DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction to Experiments

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction to Experiments Experimental Methods in the Social Sciences Introduction to Experiments August 5, 2013 Experiments Increasingly Important in the Social Sciences · Field experiments in political science as early as 1920s · Growing use of experiments in development economics, transportation, education, criminology, · Global experiments in economic development, alternative energy sources, education 2 Increase in Articles Using Experiments in American Political Science Review 3 Why More Experiments Now? · Better technology · Maturation of social sciences · Increased understanding of the complexity and interdependence of research in social sciences · Social sciences catching up to physical sciences and medicine 4 Key Elements of Experiments · Standardization · Randomization · Treatment versus Control Groups · Between-Subjects versus Within-Subjects Design · Internal versus External Validity · Experimental Bias 5 Standardization · The Dependent Variable (DV) { the thing to be explained { is measured the same way in the same context across subjects · Independent Variables (IVs) { the explanatory variables { also controlled and standardized · Compared to field studies, experiments eliminate or control unmeasured influences on the DV and IVs 6 Treatment versus Control · Treatment is the Independent Variable that the experimenter manipulates. · The Treatment Group receives the treatment. · The Control Group that does not receive the treatment · An experiment may contain multiple treatments and a control group. 7 Blinded Experiment · In a blind experiment, subjects do not know whether they received the treatment or control. · A placebo is a false treatment, meant to make the control group believe they received the treatment. · In a double-blind experiment, the experiment administrators do not know who received the treatment or control 8 Randomization · The key feature of an experiment is randomization · In laboratory and survey experiments, subjects assigned randomly to treatment and control groups · If subjects volunteer for either treatment or control, we cannot be sure that different outcomes are due to selection bias or to the treatment 9 Randomization · A simple randomizing device such as a coin flip can assign subjects to treatment or control. · An n-factor design includes n simultaneous treatments. · Each subject randomized across the n treatments. 10 Factorial Design · Factorial design indicates the number of different treatments and conditions per treatment · Each subject receives a combination of treatments (or controls) · For example, a researcher may want to test whether a combination of: vitamins (vitamin or no vitamin) exercise (exercise or no exercise drugs (Drug A, Drug B, no drug) affect a subject's health 11 · A 2x2x3 factorial design indicates three separate treatments. · The first and second have two conditions (such as a treatment and control) · The third has three conditions (such as a control and two treatments) · The 2x2x3 design breaks subjects into 12 different groups for analysis. 12 Between-Subjects versus Within Subjects · Between Subjects breaks subjects into treatment and control groups to measure differences between the two groups after treatment. · Within Subjects design measures subjects before treatment and after treatment. Each subject is its own control. · Within Subjects also a Pre-post design. 13 Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) · The most powerful experimental technique in scientific research · RCT's are usually necessary in a clinical trial for medical treatments · Randomized Trial similar to RCT but does not contain a control group 14 RCT's Classified by Study Design 1. Parallel Group: Each subject randomly assigned to a group. All subjects in a group receive the same treatment (or control) 2. Crossover: Each subject receives or does not receive the treatment in a random sequence 15 3. Cluster: Pre-existing groups of subjects are selected to receive the treatment (or control). Groups may include schools, classes, villages, city blocks, provinces, countries. 