Localising the auditory N1m with event-related beamformers:localisation accuracy following bilateral and unilateral stimulation

The auditory evoked N1m-P2m response complex presents a challenging case for MEG source-modelling, because symmetrical, phase-locked activity occurs in the hemispheres both contralateral and ipsilateral to stimulation. Beamformer methods, in particular, can be susceptible to localisation bias and spurious sources under these conditions. This study explored the accuracy and efficiency of event-related beamformer source models for auditory MEG data under typical experimental conditions: monaural and diotic stimulation; and whole-head beamformer analysis compared to a half-head analysis using only sensors from the hemisphere contralateral to stimulation. Event-related beamformer localisations were also compared with more traditional single-dipole models. At the group level, the event-related beamformer performed equally well as the single-dipole models in terms of accuracy for both the N1m and the P2m, and in terms of efficiency (number of successful source models) for the N1m. The results yielded by the half-head analysis did not differ significantly from those produced by the traditional whole-head analysis. Any localisation bias caused by the presence of correlated sources is minimal in the context of the inter-individual variability in source localisations. In conclusion, event-related beamformers provide a useful alternative to equivalent-current dipole models in localisation of auditory evoked responses.

A cross-sectional survey of 5-year-old children with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate:the Cleft Care UK study. Part 1: background and methodology

OBJECTIVES: We describe the methodology for a major study investigating the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom (UK) 15 years after an initial survey, detailed in the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) report in 1998, had informed government recommendations on centralization. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: This is a UK multicentre cross-sectional study of 5-year-olds born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Children born between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2007 were seen in cleft centre audit clinics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consent was obtained for the collection of routine clinical measures (speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health, psychosocial factors) and anthropometric measures (height, weight, head circumference). The methodology for each clinical measure followed those of the earlier survey as closely as possible. RESULTS: We identified 359 eligible children and recruited 268 (74.7%) to the study. Eleven separate records for each child were collected at the audit clinics. In total, 2666 (90.4%) were collected from a potential 2948 records. The response rates for the self-reported questionnaires, completed at home, were 52.6% for the Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire and 52.2% for the Satisfaction with Service Questionnaire. CONCLUSIONS: Response rates and measures were similar to those achieved in the previous survey. There are practical, administrative and methodological challenges in repeating cross-sectional surveys 15 years apart and producing comparable data.

Centralization of cleft care in the UK. Part 6:a tale of two studies

OBJECTIVES: We summarize and critique the methodology and outcomes from a substantial study which has investigated the impact of reconfigured cleft care in the United Kingdom (UK) 15 years after the UK government started to implement the centralization of cleft care in response to an earlier survey in 1998, the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG). SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: A UK multicentre cross-sectional study of 5-year-olds born with non-syndromic unilateral cleft lip and palate. Data were collected from children born in the UK with a unilateral cleft lip and palate between 1 April 2005 and 31 March 2007. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We discuss and contextualize the outcomes from speech recordings, hearing, photographs, models, oral health and psychosocial factors in the current study. We refer to the earlier survey and other relevant studies. RESULTS: We present arguments for centralization of cleft care in healthcare systems, and we evidence this with improvements seen over a period of 15 years in the UK. We also make recommendations on how future audit and research may configure. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for children with a unilateral cleft lip and palate have improved after the introduction of a centralized multidisciplinary service, and other countries may benefit from this model. Predictors of early outcomes are still needed, and repeated cross-sectional studies, larger longitudinal studies and adequately powered trials are required to create a research-led evidence-based (centralized) service.