RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: External funding is fundamental to surgeon-scientists and many Society of Asian Academic Surgeons (SAAS) members have received funding through National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants. The amount of funding through NIH awards amongst SAAS members has yet to be evaluated. Our objective was to quantify the amount and type of NIH funding among SAAS members. METHODS: A list of all active SAAS members was compiled. The NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tool's Expenditure and Results was queried to identify NIH funding among active members. RESULTS: Among 585 active SAAS members, 165 (28%) received NIH funding during their career. Of these, 110 members (66.6%) were male and 55 members (33.3%) were female. A total of 420 NIH grants have been awarded totaling $518.7 million in funding. There are currently 47 active grants totaling $34.1 million in funding. When analyzing by type, there were 226 R research grants, 63 K career development awards, 53 T and F research training and fellowships awards, and 78 other awards. Of the 63 members who received a K award, 35 members (55%) have subsequently received an R award. CONCLUSIONS: SAAS members are highly funded with 28% of members having received NIH funding totaling $518.7 million. SAAS' mission is to foster the personal and professional development of academic surgeons and we found that many SAAS members have the experience to mentor other surgeon-scientists through the process of obtaining NIH funding. Participation in organizations like SAAS can help nurture the success of future generations of surgeon-scientists.

RESUMEN

Background: We previously examined National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published in 2004, 2009, and 2015 and found low compliance with NIH policies on inclusion, analysis, and reporting results for female and minoritized subgroups, with no improvement over time. We conducted a fourth wave of data collection using RCTs published in 2021, comparing current results with previous years. Materials and Methods: The authors used PubMed to find 657 RCTs published in print in 14 leading US medical journals in 2021. Of those, 93 (14.2%) were eligible for analysis. We reviewed all parts of eligible studies and any published commentary. Fisher's exact statistics compared proportions of studies analyzing or reporting results for subgroups in 2021 compared with RCTs studied in previous waves. Posthoc analysis compared eligible RCTs about the Covid-19 pandemic to eligible RCTs on other topics. Results: Twenty-five of 93 studies (26.9%) analyzed or reported outcomes by race or ethnicity, an increase over previous years (p < 0.01). Among 79 RCTs with participants of both sexes, the median proportion of female participants was 43%. Moreover, 34 (43.0%) reported an outcome by sex, included sex as a covariate in statistical analysis, or reported results by sex, also an increase over previous waves (p < 0.01). Eleven eligible studies (11.8%) were on a SARS-CoV-2 topic; there was no difference between SARS-CoV-2 RCTs and RCTs on other topics. Conclusions: Analysis and reporting by sex, race, and ethnicity for NIH-funded RCTs published in 2021 significantly increased from previous waves, despite no corresponding increase in enrollment.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is an essential source of funding for vascular surgeons conducting research. NIH funding is frequently used to benchmark institutional and individual research productivity, help determine eligibility for academic promotion, and as a measure of scientific quality. We sought to appraise the current scope of NIH funding to vascular surgeons by appraising the characteristics of NIH-funded investigators and projects. In addition, we also sought to determine whether funded grants addressed recent Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) research priorities. METHODS: In April 2022, we queried the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database for active projects. We only included projects that had a vascular surgeon as a principal investigator. Grant characteristics were extracted from the NIH Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results database. Principal investigator demographics and academic background information were identified by searching institution profiles. RESULTS: There were 55 active NIH awards given to 41 vascular surgeons. Only 1% (41/4037) of all vascular surgeons in the United States receive NIH funding. Funded vascular surgeons are an average of 16.3 years out of training; 37% (n = 15) are women. The majority of awards (58%; n = 32) were R01 grants. Among the active NIH-funded projects, 75% (n = 41) are basic or translational research projects, and 25% (n = 14) are clinical or health services research projects. Abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease are the most commonly funded disease areas and together accounted for 54% (n = 30) of projects. Three SVS research priorities are not addressed by any of the current NIH-funded projects. CONCLUSIONS: NIH funding of vascular surgeons is rare and predominantly consists of basic or translational science projects focused on abdominal aortic aneurysm and peripheral arterial disease research. Women are well-represented among funded vascular surgeons. Although the majority of SVS research priorities receive NIH funding, three SVS research priorities are yet to be addressed by NIH-funded projects. Future efforts should focus on increasing the number of vascular surgeons receiving NIH grants and ensuring all SVS research priorities receive NIH funding.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In April 2021, a coalition of employee resource groups called the Federation of Asian American, Native Hawaiian, and Pacific Islander Network, or FAN, was established at the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The coalition aims to be a unifying voice that represents and serves these diverse communities. Discussion within the group centered around the persistent inequities and the lack of inclusion that the Asian American communities have long endured. Two common themes emerged from these discussions: (1) a leadership gap for Asian Americans in senior leadership and managerial positions, and (2) the everyday experience of exclusion. Asian Americans represent nearly 20% of the NIH permanent workforce yet make up only 6% of the senior leadership positions. These two issues reflect the sentiment that Asian Americans often feel invisible or forgotten in the discourse of structural racism and organizational inequities, especially in organizations in which they are numerically overrepresented. The purpose of this manuscript is to raise awareness of Asian American concerns in the federal workforce and how current employment and workforce analytic practices in this domain might contribute to the invisibility. To accomplish this goal, we will (1) describe relevant historical and contemporary contexts of Asian American experience undergirding their inclusion and visibility concerns; (2) present data analyses from available data sources to provide a deeper understanding of the Asian American leadership gap and lack of inclusion concerns; (3) highlight data availability and analytic challenges that hinder the ability to address the inequity and invisibility issues; and (4) recommend practices in data collection, measurement, and analysis to increase the visibility of this community in the federal workforce.