4. Factorial: Each subject randomly assigned to a group that receives combinations of treatments (or controls). 16 Standard Reporting Flowchart for Parallel RCT 17 18 Example: Dartmouth SPORT Study (Weinstein, et al.) · Spine Patients Outcome Research Trial (SPORT) · RCT to assess whether surgery or conservative care (rest, physical therapy, drugs) provided better outcomes for herniated disc, spondyliosis, and other ailments of the spine · Published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, 2007, 2008 19 Surgical vs. Nonoperative Treatment for Lumbar Disc Herniation • Weinstein et al 2791 2,720 Patients were screened 729 Patients were ineligible 426 Were not surgical candidates 19 Had fracture, infection, or deformity 129 Had inadequate non-operative treatment 20 Had cancer 135 Had other reasons 1,991 Patients were eligible 747 Patients declined to participate 501 enrolled in the randomized cohort 743 enrolled in the observational cohort 256 were assigned to 222 chose non-surgical 245 were assigned to surgery 521 chose surgery non-surgical treatment treatment 203 Were available at 6 wk 219 Were available at 6 wk 464 Were available at 6 wk 197 Were available at 6 wk 40 Missed the follow-up visit 37 Missed the follow-up visit 57 Missed the follow-up visit 24 Missed the follow-up visit 2 Withdrew 0 Withdrew 0 Withdrew 1 Withdrew 0 Died 0 Died 0 Died 0 Died 75 (31%) Had undergone surgery 46 (18%) Had undergone surgery 471 (90%) Had undergone surgery 4 (2%) Had undergone surgery 198 Were available at 3 mo 211 Were available at 3 mo 434 Were available at 3 mo 187 Were available at 3 mo 45 Missed the follow-up visit 44 Missed the follow-up visit 84 Missed the follow-up visit 34 Missed the follow-up visit 2 Withdrew 1 Withdrew 2 Withdrew 1 Withdrew 0 Died 0 Died 1 Died 0 Died 116 (47%) Had undergone surgery 73 (29%) Had undergone surgery 489 (94%) Had undergone surgery 19 (9%) Had undergone surgery 200 Were available at 6 mo 210 Were available at 6 mo 443 Were available at 6 mo 187 Were available at 6 mo 37 Missed the follow-up visit 41 Missed the follow-up visit 70 Missed the follow-up visit 33 Missed the follow-up visit 8 Withdrew 5 Withdrew 7 Withdrew 2 Withdrew 0 Died 0 Died 1 Died 0 Died 133 (54%) Had undergone surgery 96 (38%) Had undergone surgery 492 (94%) Had undergone surgery 35 (16%) Had undergone surgery 202 Were available at 1 yr 213 Were available at 1 yr 448 Were available at 1 yr 189 Were available at 1 yr 29 Missed the follow-up visit 27 Missed the follow-up visit 56 Missed the follow-up visit 28 Missed the follow-up visit 14 Withdrew 15 Withdrew 16 Withdrew 5 Withdrew 0 Died 1 Died 1 Died 0 Died 139 (57%) Had undergone surgery 106 (41%) Had undergone surgery 493 (95%) Had undergone surgery 44 (20%) Had undergone surgery 187 Were available at 2 yr 191 Were available at 2 yr 429 Were available at 2 yr 192 Were available at 2 yr 35 Missed the follow-up visit 36 Missed the follow-up visit 48 Missed the follow-up visit 14 Missed the follow-up visit 23 Withdrew 27 Withdrew 43 Withdrew 15 Withdrew 0 Died 2 Died 1 Died 1 Died 141 (58%) Had undergone surgery 110 (43%) Had undergone surgery 493 (95%) Had undergone surgery 48 (22%) Had undergone surgery 382 Were available at 3 yr 175 Were available at 3 yr 180 Were available at 3 yr 170 Were available at 3 yr 76 Missed the follow-up visit 24 Missed the follow-up visit 35 Missed the follow-up visit 47 Missed the follow-up visit 60 Withdrew 22 Withdrew 29 Withdrew 37 Withdrew 3 Died 1 Died 1 Died 2 Died 493 (95%) Had undergone surgery 52 (23%) Had undergone surgery 142 (58%) Had undergone surgery 111 (43%) Had undergone surgery 149 Were available at 4 yr 150 Were available at 4 yr 342 Were available at 4 yr 166 Were available at 4 yr 47 Missed the follow-up visit 46 Missed the follow-up visit 100 Missed the follow-up visit 28 Missed the follow-up visit 33 Withdrew 43 Withdrew 76 Withdrew 27 Withdrew 1 Died 2 Died 3 Died 1 Died 15 