1,721,143 research outputs found

    Safety and efficacy of erythropoietin for the treatment of patients with optic neuritis (TONE): a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled study.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND The human cytokine erythropoietin conveys neuroprotection in animal models but has shown ambiguous results in phase 2 clinical trials in patients with optic neuritis. We assessed the safety and efficacy of erythropoietin in patients with optic neuritis as a clinically isolated syndrome in a multicentre, prospective, randomised clinical trial. METHODS This randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial, conducted at 12 tertiary referral centres in Germany, included participants aged 18-50 years, within 10 days of onset of unilateral optic neuritis, with visual acuity of 0·5 or less, and without a previous diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either 33 000 IU erythropoietin or placebo intravenously for 3 days as an adjunct to high-dose intravenous methylprednisolone (1000 mg per day). Block randomisation was performed by the trial statistician using an SAS code that generated randomly varying block sizes, stratified by study site and distributed using sealed envelopes. All trial participants and all study staff were masked to treatment assignment, except the trial pharmacist. The first primary outcome was atrophy of the peripapillary retinal nerve fibre layer (pRNFL), measured by optic coherence tomography (OCT) as the difference in pRNFL thickness between the affected eye at week 26 and the unaffected eye at baseline. The second primary outcome was low contrast letter acuity at week 26, measured as the 2·5% Sloan chart score of the affected eye. Analysis was performed in the full analysis set of all randomised participants for whom treatment was started and at least one follow-up OCT measurement was available. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of the trial medication. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01962571. FINDINGS 108 participants were enrolled between Nov 25, 2014, and Oct 9, 2017, of whom 55 were assigned to erythropoietin and 53 to placebo. Five patients were excluded from the primary analysis due to not receiving the allocated medication, withdrawn consent, revised diagnosis, or loss to follow-up, yielding a full analysis set of 52 patients in the erythropoietin group and 51 in the placebo group. Mean pRNFL atrophy was 15·93 μm (SD 14·91) in the erythropoietin group and 14·65 μm (15·60) in the placebo group (adjusted mean treatment difference 1·02 μm; 95% CI -5·51 to 7·55; p=0·76). Mean low contrast letter acuity scores were 49·60 (21·31) in the erythropoietin group and 49·06 (21·93) in the placebo group (adjusted mean treatment difference -4·03; -13·06 to 5·01). Adverse events occurred in 43 (81%) participants in the erythropoietin group and in 42 (81%) in the placebo group. The most common adverse event was headache, occuring in 15 (28%) patients in the erythropoietin group and 13 (25%) patients in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in eight (15%) participants in the erythropoietin and in four (8%) in the placebo group. One patient (2%) in the erythropoietin group developed a venous sinus thrombosis, which was treated with anticoagulants and resolved without sequelae. INTERPRETATION Erythropoietin as an adjunct to corticosteroids conveyed neither functional nor structural neuroprotection in the visual pathways after optic neuritis. Future research could focus on modified erythropoietin administration, assess its efficacy independent of corticosteroids, and investigate whether it affects the conversion of optic neuritis to multiple sclerosis. FUNDING German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed

    Variations on the Author

    Full text link
    “Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    Full text link
    We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis

    Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts

    Full text link
    We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more sophisticated methods

    Author Index

    No full text
    Nao informado

    koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist

    No full text
    We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
    corecore