Translation from research to applications

The article summarizes the collective views expressed at the fourth session of the workshop Tissue Engineering-the Next Generation, which was devoted to the translation of results of tissue engineering research into applications. Ernst Hunziker described the paradigm of a dual translational approach, and argued that tissue engineering should be guided by the dimensions and physiological setting of the bodily compartment to be repaired. Myron Spector discussed collagen-glycosaminoglycan (GAG) scaffolds for musculoskeletal tissue engineering. Jeanette Libera focused on the biological and clinical aspects of cartilage tissue engineering, and described a completely autologous procedure for engineering cartilage using the patient's own chondrocytes and blood serum. Arthur Gertzman reviewed the applications of allograft tissues in orthopedic surgery, and outlined the potential of allograft tissues as models for biological and medical studies. Savio Woo discussed a list of functional tissue engineering approaches designed to restore the biochemical and biomechanical properties of injured ligaments and tendons to be closer to that of the normal tissues. Specific examples of using biological scaffolds that have chemoattractants as well as growth factors with unique contact guidance properties to improve their healing process were shown. Anthony Ratcliffe discussed the translation of the results of research into products that are profitable and meet regulatory requirements. Michael Lysaght challenged the proposition that commercial and clinical failures of early tissue engineering products demonstrate a need for more focus on basic research. Arthur Coury described the evolution of tissue engineering products based on the example of Genzyme, and how various definitions of success and failure can affect perceptions and policies relative to the status and advancement of the field of tissue engineering.

Policy Change in Comparative Contexts: Applying the Advocacy Coalition Framework Outside of Western Europe and North America

The advocacy coalition framework (ACF) is one of the most frequently applied theories of the policy process. Most applications have been in Western Europe and North America. This article provides an overview of the ACF, summarizes existing applications outside of Western Europe and North America, and introduces the special issue that features applications of the ACF in the Philippines, China, India, and Kenya. This article concludes with an argument for the continued application of the ACF outside of Western Europe and North America and a research agenda for overcoming challenges in using the ACF in comparative public policy research.

Does published orthodontic research account for clustering effects during statistical data analysis?

In orthodontics, multiple site observations within patients or multiple observations collected at consecutive time points are often encountered. Clustered designs require larger sample sizes compared to individual randomized trials and special statistical analyses that account for the fact that observations within clusters are correlated. It is the purpose of this study to assess to what degree clustering effects are considered during design and data analysis in the three major orthodontic journals. The contents of the most recent 24 issues of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJODO), Angle Orthodontist (AO), and European Journal of Orthodontics (EJO) from December 2010 backwards were hand searched. Articles with clustering effects and whether the authors accounted for clustering effects were identified. Additionally, information was collected on: involvement of a statistician, single or multicenter study, number of authors in the publication, geographical area, and statistical significance. From the 1584 articles, after exclusions, 1062 were assessed for clustering effects from which 250 (23.5 per cent) were considered to have clustering effects in the design (kappa = 0.92, 95 per cent CI: 0.67-0.99 for inter rater agreement). From the studies with clustering effects only, 63 (25.20 per cent) had indicated accounting for clustering effects. There was evidence that the studies published in the AO have higher odds of accounting for clustering effects [AO versus AJODO: odds ratio (OR) = 2.17, 95 per cent confidence interval (CI): 1.06-4.43, P = 0.03; EJO versus AJODO: OR = 1.90, 95 per cent CI: 0.84-4.24, non-significant; and EJO versus AO: OR = 1.15, 95 per cent CI: 0.57-2.33, non-significant). The results of this study indicate that only about a quarter of the studies with clustering effects account for this in statistical data analysis.

Meta-analysis in medical research: potentials and limitations

Meta-analysis, the statistical combination of results from several studies to produce a single estimate of a treatment effect or size of an association, continues to attract controversy. We illustrate and discuss the promises and limitations of meta-analysis. Meta-analysis of clinical trials can prevent delays in the introduction of effective treatments or lead to the timely identification of adverse effects. However, meta-analyses are liable to numerous biases, both at the level of the individual study and the selection of studies for inclusion in meta-analysis. The biases and confounding factors that threaten the validity of individual studies will also affect meta-analyses of observational studies. We argue that meta-analyses should only be performed within the framework of systematic reviews that have been prepared using methods that minimize bias and address the combinability of studies.