Had visits pending 15 Had visits pending 493 (95%) Had undergone surgery 53 (24%) Had undergone surgery 144 (59%) Had undergone surgery 115 (45%) Had undergone surgery Figure 1. Exclusion, enrollment, randomization, and follow-up of trial participants. The values for surgery, withdrawal, and death are cumulative over 4 years. For example, a total of 1 patient in the group assigned to surgery died during the 4-year follow-up period. [Data set 04/10/2008]. SPORT Study Has Many of the Same Problems Social Scientists Encounter · Many subjects did not comply. Some assigned to surgery opted for conservative care. Some assigned to conservative care opted for surgery · Many subjects could not re-contacted · Potential placebo effect from surgery · Some outcomes measured using surveys: People were asked how they felt 21 Internal versus External Validity · Internally validity asks, \Did the experimental treatment make a difference in this specific experiment." · External validity asks, \To what populations, settings, treatment variables, and measurement variables can this effect be generalized?" 22 Internal Validity Threatened by... · History · Intra-experiment events (intrasession history) · Selection bias in subjects · Maturation of subjects · Performance effects (conditioning) · Regression toward the mean · Mortality or attrition of subjects 23 External Validity Threatened by... · Uncontrolled interactions, omitted variables, spurious correlations · Testing may make subjects more sensitive than rest of population to variables under investigation · Unrepresentative samples (college students in particular) 24 External Validity Threatened by... · Hawthorne effects: subjects change their behavior when observed · Professionalized subjects (Panel conditioning: experiment may change subjects) · Mortality or attrition of subjects 25 Experimental Bias · Expectancy Effects: the experimenter influences subjects · Demand Effects: Subjects anticipate the purpose of the experiment · Experimenter Bias. in recruiting subjects, selecting experiment time and place, coding and analyzing data.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Clinical Research Methodology
    Indian Journal of Pharmaceutical Education and Research Association of Pharmaceutical Teachers of India Clinical Research Methodology Purvi Gandhi* Department of Pharmacology, B. S. Patel Pharmacy College, Mehsana, India. ABSTRACT Submitted: 29/5/2010 Revised: 29/8/2010 Accepted: 04/10/2010 Medical trials occupy a greater part of clinical trials and exceed in number over other types of clinical trials. Although clinical researches or studies other than those falling under the category of trial, lack the commercial aspect, they may contribute to the betterment of clinical practice and may constitute a base for large-scale commercial trials. Explanatory clinical studies are the most widely accepted and executed type of clinical researches/ trials. They explain not only the therapeutic aspects of a drug but also provide with a detailed description on adverse events and pharmacovigilance. Any new drug to be marketed first requires proving its safety, efficacy and the need over existing product range by passing through various phases of clinical trial that follows animal studies. For this reason, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with placebo- control and blinding fashion is the only accepted form of clinical trials with few exceptions. Besides explanatory, descriptive clinical research is also useful for certain types of studies such as epidemiological research. While conducting RCTs on humans (either healthy volunteers or patients), various components of the trials viz. study design, patient population, control group, randomization, blinding or non-blinding, treatment considerations and outcome measures are important to strengthen the outcomes of the trial. Similarly, proper utilization of statistics, for sample-size calculation, data collection, compilation and analysis by applying proper statistical tests, signifies the outcomes of the clinical research.