RESUMEN

The All of Us Research Program (All of Us or Program) is an ongoing longitudinal data collection operated by the National Institutes of Health (NIH). The Program aims to improve healthcare for all through the development of a biomedical research resource reflective of the diversity of the United States that includes Underrepresented in Biomedical Research (UBR) groups. Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are a key recruitment stream of UBR participants, which are community based and provide primary care and preventive services in medically underserved areas. Over 90% of FQHC patients enrolled in All of Us to date are UBR. The COVID-19 pandemic caused a pause in All of Us activities. Re-starting the activities was a challenge, especially due to the digital divide faced by FQHC participants, and that most Program activities are primarily completed via web-based portal from a computer or a mobile device. This paper investigates the extent to which digital readiness impacted recruitment and sustainment of a pre-pandemic sample of 2,791 FQHC participants to the Program. Digital readiness was defined by access to home-based or other internet-accessing devices, and participants' comfort level using such devices. Results from multivariable logistic regression models showed that lower age, more education, female gender identity, and higher income were associated with higher digital readiness (p ≤ 0.01). Race, rurality, and sexual orientation status were not significant factors associated with digital readiness. Older participants had higher odds of completing Program activities, even though less digitally ready than their younger peers, as they often completed the activities during their in-person clinical visits. A subsequent weighted model demonstrated that FQHC participants who were digitally ready had 27% higher odds of completing Program activities than those not digitally ready. The data highlight the need for improved connectivity and sustainment between longitudinal data collection, research programs, and UBR participants, particularly among those facing the digital divide. Quantifying digital challenges provide operational insights for longitudinal data collection (All of Us, or others), and broadly, other aspects of digital medicine such as telehealth or patient portals by recognizing digital readiness of participants and patients, and the level of support required for success.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The National Institute on Aging (NIA) provides funding to academic researchers and small businesses working in the Alzheimer's Disease (AD) and AD-related dementia (ADRD) fields to help commercialize their products. The NIA uses Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) awards to bridge the funding gap in the diagnostic, therapeutic, and care interventions areas, enabling startups to reach key value inflection points to achieve scientific milestones. METHODS: Only publicly available information is reported. The National Institutes of Health Report Portfolio Online Reporting Tool database and the commercial database Global Data, were used to track the progress of companies that received SBIR or Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) funding from the NIA. RESULTS: Since 2008, the NIA has awarded $280 million-including $207 million from fiscal year (FY) 2015 to FY 2019-in new small business program awards for AD/ADRD research. DISCUSSION: NIA seed capital and mentoring programs are critical resources to help small businesses reach key value inflection points and advance their research from concept to commercialization.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related death, and countries all over the world have given considerable support to lung cancer research. However, analysis on the status of funding in the field of lung cancer is still lacking. METHODS: We visited the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) and National Institutes of Health (NIH) official websites to gather lung cancer research information between 2008 and 2020. RSTCM6 software was used to extract the keywords of funded projects which were then imported into CiteSpace software for visual analysis of word frequency. RESULTS: A total of 1,745 and 5,939 search results were finally obtained from the NSFC and NIH websites, respectively. The amount of NSFC funding for projects in the field of lung cancer increased steadily from 2008 to 2012, while the NIH funding for lung cancer was significantly higher in even years than in odd years between 2008 to 2018. The Shanghai Jiaotong University, Sun Yat-sen University, and Guangzhou Medical University were the top three research institutions that had received the most projects funded by the NSFC. Apoptosis, proliferation, invasion, metabolism, the pathogenesis of lung cancer, cell signal transduction, epithelial-mesenchymal transformation (EMT), and immune-related research were the most frequently funded research areas by the NSFC. Biomarkers, targeted therapy, signal pathway, genomics, and immune-related research were funded most the most frequently funded research areas by the NIH. Both the NIH and NSFC funding for lung cancer immune-related research has increased in recent years. CONCLUSIONS: NIH funding in the United States is decreasing year by year, whereas NSFC funding is increasing in China. There are some differences in research focus in lung cancer research funding between China and the United States. However, both countries have increased the support for immune-related research in recent years.

