[CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (Chinese version)]

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials

Overwhelming evidence shows the quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is not optimal. Without transparent reporting, readers cannot judge the reliability and validity of trial findings nor extract information for systematic reviews. Recent methodological analyses indicate that inadequate reporting and design are associated with biased estimates of treatment effects. Such systematic error is seriously damaging to RCTs, which are considered the gold standard for evaluating interventions because of their ability to minimise or avoid bias. A group of scientists and editors developed the CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement to improve the quality of reporting of RCTs. It was first published in 1996 and updated in 2001. The statement consists of a checklist and flow diagram that authors can use for reporting an RCT. Many leading medical journals and major international editorial groups have endorsed the CONSORT statement. The statement facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of RCTs. During the 2001 CONSORT revision, it became clear that explanation and elaboration of the principles underlying the CONSORT statement would help investigators and others to write or appraise trial reports. A CONSORT explanation and elaboration article was published in 2001 alongside the 2001 version of the CONSORT statement. After an expert meeting in January 2007, the CONSORT statement has been further revised and is published as the CONSORT 2010 Statement. This update improves the wording and clarity of the previous checklist and incorporates recommendations related to topics that have only recently received recognition, such as selective outcome reporting bias. This explanatory and elaboration document-intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the CONSORT statement-has also been extensively revised. It presents the meaning and rationale for each new and updated checklist item providing examples of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies. Several examples of flow diagrams are included. The CONSORT 2010 Statement, this revised explanatory and elaboration document, and the associated website (www.consort-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of randomised trials.

The role of warning behaviors in threat assessment: an exploration and suggested typology

The concept of warning behaviors offers an additional perspective in threat assessment. Warning behaviors are acts which constitute evidence of increasing or accelerating risk. They are acute, dynamic, and particularly toxic changes in patterns of behavior which may aid in structuring a professional's judgment that an individual of concern now poses a threat - whether the actual target has been identified or not. They require an operational response. A typology of eight warning behaviors for assessing the threat of intended violence is proposed: pathway, fixation, identification, novel aggression, energy burst, leakage, directly communicated threat, and last resort warning behaviors. Previous research on risk factors associated with such warning behaviors is reviewed, and examples of each warning behavior from various intended violence cases are presented, including public figure assassination, adolescent and adult mass murder, corporate celebrity stalking, and both domestic and foreign acts of terrorism. Practical applications and future research into warning behaviors are suggested. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

An unusual splice defect in the mitofusin 2 gene (MFN2) is associated with degenerative axonopathy in Tyrolean Grey cattle

Tyrolean Grey cattle represent a local breed with a population size of approximately 5000 registered cows. In 2003, a previously unknown neurological disorder was recognized in Tyrolean Grey cattle. The clinical signs of the disorder are similar to those of bovine progressive degenerative myeloencephalopathy (weaver syndrome) in Brown Swiss cattle but occur much earlier in life. The neuropathological investigation of an affected calf showed axonal degeneration in the central nervous system (CNS) and femoral nerve. The pedigrees of the affected calves suggested a monogenic autosomal recessive inheritance. We localized the responsible mutation to a 1.9 Mb interval on chromosome 16 by genome-wide association and haplotype mapping. The MFN2 gene located in this interval encodes mitofusin 2, a mitochondrial membrane protein. A heritable human axonal neuropathy, Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease-2A2 (CMT2A2), is caused by MFN2 mutations. Therefore, we considered MFN2 a positional and functional candidate gene and performed mutation analysis in affected and control Tyrolean Grey cattle. We did not find any non-synonymous variants. However, we identified a perfectly associated silent SNP in the coding region of exon 20 of the MFN2 gene. This SNP is located within a putative exonic splice enhancer (ESE) and the variant allele leads to partial retention of the entire intron 19 and a premature stop codon in the aberrant MFN2 transcript. Thus we have identified a highly unusual splicing defect, where an exonic single base exchange leads to the retention of the preceding intron. This splicing defect represents a potential explanation for the observed degenerative axonopathy. Marker assisted selection can now be used to eliminate degenerative axonopathy from Tyrolean Grey cattle.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalizability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies.The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers.This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Hexose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase modulates 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1-dependent metabolism of 7-keto- and 7beta-hydroxy-neurosteroids

