5 resultados para Surrogate impact testing
em DigitalCommons@The Texas Medical Center
Resumo:
Introduction: First Trimester Screening (FTS) combines maternal age with fetal nuchal translucency (NT) and maternal analytes to identify pregnancies at an increased risk for Down syndrome and trisomy 18. Though the accuracy of this screening is high, it cannot replace the conclusive accuracy of prenatal diagnostic testing (PDT). Since FTS has been available, a decrease in the number of women who pursue PDT has been observed. This study sought to determine if there has been a significant change in the amount of PDT performed in our clinics, if the type of FTS result affects the patient’s decision regarding PDT, and what the patient’s intentions are regarding PDT. Material and Methods: A database review was performed for the two years prior and the two years after the January 2007 American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) guidelines regarding FTS were issued. We compared the number of women who were AMA and the number of women who were AMA and had PDT between those time periods. We also determined the number of positive and negative FTS results, and determined how many of those patients had PDT. Finally, we surveyed our patients and referring physicians to determine: what the patient understands about FTS, what the patient’s intentions are regarding FTS, and how physicians present the option of FTS to their patients. Results: We determined that there was a 19.6% decrease in the amount of PDT performed when we compared the two time periods at our three specified clinics. Many of our patients were against having PDT prior to their genetic counseling session, but after they received genetic counseling, 76% of our population became open to the possibility of having PDT. Conclusion: Similar to previous studies, we determined that there has been a significant decrease in the number of PDT procedures performed at our clinics, which coincides with the release of the January 2007 ACOG statement regarding FTS. While our patients regarded FTS as a way to gain early information about their pregnancy in a non-invasive manner, they also stated they would use their results as a way to aid in their decision regarding PDT.
Resumo:
Background: As scholars who prepare future school leaders to be innovative instructional leaders for their learning communities, we are on the verge of a curriculum design revolution. The application of brain research findings promotes educational reform efforts to systemically change the way in which children experience school. However, most educators, school leaders, board members, and policy makers are ill prepared to reconsider the implications for assessment, pedagogy, school climate, daily schedules, and use of technology. This qualitative study asked future school leaders to reconsider how school leadership preparedness programs prepared them to become instructional leaders for the 21st century. The findings from this study will enhance the field of school leadership, challenging the current emphasis placed on standardized testing, traditional school calendars, assessments, monocultural instructional methods, and meeting the needs of diverse learning communities. [See PDF for complete abstract]
Resumo:
Purpose. No Child Left Behind aimed to "improve the academic achievement of the disadvantaged." The primary research question considered how academic achievement of those from economic disadvantage compared to those not from disadvantage? ^ Economically disadvantaged students can potentially have added academic disadvantage. Research shows low academic achievement can potentially result in drug abuse, youth violence, and teen pregnancy. ^ Methods. To compare the student populations, measures included TAKS results and academic indicator data collected by the Texas Education Agency. ^ Results. T-test analyses showed a significant difference between the economically and non-economically disadvantaged student populations in meeting the TAKS passing standard, graduation, and preparation for higher education.^ Conclusions. The achievement gap between students remained as indicated by the Texas testing program. More research and time are needed to observe if the desired impact on those from economic disadvantage will be reflected by academic achievement data.^
Resumo:
This study aimed to develop and validate The Cancer Family Impact Scale (CFIS), an instrument for use in studies investigating relationships among family factors and colorectal cancer (CRC) screening when family history is a risk factor. We used existing data to develop the measure from 1,285 participants (637 families) across the United States who were in the Johns Hopkins Colon Cancer Genetic Testing study. Participants were 94% white with an average age of 50.1 years, and 60% were women. None had a personal CRC history, and eighty percent had 1 FDR with CRC and 20% had more than one FDR with CRC. The study had three aims: (1) to identify the latent factors underlying the CFIS via exploratory factor analysis (EFA); (2) to confirm the findings of the EFA via confirmatory factor analysis (CFA); and (3) to assess the reliability of the scale via Cronbach's alpha. Exploratory analyses were performed on a split half of the sample, and the final model was confirmed on the other half. The EFA suggested the CFIS was an 18-item measure with 5 latent constructs: (1) NEGATIVE: negative effects of cancer on the family; (2) POSITIVE: positive effects of cancer on the family; (3) COMMUNICATE: how families communicate about cancer; (4) FLOW: how information about cancer is conveyed in families; and (5) NORM: how individuals react to family norms about cancer. CFA on the holdout sample showed the CFIS to have a reasonably good fit (Chi-square = 389.977, df = 122, RMSEA= 0.058 (.052-.065), CFI=.902, TLI=.877, GF1=.939). The overall reliability of the scale was α=0.65. The reliability of the subscales was: (1) NEGATIVE α = 0.682; (2) POSITIVE α = 0.686; (3) COMMUNICATE α = 0.723; (4) FLOW α = 0.467; and (5) NORM α = 0.732. ^ We concluded the CFIS to be a good measure with most fit levels over 0.90. The CFIS could be used to compare theoretically driven hypotheses about the pathways through which family factors could influence health behavior among unaffected individuals at risk due to family history, and also aid in the development and evaluation of cancer prevention interventions including a family component. ^
Resumo:
The American Thyroid Association recently classified all MEN2A-associated codons into increasing risk levels A-C and stated that some patients may delay prophylactic thyroidectomy if certain criteria are met. One criterion is a less aggressive family history of MTC but whether families with the same mutated codon have variable MTC aggressiveness is not well described. We developed several novel measures of MTC aggressiveness and compared families with the same mutated codon to determine if there is significant inter-familial variability. Pedigrees of families with MEN2A were reviewed for codon mutated and proportion of RET mutation carriers with MTC. Individuals with MTC were classified as having local or distant MTC and whether they had progressive MTC. MTC status and age were assessed at diagnosis and most advanced MTC stage. For those without MTC, age was recorded at prophylactic thyroidectomy or last follow-up if the patient did not have a thyroidectomy. For each pedigree, the mean age of members without MTC, with MTC, and the proportion of RET mutation carriers with local or distant and progressive MTC were calculated. We assessed differences in these variables using ANOVA and the Fisher’s exact test. Sufficient data for analysis were available for families with mutated codons 609 (92 patients from 13 families), 618 (41 patients from 7 families), and 634 (152 patients from 13 families). The only significant differences found were the mean age of patients without MTC between families with codon 609 and 618 mutations even after accounting for prophylactic thyroidectomy (p=0.006 and 0.001, respectively), and in the mean age of MTC diagnosis between families with codon 618 and 634 mutations even after accounting for symptomatic presentation (p=0.023 and 0.014, respectively). However, these differences may be explained by generational differences in ascertainment of RET carriers and the availability of genetic testing when the proband initially presented.