STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology--Molecular Epidemiology STROBE-ME: an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology -Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and the body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrenghtening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE Statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology--Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating interactions between external and / or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing nine existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME): an extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as the STrengthening Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology -Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE statement implementing nine existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology: Molecular Epidemiology STROBE-ME. An extension of the STROBE statement

Advances in laboratory techniques have led to a rapidly increasing use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies. Biomarkers of internal dose, early biological change, susceptibility, and clinical outcomes are used as proxies for investigating the interactions between external and/or endogenous agents and the body components or processes. The need for improved reporting of scientific research led to influential statements of recommendations such as STrengthening Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement. The STROBE initiative established in 2004 aimed to provide guidance on how to report observational research. Its guidelines provide a user-friendly checklist of 22 items to be reported in epidemiological studies, with items specific to the three main study designs: cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies. The present STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology - Molecular Epidemiology (STROBE-ME) initiative builds on the STROBE Statement implementing 9 existing items of STROBE and providing 17 additional items to the 22 items of STROBE checklist. The additions relate to the use of biomarkers in epidemiological studies, concerning collection, handling and storage of biological samples; laboratory methods, validity and reliability of biomarkers; specificities of study design; and ethical considerations. The STROBE-ME recommendations are intended to complement the STROBE recommendations.

Strengthening the Reporting of Molecular Epidemiology for Infectious Diseases (STROME-ID): an extension of the STROBE statement

Molecular data are now widely used in epidemiological studies to investigate the transmission, distribution, biology, and diversity of pathogens. Our objective was to establish recommendations to support good scientific reporting of molecular epidemiological studies to encourage authors to consider specific threats to valid inference. The statement Strengthening the Reporting of Molecular Epidemiology for Infectious Diseases (STROME-ID) builds upon the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative. The STROME-ID statement was developed by a working group of epidemiologists, statisticians, bioinformaticians, virologists, and microbiologists with expertise in control of infection and communicable diseases. The statement focuses on issues relating to the reporting of epidemiological studies of infectious diseases using molecular data that were not addressed by STROBE. STROME-ID addresses terminology, measures of genetic diversity within pathogen populations, laboratory methods, sample collection, use of molecular markers, molecular clocks, timeframe, multiple-strain infections, non-independence of infectious-disease data, missing data, ascertainment bias, consistency between molecular and epidemiological data, and ethical considerations with respect to infectious-disease research. In total, 20 items were added to the 22 item STROBE checklist. When used, the STROME-ID recommendations should advance the quality and transparency of scientific reporting, with clear benefits for evidence reviews and health-policy decision making.

ERS task force statement: diagnosis and treatment of primary spontaneous pneumothorax.

Primary spontaneous pneumothorax (PSP) affects young healthy people with a significant recurrence rate. Recent advances in treatment have been variably implemented in clinical practice. This statement reviews the latest developments and concepts to improve clinical management and stimulate further research.The European Respiratory Society's Scientific Committee established a multidisciplinary team of pulmonologists and surgeons to produce a comprehensive review of available scientific evidence.Smoking remains the main risk factor of PSP. Routine smoking cessation is advised. More prospective data are required to better define the PSP population and incidence of recurrence. In first episodes of PSP, treatment approach is driven by symptoms rather than PSP size. The role of bullae rupture as the cause of air leakage remains unclear, implying that any treatment of PSP recurrence includes pleurodesis. Talc poudrage pleurodesis by thoracoscopy is safe, provided calibrated talc is available. Video-assisted thoracic surgery is preferred to thoracotomy as a surgical approach.In first episodes of PSP, aspiration is required only in symptomatic patients. After a persistent or recurrent PSP, definitive treatment including pleurodesis is undertaken. Future randomised controlled trials comparing different strategies are required.

Cardiovascular-renal axis disorders in the domestic dog and cat: a veterinary consensus statement.

OBJECTIVES There is a growing understanding of the complexity of interplay between renal and cardiovascular systems in both health and disease. The medical profession has adopted the term "cardiorenal syndrome" (CRS) to describe the pathophysiological relationship between the kidney and heart in disease. CRS has yet to be formally defined and described by the veterinary profession and its existence and importance in dogs and cats warrant investigation. The CRS Consensus Group, comprising nine veterinary cardiologists and seven nephrologists from Europe and North America, sought to achieve consensus around the definition, pathophysiology, diagnosis and management of dogs and cats with "cardiovascular-renal disorders" (CvRD). To this end, the Delphi formal methodology for defining/building consensus and defining guidelines was utilised. METHODS Following a literature review, 13 candidate statements regarding CvRD in dogs and cats were tested for consensus, using a modified Delphi method. As a new area of interest, well-designed studies, specific to CRS/CvRD, are lacking, particularly in dogs and cats. Hence, while scientific justification of all the recommendations was sought and used when available, recommendations were largely reliant on theory, expert opinion, small clinical studies and extrapolation from data derived from other species. RESULTS Of the 13 statements, 11 achieved consensus and 2 did not. The modified Delphi approach worked well to achieve consensus in an objective manner and to develop initial guidelines for CvRD. DISCUSSION The resultant manuscript describes consensus statements for the definition, classification, diagnosis and management strategies for veterinary patients with CvRD, with an emphasis on the pathological interplay between the two organ systems. By formulating consensus statements regarding CvRD in veterinary medicine, the authors hope to stimulate interest in and advancement of the understanding and management of CvRD in dogs and cats. The use of a formalised method for consensus and guideline development should be considered for other topics in veterinary medicine.