RESUMEN

One of the objectives within the medicinal chemistry discipline is to design tissue targeting molecules. The objective of tissue specificity can be either to gain drug access to the compartment of interest (e.g., the CNS) for Neuroscience targets or to restrict drug access to the CNS for all other therapeutic areas. Both neuroscience and non-neuroscience therapeutic areas have struggled to quantitatively estimate brain penetration or the lack thereof with compounds that are substrates of efflux transport proteins such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistant protein (BCRP) that are key components of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). It has been well established that drug candidates with high efflux ratios (ER) of these transporters have poor penetration into brain tissue. In the current work, we outline a parallel analysis to previously published models for the prediction of brain penetration that utilize an alternate MDR1-MDCK cell line as a better predictor of brain penetration and whether a correlation between in vitro, rodent data, non-human primate (NHP), and human in vivo brain penetration data could be established. Analysis of structural and physicochemical properties in conjunction with in vitro parameters and preclinical in vivo data has been highlighted in this manuscript as a continuation of the previously published work.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction As the world's largest funding source for biomedical research, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) supports physician-scientists with a discipline-specific R01 grant. Recently, scholarly activity disparities regarding investigator degree and gender have been highlighted in the medical literature among allopathic and osteopathic investigators of various medical backgrounds. We aimed to assess trends in internal medicine NIH R01 grants over the past decade. Methodology Internal medicine R01 funding was retrospectively obtained from a centralized online NIH database encompassing 2008 through 2017. Principal investigators (PIs) were then categorized by gender and academic degree(s). Two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze NIH grant funding trends over the time period studied. Results A total of 5,089 NIH R01s were awarded to internal medicine PIs, with an average value per grant of $469,270. Awardees were predominantly male (71.5%, 3,639/5,089). Most awards were issued to PIs with an MD degree (62.4%, 3,173/5,089), followed by PhD degree (36.3%, 1,845/5,089). DOs accounted for five awards over the time period studied (0.15%). MDs were awarded higher funding than PhDs ($466,494 and $421,576, p < 0.001), and females were awarded higher amounts than males ($462,771 and $444,868, p < 0.001). Investigators who held a second degree received more funding than PIs with a single degree ($476,693 and $439,693, p < 0.001). Conclusion In the decade under investigation, both gender and degree disparities existed within NIH R01 funding for PIs in the field of internal medicine, and osteopathic representation accounted for a paucity of R01 funding.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) previously developed a research database consisting of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants that were awarded to its members. The purpose of this report is to classify these NIH grants into various medical physics subdisciplines and analyze the scope of AAPM member research. METHODS: For this report, an algorithm classified grant topics into medical physics research subdisciplines (grants from 2002 to 2019 were analyzed). This algorithm utilized a search for common words and phrases within grant titles, keywords, abstracts, and activity codes to perform the classification. AAPM member grants were compared with non-AAPM member grants in various relevant subcategories to assess what percentage of these grants was held by AAPM members. RESULTS: The percentage of AAPM member grants that included words relating to both imaging and therapy (image-guided therapy grants) increased from 13% (27/207) in 2002 to 27% (79/293) in 2019. The percentage of AAPM member grants utilizing words relating to artificial intelligence increased from 8% in 2002 to 20% in 2019. From 2002 to 2019, AAPM member grants referenced cancer more than all other diseases combined. The majority of AAPM member grants included words relating to clinical research (81% of grants in 2002 and 99% in 2019). When comparing AAPM member with non-AAPM member grants it was found that in 2019 AAPM members held a substantial fraction of all NIH grants that referenced stereotactic radiation therapies (41%), radionuclide therapies (10%), brachytherapies (35%), intensity-modulated radiation therapies (45%), and external beam particle therapies (55%). From 2002 to 2019, the percentage of AAPM membership holding NIH grants decreased for males (3.2% down to 2.3%) and increased for females (0.8% up to 1.3%) CONCLUSIONS: The majority of grants awarded to AAPM members focus on clinical research, which underlies the translational aspect of medical physics and suggests medical physicists are uniquely positioned to help translate new technologies such as artificial intelligence into the clinic. Since 2002, NIH grants awarded to AAPM members have increasingly referenced some form of image-guided therapy, suggesting opportunities for continued innovation of imaging technologies. A substantial fraction of all radiotherapy-related research grants were awarded to AAPM members, emphasizing the important role physicists have in developing radiotherapy-related treatments.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Introduction Despite a call for increased research by family-medicine physicians, there is no data on the demographics of those awarded a National Institutes of Health (NIH) R01 grant.  Objective The purpose of the study was to assess recent NIH R01 funding trends over the last decade in family medicine. Methods  A retrospective analysis of NIH R01 grant funding in family medicine was conducted by extracting demographic data from the NIH's Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results (RePORTER) database from 2008 through 2017. Demographics were reported as percentages, and comparisons of the groups were performed by the t-test.  Results  From 2008 to 2017, the NIH awarded 139 R01 grants to principal investigators (PI) in family medicine. Males comprised 51.80% of all awardees, and those holding a doctorate of medicine (MD) made up 43.88% of the awardees. No one holding a Doctorate of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) degree received an NIH R01 grant during the timeframe studied. A total of 81.97% of all MDs held a dual degree. When gender and degree were considered, no statistical difference was observed for the total amount of dollars awarded.  Conclusion For the years studied, a disparity related to medical degrees was noted for those family-medicine physicians who received an NIH R01 grant. However, no gender disparity was observed.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is the world's largest funding source for research, and the R01 grant is seen as a stepping stone to future granting opportunities for the physician-scientist. Recently, both a gender and degree disparity in scholarly activity has been highlighted in the medical literature.  Objective: To assess NIH R01 funding trends in general surgery over the last decade. METHODS: A retrospective review of general surgery funding was extracted from the NIH's Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures and Results database from 2008 through 2017. All principal investigators (PIs) were categorized by gender and academic degree(s). Linear regression analysis assessed NIH grant funding trends over time and comparisons of groups were completed with the t-test. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2017, the NIH awarded 600 R01 grants and $272,669,397 to PIs in general surgery. The majority of R01 grants were awarded to males (76.33%; p < 0.01) and those holding a Doctorate of Medicine (MD) degree (58.33%; p < 0.01). No Doctorate of Osteopathic Medicine (DO) had received an NIH R01 grant during the time studied. No statistically significant trend could be established for the number of R01 grants awarded over time (p = 0.33), grants awarded to males or females over time (p = 0.73 and p = 0.18), or for those holding an MD or other type of degree over time (p = 0.30 and p = 0.39). Also, no statistically significant trend was established for increased grant funding over time (P = 0.88) but females and those holding an other type of degree (Doctorate in Philosophy (PhD), Doctorate in Science (DSc), Master of Public Health (MPH), etc.) experienced an increase in the total dollar amount of funding over the time studied (p < 0.01 and p < 0.01).  Conclusion: For the years studied, a gender and degree disparity exists for those receiving an NIH R01 grant in general surgery. However, an increase in total grant funding has been seen for both females and non-physician scientists over from 2008 through 2017.

