Tanaididae (Crustacea, Tanaidacea, Tanaidomorpha, Tanaidoidea) on a Floating Dock, West Beach, Adelaide, South Australia: Introduced or Indigenous?

Floating artificial structures provide sites for fouling communities and favourable habitat for the establishment of non-indigenous species. Two species of Tanaididae dominated crustacean biota in a one year time-series sampling of macroalgae on the floating dock at the West Beach boat ramp, Adelaide, South Australia. This paper provides identifications for these two species and discusses inter- and intra-species variability considering the available body of morphological and molecular information. We have given one species a new species designation, Tanais adelaidensis n. sp. The other has a 655 nucleotide CO1 sequence matching that of Hexapleomera sasuke Tanabe Kakui, 2019 collected in Japan, also matching a shorter CO1 sequence for a described Zeuxo Templeton, 1840 species from the Eastern Mediterranean. This work underlines the utility and need for detailed morphological and molecular data to resolve the taxonomy and biogeography of fouling and holdfast community tanaids, particularly those that have the demonstrated potential for a history of transport between geographically distant sites.

Human Auditory Cortex Neurochemistry Reflects the Presence and Severity of Tinnitus.

It is not known why tinnitus occurs in some cases of hearing damage but not others. Abnormalities of excitation-inhibition balance could influence whether tinnitus develops and its severity if it does. Animal models of hearing damage, which also produce tinnitus based on behavioral evidence, have identified abnormalities of GABAergic inhibition, both cortically and subcortically. However, the precise relationships of GABA inhibitory changes to tinnitus itself, as opposed to other consequences of hearing damage, remain uncertain. Here, we used magnetic resonance spectroscopy to non-invasively quantify GABA in the left (LAC) and right (RAC) auditory cortices of a group of 14 patients with lateralized tinnitus (eight left ear) and 14 controls matched for age, sex, and hearing. We also explored the potential relationships with other brain metabolites (i.e., choline, N-acetylaspartate, and creatine). The presence of tinnitus was associated with a reduction in auditory cortex GABA concentration. Regardless of tinnitus laterality, post hoc testing indicated reductions that were significant in RAC and nonsignificant in LAC. Tinnitus severity and hearing loss were correlated positively with RAC choline but not GABA. We discuss the results in the context of current models of tinnitus and methodological constraints. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Permanently affecting one in seven adults, tinnitus lacks both widely effective treatments and adequate understanding of its brain mechanisms. Existing animal models represent tinnitus that may not be distinguishable from homeostatic responses to the auditory insults used to induce it. Human studies can be well controlled in this regard but are usually not (with few even matching control subjects for hearing loss) and are limited in scope as a result of relying solely on non-invasive recording techniques. Here, we exploit recent advances in non-invasive spectroscopic techniques to establish, in a human study tightly controlled for hearing loss and hyperacusis, that tinnitus is associated with a significant reduction in auditory cortex GABA concentration, which has implications for understanding and treatment of the condition.

Systematic meta-analyses and field synopsis of genetic association studies in colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is a major global public health problem, with approximately 950,000 patients newly diagnosed each year. We report the first comprehensive field synopsis and creation of a parallel publicly available and regularly updated database (CRCgene) that catalogs all genetic association studies on colorectal cancer (http://www.chs.med.ed.ac.uk/CRCgene/). METHODS: We performed two independent systematic reviews, reviewing 10 145 titles, then collated and extracted data from 635 publications reporting on 445 polymorphisms in 110 different genes. We carried out meta-analyses to derive summary effect estimates for 92 polymorphisms in 64 different genes. For assessing the credibility of associations, we applied the Venice criteria and the Bayesian False Discovery Probability (BFDP) test. RESULTS: We consider 16 independent variants at 13 loci (MUTYH, MTHFR, SMAD7, and common variants tagging the loci 8q24, 8q23.3, 11q23.1, 14q22.2, 1q41, 20p12.3, 20q13.33, 3q26.2, 16q22.1, and 19q13.1) to have the most highly credible associations with colorectal cancer, with all variants except those in MUTYH and 19q13.1 reaching genome-wide statistical significance in at least one meta-analysis model. We identified less-credible (higher heterogeneity, lower statistical power, BFDP >0.2) associations with 23 more variants at 22 loci. The meta-analyses of a further 20 variants for which associations have previously been reported found no evidence to support these as true associations. CONCLUSION: The CRCgene database provides the context for genetic association data to be interpreted appropriately and helps inform future research direction.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Low dose ionizing radiation exposure and cardiovascular disease mortality: cohort study based on Canadian national dose registry of radiation workers.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of our study was to assess the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) mortality in a Canadian cohort of 337 397 individuals (169 256 men and 168 141 women) occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation and included in the National Dose Registry (NDR) of Canada. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Exposure to high doses of ionizing radiation, such as those received during radiotherapy, leads to increased risk of cardiovascular diseases. The emerging evidence of excess risk of CVDs after exposure to doses well below those previously considered as safe warrants epidemiological studies of populations exposed to low levels of ionizing radiation. In the present study, the cohort consisted of employees at nuclear power stations (nuclear workers) as well as medical, dental and industrial workers. The mean whole body radiation dose was 8.6 mSv for men and 1.2 mSv for women. RESULTS: During the study period (1951-1995), as many as 3 533 deaths from cardiovascular diseases have been identified (3 018 among men and 515 among women). In the cohort, CVD mortality was significantly lower than in the general population of Canada. The cohort showed a significant dose response both among men and women. Risk estimates of CVD mortality in the NDR cohort, when expressed as excess relative risk per unit dose, were higher than those in most other occupational cohorts and higher than in the studies of Japanese atomic bomb survivors. CONCLUSIONS: The study has demonstrated a strong positive association between radiation dose and the risk of CVD mortality. Caution needs to be exercised when interpreting these results, due to the potential bias introduced by dosimetry uncertainties, the possible record linkage errors, and especially by the lack of adjustment for non-radiation risk factors.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement.

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Validation of a tool to assess health practitioners' decision support and communication skills.

As patients become more involved in decisions affecting their health, it is important to monitor and improve the support clinicians provide to facilitate shared decision making. The Decision Support Analysis Tool (DSAT) was developed as a research tool to evaluate practitioners' use of decision support and related communication skills during a clinical encounter. The DSAT, consisting of six categories of decision support skills and four categories of communication skills, was tested with 34 actual transcripts of patient-physician dialogue. The patients were prepared for the clinical encounter with either a detailed decision aid plus worksheet (n=16) or a pamphlet (n=18). Pairs of raters, blinded to the intervention allocation, coded each transcript independently. The overall inter-rater agreement and kappa coefficients were, respectively 75% and 0.59 for the decision support skills and 76% and 0.68 for the communication skills categories. The frequency of DSAT skills coded: (a) were significantly correlated with three out of six patient and physician outcome measures (r>0.30, P<0.05); and (b) showed significant discrimination (P=0.05) or trends (P<0.15) in discrimination between the decision aid and pamphlet groups. The DSAT shows promise as a reliable and valid evaluation tool but requires further testing with larger samples.