Application of growing self-organizing map to distinguish between finger tapping and non tapping from brain images

Growing self-organizing map (GSOM) has been characterized as a knowledge discovery visualization application which outshines the traditional self-organizing map (SOM) due to its dynamic structure in which nodes can grow based on the input data. GSOM is utilized as a visualization tool in this paper to cluster fMRI finger tapping and non- tapping data, demonstrating the visualization capability to distinguish between tapping or non-tapping. A unique feature of GSOM is a parameter called the spread factor whose functionality is to control the spread of the GSOM map. By setting different levels of spread factor, different granularities of region of interests within tapping or non-tapping images can be visualized and analyzed. Euclidean distance based similarity calculation is used to quantify the visualized difference between tapping and non tapping images. Once the differences are identified, the spread factor is used to generate a more detailed view of those regions to provide a better visualization of the brain regions.

Biomarkers in bipolar disorder : a positional paper from the International Society for Bipolar Disorders Biomarkers Task Force

Although the etiology of bipolar disorder remains uncertain, multiple studies examining neuroimaging, peripheral markers and genetics have provided important insights into the pathophysiologic processes underlying bipolar disorder. Neuroimaging studies have consistently demonstrated loss of gray matter, as well as altered activation of subcortical, anterior temporal and ventral prefrontal regions in response to emotional stimuli in bipolar disorder. Genetics studies have identified several potential candidate genes associated with increased risk for developing bipolar disorder that involve circadian rhythm, neuronal development and calcium metabolism. Notably, several groups have found decreased levels of neurotrophic factors and increased pro-inflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress markers. Together these findings provide the background for the identification of potential biomarkers for vulnerability, disease expression and to help understand the course of illness and treatment response. In other areas of medicine, validated biomarkers now inform clinical decision-making. Although the findings reviewed herein hold promise, further research involving large collaborative studies is needed to validate these potential biomarkers prior to employing them for clinical purposes. Therefore, in this positional paper from the ISBD-BIONET (biomarkers network from the International Society for Bipolar Disorders), we will discuss our view of biomarkers for these three areas: neuroimaging, peripheral measurements and genetics; and conclude the paper with our position for the next steps in the search for biomarkers for bipolar disorder.

The international society for bipolar disorders (ISBD) task force report on antidepressant use in bipolar diosrders

Objective:
The risk-benefit profile of antidepressant medications in bipolar disorder is controversial. When conclusive evidence is lacking, expert consensus can guide treatment decisions. The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) convened a task force to seek consensus recommendations on the use of antidepressants in bipolar disorders.

Method:  
An expert task force iteratively developed consensus through serial consensus-based revisions using the Delphi method. Initial survey items were based on systematic review of the literature. Subsequent surveys included new or reworded items and items that needed to be rerated. This process resulted in the final ISBD Task Force clinical recommendations on antidepressant use in bipolar disorder.

Results:  
There is striking incongruity between the wide use of and the weak evidence base for the efficacy and safety of antidepressant drugs in bipolar disorder. Few well-designed, long-term trials of prophylactic benefits have been conducted, and there is insufficient evidence for treatment benefits with antidepressants combined with mood stabilizers. A major concern is the risk for mood switch to hypomania, mania, and mixed states. Integrating the evidence and the experience of the task force members, a consensus was reached on 12 statements on the use of antidepressants in bipolar disorder.

Conclusions:
Because of limited data, the task force could not make broad statements endorsing antidepressant use but acknowledged that individual bipolar patients may benefit from antidepressants. Regarding safety, serotonin reuptake inhibitors and bupropion may have lower rates of manic switch than tricyclic and tetracyclic antidepressants and norepinephrine-serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The frequency and severity of antidepressant-associated mood elevations appear to be greater in bipolar I than bipolar II disorder. Hence, in bipolar I patients antidepressants should be prescribed only as an adjunct to mood-stabilizing medications.

Sharpening the focus of force field analysis

The purpose is to explore the inherent complexity of Kurt Lewin's force field theory through applied analysis of organizational case examples and related methods. The methodology applies a range of tools from the consultancy research domain, including force field analysis of complex organizational scenarios, and applies bricolage and corroboration to emerging discoveries from semi-structured interviews, author experience, critical reflection and literature survey. Findings are that linear representation of internal and external forces in organizational applications of field theory does not fully explain the paradox of inverse vectors in the forces of change. The force field is not an impermeable thing; instead, it morphs. Examples of the inverse principle and its effects are detailed and extended in this analysis. The implications of the research are that force field analysis and related change processes promoted in organizational change literature run the risk of missing key complexities. The inclusion of the inverse principle can provide enhanced, holistic understanding of the prevailing forces for change. The augmentation of the early work of Kurt Lewin, and extension of previous analyses of his legacy in the Journal of Change Management and elsewhere, provide, in this article, change analysis insights that align well with current organizational environments.