    [Show full text]
  • Llovera 1..10
    RESEARCH ARTICLE STROKE Results of a preclinical randomized controlled multicenter trial (pRCT): Anti-CD49d treatment for acute brain ischemia Gemma Llovera,1,2 Kerstin Hofmann,1,2 Stefan Roth,1,2 Angelica Salas-Pérdomo,3,4 Maura Ferrer-Ferrer,3,4 Carlo Perego,5 Elisa R. Zanier,5 Uta Mamrak,1,2 Andre Rex,6 Hélène Party,7 Véronique Agin,7 Claudine Fauchon,8 Cyrille Orset,7,8 Benoît Haelewyn,7,8 Maria-Grazia De Simoni,5 Ulrich Dirnagl,6 Ulrike Grittner,9 Anna M. Planas,3,4 Nikolaus Plesnila,1,2 Denis Vivien,7,8 Arthur Liesz1,2* Numerous treatments have been reported to provide a beneficial outcome in experimental animal stroke models; however, these treatments (with the exception of tissue plasminogen activator) have failed in clinical trials. To improve the translation of treatment efficacy from bench to bedside, we have performed a preclinical randomized controlled multicenter trial (pRCT) to test a potential stroke therapy under circumstances closer to the design and rigor of a Downloaded from clinical randomized control trial. Anti-CD49d antibodies, which inhibit the migration of leukocytes into the brain, were previously investigated in experimental stroke models by individual laboratories. Despite the conflicting results from four positive and one inconclusive preclinical studies, a clinical trial was initiated. To confirm the preclinical results and to test the feasibility of conducting a pRCT, six independent European research centers investigated the efficacy of anti-CD49d antibodies in two distinct mouse models of stroke in a centrally coordinated, randomized, and blinded approach. The results pooled from all research centers revealed that treatment with CD49d-specific antibodies signif- http://stm.sciencemag.org/ icantly reduced both leukocyte invasion and infarct volume after the permanent distal occlusion of the middle cerebral artery, which causes a small cortical infarction.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Study Results: How Biased Am I? January 29, 2020
    WELCOME Interpreting Study Results: How Biased Am I? January 29, 2020 www.aacom.org/aogme Copyright © 2019 American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine. All Rights Reserved. HOUSEKEEPING NOTES • This webinar is being recorded, recording will be shared with participants and posted on the AOGME’s web page • Webinar participants are in listen-only mode • For technical issues, please use the chat feature and raise your hand and we will assist you • You may submit questions anytime during this live webinar using the chat feature, if time remains, questions will be addressed either during or at the end of the presentation. SPEAKERS Mark R. Speicher, PhD, MHA Senior Vice President for Medical Education and Research American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM) Suporn Sukpraprut-Braaten, MSc, MA, PhD Graduate Medical Director of Research Unity Health In research, types of studies depend on the purpose of the study, data collection strategy, and other factors. Types of Study: Weaker Evidence I. Observational study (Cohort Study) 1.1 Cross-sectional study 1.2 Case-control study Prospective Observational Study 1.3 Observational study Retrospective Observational Study II. Non-randomized Controlled Trial Randomized Controlled Trial (Clinical Trial) . Phase I . Phase II . Phase III . Phase IV III. Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Stronger Evidence HIERARCHY OF RESEARCH EVIDENCE Strongest evidence Weakest evidence DIAGRAM 1 OVERVIEW OF TEST HYPOTHESES ANOVA – Analysis of variance ANCOVA – Analysis of covariance Source: Suporn Sukpraprut. Biostatistics: Specific Tests. American College of Preventive Medicine (ACPM) Board Review Course Material (Copyright) 6 DIAGRAM 2: TEST HYPOTHESES FOR CONTINUOUS OUTCOME Source: Suporn Sukpraprut.
    [Show full text]
  • Section 4.3 Good and Poor Ways to Experiment
    Chapter 4 Gathering Data Section 4.3 Good and Poor Ways to Experiment Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. Elements of an Experiment Experimental units: The subjects of an experiment; the entities that we measure in an experiment. Treatment: A specific experimental condition imposed on the subjects of the study; the treatments correspond to assigned values of the explanatory variable. Explanatory variable: Defines the groups to be compared with respect to values on the response variable. Response variable: The outcome measured on the subjects to reveal the effect of the treatment(s). 3 Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. Experiments ▪ An experiment deliberately imposes treatments on the experimental units in order to observe their responses. ▪ The goal of an experiment is to compare the effect of the treatment on the response. ▪ Experiments that are randomized occur when the subjects are randomly assigned to the treatments; randomization helps to eliminate the effects of lurking variables. 4 Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. 3 Components of a Good Experiment 1. Control/Comparison Group: allows the researcher to analyze the effectiveness of the primary treatment. 2. Randomization: eliminates possible researcher bias, balances the comparison groups on known as well as on lurking variables. 3. Replication: allows us to attribute observed effects to the treatments rather than ordinary variability. 5 Copyright © 2013, 2009, and 2007, Pearson Education, Inc. Component 1: Control or Comparison Group ▪ A placebo is a dummy treatment, i.e. sugar pill. Many subjects respond favorably to any treatment, even a placebo. ▪ A control group typically receives a placebo.