BACKGROUND: The role of 11beta-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (11beta-HSD1) in the regulation of energy metabolism and immune system by locally reactivating glucocorticoids has been extensively studied. Experiments determining initial rates of enzyme activity revealed that 11beta-HSD1 can catalyze both the reductase and the dehydrogenase reaction in cell lysates, whereas it predominantly catalyzes the reduction of cortisone to cortisol in intact cells that also express hexose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (H6PDH), which provides cofactor NADPH. Besides its role in glucocorticoid metabolism, there is evidence that 11beta-HSD1 is involved in the metabolism of 7-keto- and 7-hydroxy-steroids; however the impact of H6PDH on this alternative function of 11beta-HSD1 has not been assessed. METHODOLOGY: We investigated the 11beta-HSD1-dependent metabolism of the neurosteroids 7-keto-, 7alpha-hydroxy- and 7beta-hydroxy-dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and 7-keto- and 7beta-hydroxy-pregnenolone, respectively, in the absence or presence of H6PDH in intact cells. 3D-structural modeling was applied to study the binding of ligands in 11beta-HSD1. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We demonstrated that 11beta-HSD1 functions in a reversible way and efficiently catalyzed the interconversion of these 7-keto- and 7-hydroxy-neurosteroids in intact cells. In the presence of H6PDH, 11beta-HSD1 predominantly converted 7-keto-DHEA and 7-ketopregnenolone into their corresponding 7beta-hydroxy metabolites, indicating a role for H6PDH and 11beta-HSD1 in the local generation of 7beta-hydroxy-neurosteroids. 3D-structural modeling offered an explanation for the preferred formation of 7beta-hydroxy-neurosteroids. CONCLUSIONS: Our results from experiments determining the steady state concentrations of glucocorticoids or 7-oxygenated neurosteroids suggested that the equilibrium between cortisone and cortisol and between 7-keto- and 7-hydroxy-neurosteroids is regulated by 11beta-HSD1 and greatly depends on the coexpression with H6PDH. Thus, the impact of H6PDH on 11beta-HSD1 activity has to be considered for understanding both glucocorticoid and neurosteroid action in different tissues.

DHEA induces 11 -HSD2 by acting on CCAAT/enhancer-binding proteins

11beta-Hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase (11beta-HSD) type 1 and type 2 catalyze the interconversion of inactive and active glucocorticoids. Impaired regulation of these enzymes has been associated with obesity, diabetes, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease. Previous studies in animals and humans suggested that dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) has antiglucocorticoid effects, but the underlying mechanisms are unknown. In this study, DHEA treatment markedly increased mRNA expression and activity of 11beta-HSD2 in a rat cortical collecting duct cell line and in kidneys of C57BL/6J mice and Sprague-Dawley rats. DHEA-treated rats tended to have reduced urinary corticosterone to 11-dehydrocorticosterone ratios. It was found that CCAAT/enhancer-binding protein-alpha (C/EBP-alpha) and C/EBP-beta regulated HSD11B2 transcription and that DHEA likely modulated the transcription of 11beta-HSD2 in a phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase/Akt-dependent manner by increasing C/EBP-beta mRNA and protein expression. Moreover, it is shown that C/EBP-alpha and C/EBP-beta differentially regulate the expression of 11beta-HSD1 and 11beta-HSD2. In conclusion, DHEA induces a shift from 11beta-HSD1 to 11beta-HSD2 expression, increasing conversion from active to inactive glucocorticoids. This provides a possible explanation for the antiglucocorticoid effects of DHEA.

[Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration]

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.