RESUMEN

The Bermuda Principles for DNA sequence data sharing are an enduring legacy of the Human Genome Project (HGP). They were adopted by the HGP at a strategy meeting in Bermuda in February of 1996 and implemented in formal policies by early 1998, mandating daily release of HGP-funded DNA sequences into the public domain. The idea of daily sharing, we argue, emanated directly from strategies for large, goal-directed molecular biology projects first tested within the "community" of C. elegans researchers, and were introduced and defended for the HGP by the nematode biologists John Sulston and Robert Waterston. In the C. elegans community, and subsequently in the HGP, daily sharing served the pragmatic goals of quality control and project coordination. Yet in the HGP human genome, we also argue, the Bermuda Principles addressed concerns about gene patents impeding scientific advancement, and were aspirational and flexible in implementation and justification. They endured as an archetype for how rapid data sharing could be realized and rationalized, and permitted adaptation to the needs of various scientific communities. Yet in addition to the support of Sulston and Waterston, their adoption also depended on the clout of administrators at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the UK nonprofit charity the Wellcome Trust, which together funded 90% of the HGP human sequencing effort. The other nations wishing to remain in the HGP consortium had to accommodate to the Bermuda Principles, requiring exceptions from incompatible existing or pending data access policies for publicly funded research in Germany, Japan, and France. We begin this story in 1963, with the biologist Sydney Brenner's proposal for a nematode research program at the Laboratory of Molecular Biology (LMB) at the University of Cambridge. We continue through 2003, with the completion of the HGP human reference genome, and conclude with observations about policy and the historiography of molecular biology.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Grant writing is an essential component of research. In an increasingly competitive funding environment, writing successful grants has become an important focus of workshops and websites with each grant proposal component requiring detailed attention. The FUN 2017 Workshop session "Specific Aims: Your Grant in a Sound Bite" was dedicated to provide information and guidance in constructing and composing a Specific Aims document. This workshop drew on the presenters' collective combination of grant experience ranging from successful submissions to serving as grant reviewers. The focus of the session was to provide some key points with regards to the purpose of a Specific Aims document, the typical audience who will read the Specific Aims, and how to construct Specific Aims that catch the attention of reviewers and provide a clear and concise overview of the grant with the goal of attracting funding. The following is a brief summary of this workshop and includes links to additional resources to help construct a Specific Aims document that provides clarity and outlines the impact of proposed research.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Promotion and tenure are important milestones for academic surgical oncologists. The aim of this study was to quantify academic metrics associated with rank in surgical oncologists training the next generation. METHODS: Faculty were identified from accredited surgical oncology fellowships in the United States. Scopus was used to obtain the number of publications/citations and h-index values. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) RePORT website was used to identify funding history. RESULTS: Of the 319 surgeons identified, complete rank information was obtained for 308. The majority of faculty were men (70%) and only 11% of full professors were women. The median h-index values were 7, 17, and 39 for assistant, associate, and full professors, respectively. While 50% of full professors had a history of NIH funding, only 26% had RO1s and 20% had current NIH funding. Using multivariate analysis, years in practice, h-index, and a history of NIH funding were associated with academic rank (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Objective benchmarks, such as the median h-index and NIH funding, provide additional insights for both junior faculty and leadership into the productivity needed to attain promotion to the next academic rank for surgical oncologists.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) library instruction program provides training services to staff, clinicians, and researchers across NIH and several Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) operating divisions. The audience, training needs, and training topics are diverse and constantly changing. The NIH library has developed several new services and class topics to meet the needs of its NIH and HHS communities. Context, strategies, and future directions for the NIH library instruction program are described.