3 research outputs found
Melanocortin receptor accessory proteins in adrenal disease and obesity
No full textThis is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.Research on MRAPs is supported by an MRC/Academy of Medical Sciences Clinician Scientist Fellowship to LFC (grant number G0802796)
The melanocortin receptors and their accessory proteins.
No full textThe five melanocortin receptors (MCRs) named MC1R-MC5R have diverse physiological roles encompassing pigmentation, steroidogenesis, energy homeostasis and feeding behavior as well as exocrine function. Since their identification almost 20 years ago much has been learnt about these receptors. As well as interacting with their endogenous ligands the melanocortin peptides, there is now a growing list of important peptides that can modulate the way these receptors signal, acting as agonists, antagonists, and inverse agonists. The discovery of melanocortin 2 receptor accessory proteins as a novel accessory factor to the MCRs provides further insight into the regulation of these important G protein-coupled receptor
Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies
No full textA systematic search of the research literature from 1996 through July 2008 identified more than a thousand empirical studies of online learning. Analysts screened these studies to find those that (a) contrasted an online to a face-to-face condition, (b) measured student learning outcomes, (c) used a rigorous research design, and (d) provided adequate information to calculate an effect size. As a result of this screening, 51 independent effects were identified that could be subjected to meta-analysis. The meta-analysis found that, on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction. The difference between student outcomes for online and face-to-face classes—measured as the difference between treatment and control means, divided by the pooled standard deviation—was larger in those studies contrasting conditions that blended elements of online and face-to-face instruction with conditions taught entirely face-to-face. Analysts noted that these blended conditions often included additional learning time and instructional elements not received by students in control conditions. This finding suggests that the positive effects associated with blended learning should not be attributed to the media, per se. An unexpected finding was the small number of rigorous published studies contrasting online and face-to-face learning conditions for K–12 students. In light of this small corpus, caution is required in generalizing to the K–12 population because the results are derived for the most part from studies in other settings (e.g., medical training, higher education)