    [Show full text]
  • Correlation Experiment Or Quasi Experiment Worksheet
    Correlation Experiment Or Quasi Experiment Worksheet mannerlyWendell often Adrian gigging velarizing braggingly objectively when and unapproving hide his Herr Weslie sidewise tar communicatively and lithographically. and number Alejandro her depose octonaries. peremptorily? Eleusinian and Often not small studies conducted on specific, localized programs remain unpublished and can later be program directly. Often used for navigation and the economy and interviews were supposed to express our framework for rare or quasi experiment or worksheet in yellow cells and see how two major functions of a line. One response variables move in five standardized test taker isrequired to detect differences were? You should however to razor the span source material in these journals when surgery can. Sentences are more sensitive to both accurate and inaccurate recommendations for crimes that occur less frequently and have more complicated sentencing. JC participated in the literature review and helped draft the manuscript. Internal validity applies primarily to experimental research designs, in lake the researcher hopes to conclude following the independent variable has caused the dependent variable. What are experiments for or quasi experiment or more experience with correlations, correlation experiment or subscale, we wish to you! EAL Evidence Analysis Library. It is noted thto devalue the role of explicit grammar explanation in all cases of instructions. The students learned how low carbon cycle, photosynthesis, and cellular respiration are related. Imagination and strong correlation measured and have a psychology or quasi experiment must indicate the help. Why or how fresh it happening? Therefore, we accept the null hypothesis, showing no statistically significant difference in the stress levels of participants who color mandalas or coloring worksheets.
    [Show full text]
  • ORBITA and Coronary Stents: a Case Study in the Analysis and Reporting
    ORBITA and coronary stents: A case study in the analysis and reporting of clinical trials Andrew Gelman, John B. Carlin and Brahmajee K Nallamothu 25 Mar 2019 Department of Statistics and Political Science, Columbia University, New YorK City, NY, United States (Andrew Gelman, professor); Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health and Department of Paediatrics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia (John Carlin, professor); Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, United States (Brahmajee K Nallamothu, professor); Correspondence to: Brahmajee K Nallamothu [email protected] Acknowledgements: We thanK Doug Helmreich for bringing this eXample to our attention, Shira Mitchell for helpful comments, and the Office of Naval Research, Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, and the National Institutes of Health for partial support of this worK. Competing interests: Dr. Gelman and Dr. Carlin report no competing interests. Dr. Nallamothu is an interventional cardiologist and Editor-in-Chief of a journal of the American Heart Association but otherwise has no competing interests. Word Count: 3078 Appeared in American Heart Journal 214, 54-59 (2019) 1. Introduction Al-Lamee et al. (2017) report results from a randomized controlled trial of percutaneous coronary intervention using coronary stents for stable angina. The study, called ORBITA (Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina), included approXimately 200 patients and was notable for being a blinded eXperiment in which half the patients received stents and half received a placebo procedure in which a sham operation was performed. In follow-up, patients were asKed to guess their treatment and of those who were willing to guess only 56% guessed correctly, indicating that the blinding was largely successful.