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective: To validate the clinical effect of three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc developed by our research team in the evaluation of burn wound area. Methods: A total of 48 burn patients treated in the outpatient department of our unit from January to June 2015, conforming to the study criteria, were enrolled in. For the first 12 patients, one wound on the limbs or torso was selected from each patient. The stability of the system was tested by 3 attending physicians using three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc to measure the area of wounds individually. For the following 36 patients, one wound was selected from each patient, including 12 wounds on limbs, front torso, and side torso, respectively. The area of wounds was measured by the same attending physician using transparency tracing method, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc, respectively. The time for getting information of 36 wounds by three methods was recorded by stopwatch. The stability among the testers was evaluated by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Data were processed with randomized blocks analysis of variance and Bonferroni test. Results: (1) Wound area of patients measured by three physicians using three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (122±95), (121±95), and (123±96) cm(2,) respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference among them ( F=1.55, P>0.05). The ICC among 3 physicians was 0.999. (2) The wound area of limbs of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (84±50), (76±46), and (84±49) cm(2,) respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of limbs of patients measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (P>0.05). The wound area of limbs of patients measured by NIH Image J method was smaller than that measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of front torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (F=0.33, P>0.05). The wound area of side torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (169±88), (150±80), and (169±86) cm(2,) respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of side torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (P>0.05). The wound area of side torso of patients measured by NIH Image J method was smaller than that measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). (3) The time for getting information of wounds of patients by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (77±14), (10±3), and (9±3) s, respectively. The time for getting information of wounds of patients by transparency tracing method was longer than that by NIH Image J method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). The time for getting information of wounds of patients by three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was close to that by NIH Image J method (P>0.05). Conclusions: The three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc is stable and can accurately evaluate the wound area on limbs and torso of burn patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Objective@#To validate the clinical effect of three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc developed by our research team in the evaluation of burn wound area.@*Methods@#A total of 48 burn patients treated in the outpatient department of our unit from January to June 2015, conforming to the study criteria, were enrolled in. For the first 12 patients, one wound on the limbs or torso was selected from each patient. The stability of the system was tested by 3 attending physicians using three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc to measure the area of wounds individually. For the following 36 patients, one wound was selected from each patient, including 12 wounds on limbs, front torso, and side torso, respectively. The area of wounds was measured by the same attending physician using transparency tracing method, National Institutes of Health (NIH) Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc, respectively. The time for getting information of 36 wounds by three methods was recorded by stopwatch. The stability among the testers was evaluated by the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). Data were processed with randomized blocks analysis of variance and Bonferroni test.@*Results@#(1) Wound area of patients measured by three physicians using three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (122±95), (121±95), and (123±96) cm2, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference among them ( F=1.55, P>0.05). The ICC among 3 physicians was 0.999. (2) The wound area of limbs of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (84±50), (76±46), and (84±49) cm2, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of limbs of patients measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (P>0.05). The wound area of limbs of patients measured by NIH Image J method was smaller than that measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of front torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (F=0.33, P>0.05). The wound area of side torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (169±88), (150±80), and (169±86) cm2, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in the wound area of side torso of patients measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (P>0.05). The wound area of side torso of patients measured by NIH Image J method was smaller than that measured by transparency tracing method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). (3) The time for getting information of wounds of patients by transparency tracing method, NIH Image J method, and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was (77±14), (10±3), and (9±3) s, respectively. The time for getting information of wounds of patients by transparency tracing method was longer than that by NIH Image J method and three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc (with P values below 0.05). The time for getting information of wounds of patients by three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc was close to that by NIH Image J method (P>0.05).@*Conclusions@#The three dimensional human body scanning system BurnCalc is stable and can accurately evaluate the wound area on limbs and torso of burn patients.

