Supporting the Biomedical Science UG Project Research Journey Through Staff-Student Partnerships.

Introduction: Developing research skills enhances graduate attributes and student employability. The UG research project is coined the pedagogy of the 21st century but the diversity of supervisory styles is a source of student perceived inequality of experience. The goal of this study was to provide structure and support to undergraduate (UG) biomedical science research students and supervisors by co-creating research informed resources that are accessible, engaging and student centred. We asked 1) How do UG students experience research supervision? 2) What approaches do supervisors use to support UG project students? 3) How do students as partners benefit from being involved in pedagogical research? Materials and Methods: In Stage One, 3 UG student research partners co-developed questionnaires and followed these up with semi-structured interviews. Fifty two UG project students took part in an interactive poll and 14 supervisors answered a questionnaire. Seven students and 4 supervisors were interviewed. These were analysed by thematic analysis. In Stage Two, the questions were asked of UG project students (n = 79) via an interactive poll and the resource developed in Stage One was trialled with students (n = 68) and supervisors (n = 37). Results: The global theme identified was that students feel strongly that the student-supervisor relationship influences their experience, satisfaction and success. In all polls, >90% of students but <60% of supervisors agree that a good student/supervisor partnership has an effect on the success of the final project. A smaller percentage of students felt strongly that they were able to develop a successful partnership with their supervisor. We co-created a visual model and a list of discussion points of how the student-supervisor partnership can be developed, aimed at making supervision more effective whilst being non-prescriptive. Discussion: The resource can be easily adapted. Students believe it helped them to develop a staff-student partnership and supervisors commented that it helps to clarify roles and manage student expectations. This scalable project will support the practice of future UG biomedical science project research students and supervisors. Working with students as partners enabled the development of richer ideas whilst supporting their employability.

Alzheimer's Disease-Related Dementias Summit 2016: National research priorities.

Goal 1 of the National Plan to Address Alzheimer's Disease is to prevent and effectively treat Alzheimer disease and Alzheimer disease-related dementias by 2025. To help inform the research agenda toward achieving this goal, the NIH hosts periodic summits that set and refine relevant research priorities for the subsequent 5 to 10 years. This proceedings article summarizes the 2016 Alzheimer's Disease-Related Dementias Summit, including discussion of scientific progress, challenges, and opportunities in major areas of dementia research, including mixed-etiology dementias, Lewy body dementia, frontotemporal degeneration, vascular contributions to cognitive impairment and dementia, dementia disparities, and dementia nomenclature.

Recommendations of the Alzheimer's disease-related dementias conference.

The National Alzheimer's Project Act, signed into law in 2011, mandates a National Plan to Address Alzheimer's Disease that is updated annually. In the Plan, the term Alzheimer disease includes not only Alzheimer disease (AD) proper, but also several specified related dementias, namely, frontotemporal, Lewy body, vascular, and mixed dementia. In response to a specific action item in the 2012 National Plan, the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, in collaboration with the National Institute on Aging, convened panels of experts and conducted a 2-day public conference to develop research priorities and timelines for addressing Alzheimer disease-related dementias (ADRD) in 5 topic areas: multiple etiology dementias, health disparities, Lewy body dementias including dementia with Lewy bodies and Parkinson disease dementia, frontotemporal dementia and related tauopathies, and vascular contributions to ADRD. By design, the product was up to 8 prioritized research recommendations in each topic area including estimated timelines from when work on a recommendation is started to completion or to full implementation of an ongoing activity, and recognition of shared research themes across recommendations. These included increased education and training of both researchers and health care professionals, addressing health disparities, fundamental neurobiology research, advanced diagnostics, collaborative biosample repositories, and a focus on developing effective interventions to prevent or treat ADRD by the year 2025 as targeted by the National Plan.

National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association guidelines for the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease.

A consensus panel from the United States and Europe was convened recently to update and revise the 1997 consensus guidelines for the neuropathologic evaluation of Alzheimer's disease (AD) and other diseases of brain that are common in the elderly. The new guidelines recognize the pre-clinical stage of AD, enhance the assessment of AD to include amyloid accumulation as well as neurofibrillary change and neuritic plaques, establish protocols for the neuropathologic assessment of Lewy body disease, vascular brain injury, hippocampal sclerosis, and TDP-43 inclusions, and recommend standard approaches for the workup of cases and their clinico-pathologic correlation.

National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association guidelines for the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease: a practical approach.