    [Show full text]
  • Blinding in Pharmacological Trials: the Devil Is in the Details
    Downloaded from adc.bmj.com on February 6, 2014 - Published by group.bmj.com Leading article measures involve some subjectivity, and Blinding in pharmacological trials: becomes less so to reduce observer bias for objective criteria.7 However, even the devil is in the details then, the lack of participant or healthcare provider blinding can lead to other pro- 1 2 3 2 Mandy Wan, Mine Orlu-Gul, Helene Legay, Catherine Tuleu blems, such as differential attrition and cointervention bias, which can likewise influence the assessment of clinical trial While the methodological principle of science underpinning blinding is very outcomes.710 ‘blinding’ for minimising bias in randomised much pharmaceutical based, and may be controlled trials (RCT) is widely debated technical at times, but part of this paucity BLINDING WITH PLACEBOS and accepted, rarely is this depth of thinking of knowledge is undoubtedly due to a The use of placebo in RCTs would appear applied to its correct handling with respect certain lack of recognition for the as a seemingly simple experimental to design, reporting and analysis. Beyond pharmaceutical properties of a medicine. scheme. Such perception is so deeply fi the general comprehension of the de nition This article, written with clinicians in embedded that we often implicitly accept of the word, the practical aspects of estab- mind, presents a discussion on the prac- clinical trial reporting with rather loose lishing blinding in investigator-initiated tical considerations for blinding in paedi- descriptions of blinding procedures as pharmacological trials are often grossly atric pharmacological trials, with the aim 1 adequate indication for the success of underestimated, and very much an after- to facilitate paediatricians in improving blinding.23Rarely do we ask ourselves thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Clinical Trials Abstract
    Summer Institute in Statistics for Clinical Research July 22, 2019 Module 1: Introduction to Clinical Trials Scott S. Emerson, M.D., Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Biostatistics University of Washington Seattle Institute for Statistics in Clinical Research July 22, 2019 1 © 2019 Scott S. Emerson, M.D., Ph.D. Abstract This module provides an overview of the clinical and scientific issues that must be considered by the many disciplines that collaborate on a clinical trial. In this module, we consider the clinical, scientific, and regulatory setting of clinical trials, describing the phased approach to “treatment discovery” in which the safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of candidate treatments is investigated. In particular, we discuss the issues surrounding identification of the target population, definition of the treatment, choice of clinical outcomes, and choice of comparators. It will include introductory discussion of the choice of randomization strategies, blinding, conduct and monitoring of the study, and plans for reporting of the result. The importance of a well-defined study protocol is emphasized. 2 : 1 Summer Institute in Statistics for Clinical Research July 22, 2019 Where Am I Going? Overview of Use of RCTs in Clinical Research Organization of the Course 1. Scientific / ethical setting: “Treatment Discovery” 2. Clinical trial goal: Estimands / endpoints 3. Materials and methods: a) Patient eligibility criteria b) Randomization / blinding c) Treatments / study procedures d) Data collection / management / analysis 4. Documentation:
    [Show full text]
  • Doubleblind Free
    FREE DOUBLEBLIND PDF Ann Aguirre | 310 pages | 29 Sep 2009 | Ace Books | 9780441017812 | English | New York, NY, United States Double-blind | Definition of Double-blind by Merriam-Webster A double-blind Doubleblind is one in which neither the participants nor the experimenters know who is receiving a particular treatment. This procedure is utilized Doubleblind prevent bias in research results. Double-blind studies are particularly useful for preventing bias due Doubleblind demand characteristics or the placebo effect. For example, let's imagine that researchers are investigating the effects of Doubleblind new drug. In a double-blind study, the researchers who interact with the participants would not know who was receiving the Doubleblind drug and who was receiving a placebo. As mentioned previously, double-blind indicates Doubleblind the participants and the experimenters are unaware of who is receiving the real treatment. In a psychology experiment, the Doubleblind is Doubleblind level of the independent variable that the experimenters are manipulating. This can be contrasted with a single-blind study in which the experimenters are aware of which participants are receiving Doubleblind treatment while the participants remain unaware. In such studies, researchers may use what is known as a placebo. A placebo is an inert substance, such as a sugar pill, that has Doubleblind effect on the individual taking it. The placebo pill is given Doubleblind participants who are randomly assigned to the control group. A control Doubleblind is a subset of participants who are not exposed to any levels of the independent variable. This group serves as a baseline to determine if exposure to the independent Doubleblind had any significant effects.