RESUMEN

Analyses of data and hidden agenda behind repeated failed outcomes of cancer research and therapy, status of American health, safety concerns for HPV vaccines and future research considerations are summarized in this commentary. A closer look at cancer science reveals that highly power structure (system) in medical establishment vs. anti-system and chaos in cancer research ('medical/scientific ponzi schemes') is potent recipe for failed therapeutics that kills patients but generates huge corporate profit. American health status ranks last among other developed nations despite the highest amount that USA invests in healthcare. This is a wake-up call to make sure that the evil part of human being does not prevent the health services that the public deserves. Otherwise, 'it does not matter how many resources you have, if you don't know, or don't want to know, how to use them, they will never be enough'. Answer to cancer and improved public health is possible only by switching the current corruptive and abusive culture of 'who you know' to a culture of 'what you know'. Policy makers and professionals in decision making roles are urged to return to common sense and logics that our Forefathers used to serve the public.

RESUMEN

Alzheimer's disease research has often focused on the molecular brain changes that promote memory loss and other dementia-related cognitive impairments. Many studies, for example, have used positron emission tomography (PET) imaging to measure brain levels of the beta-amyloid protein, a key molecular suspect in Alzheimer's. In recent years, PET scans have become more prominent in clinical settings. Clinicians may use a positive PET scan-that is, a significant presence of beta-amyloid plaques in the brain-to help determine a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Yet, because beta-amyloid PET remains a fairly new diagnostic tool, physicians and patients still have many basic questions about how and why it is used. This article addresses some of those questions. It explains what PET scans actually show, how they are employed in research and clinical trials, and when they should and should not be used to help diagnose Alzheimer's in everyday patients. The article also discusses whether cognitively healthy people should request PET scans to assess their risk for developing dementia. Information in the text will be updated in future years, as diagnostic imaging techniques for Alzheimer's disease continue to evolve.

Asunto(s)