EACTS expert consensus statement for surgical management of pleural empyema

Pleural infection is a frequent clinical condition. Prompt treatment has been shown to reduce hospital costs, morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in treatment have been variably implemented in clinical practice. This statement reviews the latest developments and concepts to improve clinical management and stimulate further research. The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) Thoracic Domain and the EACTS Pleural Diseases Working Group established a team of thoracic surgeons to produce a comprehensive review of available scientific evidence with the aim to cover all aspects of surgical practice related to its treatment, in particular focusing on: surgical treatment of empyema in adults; surgical treatment of empyema in children; and surgical treatment of post-pneumonectomy empyema (PPE). In the management of Stage 1 empyema, prompt pleural space chest tube drainage is required. In patients with Stage 2 or 3 empyema who are fit enough to undergo an operative procedure, there is a demonstrated benefit of surgical debridement or decortication [possibly by video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS)] over tube thoracostomy alone in terms of treatment success and reduction in hospital stay. In children, a primary operative approach is an effective management strategy, associated with a lower mortality rate and a reduction of tube thoracostomy duration, length of antibiotic therapy, reintervention rate and hospital stay. Intrapleural fibrinolytic therapy is a reasonable alternative to primary operative management. Uncomplicated PPE [without bronchopleural fistula (BPF)] can be effectively managed with minimally invasive techniques, including fenestration, pleural space irrigation and VATS debridement. PPE associated with BPF can be effectively managed with individualized open surgical techniques, including direct repair, myoplastic and thoracoplastic techniques. Intrathoracic vacuum-assisted closure may be considered as an adjunct to the standard treatment. The current literature cements the role of VATS in the management of pleural empyema, even if the choice of surgical approach relies on the individual surgeon's preference.

Inflammatory Airway Disease of Horses-Revised Consensus Statement

The purpose of this manuscript is to revise and update the previous consensus statement on inflammatory airway disease (IAD) in horses. Since 2007, a large number of scientific articles have been published on the topic and these new findings have led to a significant evolution of our understanding of IAD.

Report of the administrative chairman of the Honorary Advisory Council for Scientific and Industrial Research of Canada.

Report year ends Mar. 31; report for 1918 covers activities since the establishment of the council June 1, 1916.

A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive : being a connected view of the principles of evidence, and methods of scientific investigation /

Printer's statement on verso of title page: London: Harrison and Co., Printers, St. Martin's Lane.

Termo do 1º Consenso em Disfunção Temporomandibular e Dor Orofacial

O Termo do 1º Consenso em Disfunção Temporomandibular e Dor Orofacial* foi criado com o propósito de substituir divergências por evidência científica dentro dessa especialidade da Odontologia. O documento oferece informações claras e fundamentadas para orientar o cirurgião-dentista e demais profissionais de saúde sobre os cuidados demandados pelo paciente, tanto no processo de diagnóstico diferencial quanto na fase de aplicação das terapias de controle da dor e disfunção. O Termo foi aprovado no mês de janeiro de 2010 em reunião realizada durante o Congresso Internacional de Odontologia do Estado de São Paulo e converge o pensamento dos profissionais mais conceituados do Brasil na especialidade Disfunção Temporomandibular e Dor Orofacial.

Innovation and entrepreneurship in scientific research

This research wants to lay emphasis on topics that historicize and rescue concepts, in addition, shows the relation between innovation and socioeconomic development resulted; reviews the legal framework to stimulate new innovation into Brazilian society; considers the definition and the entrepreneur university's new paradigm; and finally, this research highlights the importance of teaching entrepreneur at universities, with straight society benefits. The results suggests that innovation is directly enrolled with a successful development of certain society, as well, is actually the biggest business competitive differential into corporative universe. In one way of getting results of social advancement to inform entrepreneur research practice, it appears that entrepreneurs concepts, necessarily, must be incorporated into the array of Science/Technology/Innovation for the effective development of supported formula. This article develops a thought about actual scientific researches paradigm, the way that is built on today, and if it's sufficient to effectively get the results that society expects from main bodies to create human resource and researches, especially those with innovation aspects, at Brazilian economic improvement.

Pitfalls of artificial grouping and stratification of scientific journals based on their Impact Factor: a case study in Brazilian Zoology

The present contribution explores the impact of the QUALIS metric system for academic evaluation implemented by CAPES (Coordination for the Development of Personnel in Higher Education) upon Brazilian Zoological research. The QUALIS system is based on the grouping and ranking of scientific journals according to their Impact Factor (IF). We examined two main points implied by this system, namely: 1) its reliability as a guideline for authors; 2) if Zoology possesses the same publication profile as Botany and Oceanography, three fields of knowledge grouped by CAPES under the subarea "BOZ" for purposes of evaluation. Additionally, we tested CAPES' recent suggestion that the area of Ecology would represent a fourth field of research compatible with the former three. Our results indicate that this system of classification is inappropriate as a guideline for publication improvement, with approximately one third of the journals changing their strata between years. We also demonstrate that the citation profile of Zoology is distinct from those of Botany and Oceanography. Finally, we show that Ecology shows an IF that is significantly different from those of Botany, Oceanography, and Zoology, and that grouping these fields together would be particularly detrimental to Zoology. We conclude that the use of only one parameter of analysis for the stratification of journals, i.e., the Impact Factor calculated for a comparatively small number of journals, fails to evaluate with accuracy the pattern of publication present in Zoology, Botany, and Oceanography. While such simplified procedure might appeals to our sense of objectivity, it dismisses any real attempt to evaluate with clarity the merit embedded in at least three very distinct aspects of scientific practice, namely: productivity, quality, and specificity.