We present a practical guide for the implementation of recently revised National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association guidelines for the neuropathologic assessment of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Major revisions from previous consensus criteria are: (1) recognition that AD neuropathologic changes may occur in the apparent absence of cognitive impairment, (2) an "ABC" score for AD neuropathologic change that incorporates histopathologic assessments of amyloid ß deposits (A), staging of neurofibrillary tangles (B), and scoring of neuritic plaques (C), and (3) more detailed approaches for assessing commonly co-morbid conditions such as Lewy body disease, vascular brain injury, hippocampal sclerosis, and TAR DNA binding protein (TDP)-43 immunoreactive inclusions. Recommendations also are made for the minimum sampling of brain, preferred staining methods with acceptable alternatives, reporting of results, and clinico-pathologic correlations.

Introduction to the recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Criteria for the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD) were established in 1984. A broad consensus now exists that these criteria should be revised to incorporate state-of-the-art scientific knowledge. METHODS: The National Institute on Aging (NIA) and the Alzheimer's Association sponsored a series of advisory round table meetings in 2009 whose purpose was to establish a process for revising diagnostic and research criteria for AD. The recommendation from these advisory meetings was that three separate work groups should be formed with each assigned the task of formulating diagnostic criteria for one phase of the disease: the dementia phase; the symptomatic, pre-dementia phase; and the asymptomatic, preclinical phase of AD. RESULTS: Two notable differences from the AD criteria published in 1984 are incorporation of biomarkers of the underlying disease state and formalization of different stages of disease in the diagnostic criteria. There was a broad consensus within all three workgroups that much additional work is needed to validate the application of biomarkers for diagnostic purposes. In the revised NIA-Alzheimer's Association criteria, a semantic and conceptual distinction is made between AD pathophysiological processes and clinically observable syndromes that result, whereas this distinction was blurred in the 1984 criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The new criteria for AD are presented in three documents. The core clinical criteria of the recommendations regarding AD dementia and MCI due to AD are intended to guide diagnosis in the clinical setting. However, the recommendations of the preclinical AD workgroup are intended purely for research purposes.

Toward defining the preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease.

The pathophysiological process of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is thought to begin many years before the diagnosis of AD dementia. This long "preclinical" phase of AD would provide a critical opportunity for therapeutic intervention; however, we need to further elucidate the link between the pathological cascade of AD and the emergence of clinical symptoms. The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association convened an international workgroup to review the biomarker, epidemiological, and neuropsychological evidence, and to develop recommendations to determine the factors which best predict the risk of progression from "normal" cognition to mild cognitive impairment and AD dementia. We propose a conceptual framework and operational research criteria, based on the prevailing scientific evidence to date, to test and refine these models with longitudinal clinical research studies. These recommendations are solely intended for research purposes and do not have any clinical implications at this time. It is hoped that these recommendations will provide a common rubric to advance the study of preclinical AD, and ultimately, aid the field in moving toward earlier intervention at a stage of AD when some disease-modifying therapies may be most efficacious.

The diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease.

The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of developing criteria for the symptomatic predementia phase of Alzheimer's disease (AD), referred to in this article as mild cognitive impairment due to AD. The workgroup developed the following two sets of criteria: (1) core clinical criteria that could be used by healthcare providers without access to advanced imaging techniques or cerebrospinal fluid analysis, and (2) research criteria that could be used in clinical research settings, including clinical trials. The second set of criteria incorporate the use of biomarkers based on imaging and cerebrospinal fluid measures. The final set of criteria for mild cognitive impairment due to AD has four levels of certainty, depending on the presence and nature of the biomarker findings. Considerable work is needed to validate the criteria that use biomarkers and to standardize biomarker analysis for use in community settings.

The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer's disease: recommendations from the National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer's disease.

The National Institute on Aging and the Alzheimer's Association charged a workgroup with the task of revising the 1984 criteria for Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia. The workgroup sought to ensure that the revised criteria would be flexible enough to be used by both general healthcare providers without access to neuropsychological testing, advanced imaging, and cerebrospinal fluid measures, and specialized investigators involved in research or in clinical trial studies who would have these tools available. We present criteria for all-cause dementia and for AD dementia. We retained the general framework of probable AD dementia from the 1984 criteria. On the basis of the past 27 years of experience, we made several changes in the clinical criteria for the diagnosis. We also retained the term possible AD dementia, but redefined it in a manner more focused than before. Biomarker evidence was also integrated into the diagnostic formulations for probable and possible AD dementia for use in research settings. The core clinical criteria for AD dementia will continue to be the cornerstone of the diagnosis in clinical practice, but biomarker evidence is expected to enhance the pathophysiological specificity of the diagnosis of AD dementia. Much work lies ahead for validating the biomarker diagnosis of AD dementia.