policy makers should cautiously weight what vaccination schedules are needed, and refrain from urging frequent vaccine boosters unless supported by sufficient evidence.
In Reply: We agree with Drs Batterham and Hopkins that small studies are not necessarily inherently flawed. However, probabilistically speaking, even in the absence of biases, small-sized trials are more prone to provide overestimates (or underestimates) compared with larger trials.
Abstract Background Expenditure on industry products (mostly drugs and devices) has spiraled over the last 15 years and accounts for substantial part of healthcare expenditure. The enormous financial interests involved in the development and marketing of drugs and devices may have given excessive power to these industries to influence medical research, policy, and practice. Material and methods Review of the literature and analysis of the multiple pathways through which the industry has directly or indirectly infiltrated the broader healthcare systems. We present the analysis of the industry influences at the following levels: (i) evidence base production, (ii) evidence synthesis, (iii) understanding of safety and harms issues, (iv) cost‐effectiveness evaluation, (v) clinical practice guidelines formation, (vi) healthcare professional education, (vii) healthcare practice, (viii) healthcare consumer's decisions. Results We located abundance of consistent evidence demonstrating that the industry has created means to intervene in all steps of the processes that determine healthcare research, strategy, expenditure, practice and education. As a result of these interferences, the benefits of drugs and other products are often exaggerated and their potential harms are downplayed, and clinical guidelines, medical practice, and healthcare expenditure decisions are biased. Conclusion To serve its interests, the industry masterfully influences evidence base production, evidence synthesis, understanding of harms issues, cost‐effectiveness evaluations, clinical practice guidelines and healthcare professional education and also exerts direct influences on professional decisions and health consumers. There is an urgent need for regulation and other action towards redefining the mission of medicine towards a more objective and patient‐, population‐ and society‐benefit direction that is free from conflict of interests.
Genetic polymorphisms of the low-affinity receptors of the Fc domain of IgG (FcγR) have been proposed to be associated with an array of hematologic, autoimmune, and other diseases. Most studies have addressed the R/H131 polymorphism of the FcγRIIa isoform[1][1] and the V/F158 polymorphism of the
Contradiction and initially stronger effects are not unusual in highly cited research of clinical interventions and their outcomes. The extent to which high citations may provoke contradictions and vice versa needs more study. Controversies are most common with highly cited nonrandomized studies, but even the most highly cited randomized trials may be challenged and refuted over time, especially small ones.