    [Show full text]
  • Rapid, Accurate, Nucleobase Detection Using Fncas9
    medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.09.13.20193581; this version posted September 14, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. Rapid, accurate, nucleobase detection using FnCas9 Single sentence summary A method to identify nucleotide sequence or nucleobase identity using FnCas9 and its implementation in the rapid and accurate diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 Authors Mohd. Azhar1,2,8, Rhythm Phutela1,2,8, Manoj Kumar1,2,8, Asgar Hussain Ansari1,2,8, Riya Rauthan1,2, Sneha Gulati1, Namrata Sharma1, Dipanjali Sinha1,2, Saumya Sharma1,2, Sunaina Singh1, Sundaram Acharya1,2, Deepanjan Paul1, Poorti Kathpalia1, Meghali Aich1,2, Paras Sehgal1,2, Gyan Ranjan1,2, Rahul C. Bhoyar1, Indian CoV2 Genomics & Genetic Epidemiology (IndiCovGEN) Consortium1, Khushboo Singhal1,2, Harsha Lad3, Pradeep Kumar Patra3, Govind Makharia4, Giriraj Ratan Chandak5, Bala Pesala7, Debojyoti Chakraborty1,2,8*, Souvik Maiti1,2,6,8* 1CSIR-Institute of Genomics & Integrative Biology, Mathura Road, New Delhi- 110025, India 2Academy of Scientific & Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad, 201002, India 3CSIR-Sickle Cell Anemia Mission Laboratory, Chhattisgarh Institute of Medical Sciences, Bilaspur 495001, Chhattisgarh, India. 4All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar East, New Delhi 110029, India 5CSIR-Center for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Uppal Road, Hyderabad, Telengana 500007 6CSIR-National Chemical Laboratory, Dr. Homi Bhabha Road, Pune, 411008, India 7CSIR-Central Electronics Engineering Research Institute, Chennai, India 8These authors contributed equally *Correspondence: [email protected] (D.C.); [email protected] (S.M.) 1 NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice.
    [Show full text]
  • Validation of Preferred Salt Concentration in Soup
    Hypertension Research (2020) 43:525–533 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41440-020-0397-1 ARTICLE Validation of preferred salt concentration in soup based on a randomized blinded experiment in multiple regions in Japan— influence of umami (L-glutamate) on saltiness and palatability of low-salt solutions 1 2 2 2 3 3 Hitomi Hayabuchi ● Rieko Morita ● Masanori Ohta ● Akiko Nanri ● Hideki Matsumoto ● Shoji Fujitani ● 3 4,5 6 7 8 9 Shintaro Yoshida ● Sadayoshi Ito ● Atsushi Sakima ● Hiroyuki Takase ● Miho Kusaka ● Takuya Tsuchihashi Received: 21 October 2019 / Revised: 8 December 2019 / Accepted: 22 December 2019 / Published online: 29 January 2020 © The Author(s) 2020. This article is published with open access Abstract Sodium reduction is an important public health goal. Individual and population approaches are necessary for reducing the sodium content of processed foods and meals. The aim of the present study is to affirm the effect of monosodium L-glutamate (MSG), an umami substance, on the saltiness or palatability of low-salt solutions and to explore the preferred salt concentration in soup. Five hundred and eighty-four healthy participants from nineteen regions in Japan tasted 0.3, 0.6, 1234567890();,: 1234567890();,: and 0.9% NaCl solutions with or without 0.3% MSG. Evaluations of saltiness and palatability for each solution were conducted using a visual analog scale in a double-blinded randomized manner. Saltiness gradually increased depending on the concentration of NaCl. The saltiness of the 0.3% NaCl solution with MSG was rated significantly higher than that without MSG. The palatability ratings were higher for the solutions with MSG than for those without MSG for all NaCl concentrations.
    [Show full text]
  • The London School of Economics and Political Science Philosophical
    The London School of Economics and Political Science Philosophical Issues in Evidence-Based Medicine: Evaluating the Epistemological Role of Double Blinding and Placebo Controls Jeremy Howick A thesis submitted to the Department of Philosophy, Logic, and Scientific Method of the London School of Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, London, March 2008 1 UMI Number: U615925 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615925 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 F Qrtlah Ltoraf y o< P - and Eoonomc Sc<©f' >- Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the PhD degree to the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis is with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgment is made.
    [Show full text]