Embedding stakeholder preferences in setting priorities for health research: Using a discrete choice experiment to develop a multi-criteria tool for evaluating research proposals.

We determined weights for a multi-criteria tool for assessing the relative merits of clinical-trial research proposals, and investigated whether the weights vary across relevant stakeholder groups. A cross-sectional, adaptive discrete choice experiment using 1000minds online software was administered to consumers, researchers and funders affiliated with the Australian Clinical Trials Alliance (ACTA). We identified weights for four criteria-Appropriateness, Significance, Relevance, Feasibility-and their levels, representing their relative importance, so that research proposals can be scored between 0% (nil or very low merit) and 100% (very high merit). From 220 complete survey responses, the most important criterion was Appropriateness (adjusted for differences between stakeholder groups, mean weight 28.9%) and the least important was Feasibility (adjusted mean weight 19.5%). Consumers tended to weight Relevance more highly (2.7% points difference) and Feasibility less highly (3.1% points difference) than researchers. The research or grant writing experience of researchers or consumers was not associated with the weights. A multi-criteria tool for evaluating research proposals that reflects stakeholders' preferences was created. The tool can be used to assess the relative merits of clinical trial research proposals and rank them, to help identify the best proposals for funding.

Activities supporting the growth of Clinical Trial Networks in Australia.

Clinical Trial Networks in which trialists work collaboratively enable multi-site, large-scale, high-quality clinical trials to be efficiently run. Although the benefits of Clinical Trial Networks are largely known, establishing a Clinical Trial Network can be complex. There are many factors for clinicians and researchers to consider, and there is currently a paucity of information on how to form a Clinical Trial Network. This article provides a suggested roadmap on how to establish a Clinical Trial Network. The Australian Clinical Trials Alliance (ACTA) is the peak body for Clinical Trial Networks, Coordinating Centres and Registries in Australia, and has produced several resources to support the effective and efficient running of clinical trials. This guide has come about through discussions with members of the ACTA Clinical Trial Network Sector Expansion Reference Group consisting of clinical trialists, clinicians, researchers, and consumers.

Non-symbolic magnitudes are represented spatially: Evidence from a non-symbolic SNARC task.

A core proposition in numerical cognition is numbers are represented spatially. Evidence for this proposition comes from the "spatial numerical association of response codes" effect (SNARC) in which faster responses are made by the left/right hand judging whether one of a pair of Arabic digits is smaller/larger than the other. Less is known if a similar SNARC effect exists for non-symbolic magnitudes; and research that has been conducted used stimuli which could be translated into symbolic terms. To overcome this limitation, we employed a referent-to-target judgment paradigm in which a referent dot array (n = 30 dots) was follow by a second array of dots (e.g., n = 45 or 15 dots)-participants judged if the second array contained fewer or more dots than the referent array. Dot arrays with fewer dots were judged more quickly with the left hand compared to the right hand (i.e., a SNARC effect). Not all participants demonstrated a SNARC effect, however. Neither visuospatial working memory nor math ability was associated with the presence/absence of a non-symbolic SNARC effect. Implications of the non-symbolic SNARC effect for accounts of numerical cognition are discussed.

An acute, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study of 320 mg and 640 mg doses of a special extract of Bacopa monnieri (CDRI 08) on sustained cognitive performance.

Standardized extracts of the traditional Ayurvedic medicine Bacopa monnieri (BM) (Brahmi) have been recently shown to have cognitive enhancing effects in chronic administration studies. Pre-clinical work has also identified a number of acute anxiolytic, nootropic, and cardiovascular effects of BM. There has, however, been little research on the acute effects of BM on cognitive function. The current study aimed to assess the acute effects of a specific extract of BM (KeenMind®-CDRI 08) in a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in normal healthy participants who completed a cognitively demanding series of tests. Twenty-four healthy volunteers completed six repetitions of the Cognitive Demand Battery (CDB) after consuming a placebo, 320 mg BM or 640 mg of BM in a cross-over design and provided cardiovascular and mood assessments before and after treatment. Change from baseline scores indicated that the 320 mg dose of BM improved performance at the first, second, and fourth repetition post-dosing on the CDB, and the treatments had no effect upon cardiovascular activity or in attenuating task-induced ratings of stress and fatigue. It was concluded that assessment of an earlier pharmacological window and use of less memory-specific cognitive tests together with more temporally sensitive measures of brain activity may improve our understanding of the acute neurocognitive properties of BM.