A study with low statistical power has a reduced chance of detecting a true effect, but it is less well appreciated that low power also reduces the likelihood that a statistically significant result reflects a true effect. Here, we show that the average statistical power of studies in the neurosciences is very low. The consequences of this include overestimates of effect size and low reproducibility of results. There are also ethical dimensions to this problem, as unreliable research is inefficient and wasteful. Improving reproducibility in neuroscience is a key priority and requires attention to well-established but often ignored methodological principles.

/pdf/power-failure-why-small-sample-size-undermines-the-4ftwwuexp7.pdf

Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience

Increasing evidence suggests that Alzheimer's disease pathogenesis is not restricted to the neuronal compartment, but includes strong interactions with immunological mechanisms in the brain. Misfolded and aggregated proteins bind to pattern recognition receptors on microglia and astroglia, and trigger an innate immune response characterised by release of inflammatory mediators, which contribute to disease progression and severity. Genome-wide analysis suggests that several genes that increase the risk for sporadic Alzheimer's disease encode factors that regulate glial clearance of misfolded proteins and the inflammatory reaction. External factors, including systemic inflammation and obesity, are likely to interfere with immunological processes of the brain and further promote disease progression. Modulation of risk factors and targeting of these immune mechanisms could lead to future therapeutic or preventive strategies for Alzheimer's disease.

/pdf/neuroinflammation-in-alzheimer-s-disease-36czdowiut.pdf

Neuroinflammation in Alzheimer's disease

The brain is constantly bombarded by stimuli, and the relative salience of these inputs determines which are more likely to capture attention. A brain system known as the 'salience network', with key nodes in the insular cortices, has a central role in the detection of behaviourally relevant stimuli and the coordination of neural resources. Emerging evidence suggests that atypical engagement of specific subdivisions of the insula within the salience network is a feature of many neuropsychiatric disorders.

Salience processing and insular cortical function and dysfunction

Studies of psychiatric disorders have traditionally focused on emotional symptoms such as depression, anxiety and hallucinations. However, poorly controlled cognitive deficits are equally prominent and severely compromise quality of life, including social and professional integration. Consequently, intensive efforts are being made to characterize the cellular and cerebral circuits underpinning cognitive function, define the nature and causes of cognitive impairment in psychiatric disorders and identify more effective treatments. Successful development will depend on rigorous validation in animal models as well as in patients, including measures of real-world cognitive functioning. This article critically discusses these issues, highlighting the challenges and opportunities for improving cognition in individuals suffering from psychiatric disorders.

https://www.oxcns.org/papers/512%20Millan%20et%20al%202012%20Cognitive%20function%20in%20psychiatric%20disorders.pdf

Cognitive dysfunction in psychiatric disorders: characteristics, causes and the quest for improved therapy

Objectives To update a 2004 systematic review of health care service use and health outcomes related to differences in health literacy level and interventions designed to improve these outcomes for individuals with low health literacy. Disparities in health outcomes and effectiveness of interventions among different sociodemographic groups were also examined. Data sources We searched MEDLINE®, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Cochrane Library, PsychINFO, and the Educational Resources Information Center. For health literacy, we searched using a variety of terms, limited to English and studies published from 2003 to May 25, 2010. For numeracy, we searched from 1966 to May 25, 2010. Review methods We used standard Evidence-based Practice Center methods of dual review of abstracts, full-text articles, abstractions, quality ratings, and strength of evidence grading. We resolved disagreements by consensus. We evaluated whether newer literature was available for answering key questions, so we broadened our definition of health literacy to include numeracy and oral (spoken) health literacy. We excluded intervention studies that did not measure health literacy directly and updated our approach to evaluate individual study risk of bias and to grade strength of evidence. Results We included good- and fair-quality studies: 81 studies addressing health outcomes (reported in 95 articles including 86 measuring health literacy and 16 measuring numeracy, of which 7 measure both) and 42 studies (reported in 45 articles) addressing interventions. Differences in health literacy level were consistently associated with increased hospitalizations, greater emergency care use, lower use of mammography, lower receipt of influenza vaccine, poorer ability to demonstrate taking medications appropriately, poorer ability to interpret labels and health messages, and, among seniors, poorer overall health status and higher mortality. Health literacy level potentially mediates disparities between blacks and whites. The strength of evidence of numeracy studies was insufficient to low, limiting conclusions about the influence of numeracy on health care service use or health outcomes. Two studies suggested numeracy may mediate the effect of disparities on health outcomes. We found no evidence concerning oral health literacy and outcomes. Among intervention studies (27 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 2 cluster RCTs, and 13 quasi-experimental designs), the strength of evidence for specific design features was low or insufficient. However, several specific features seemed to improve comprehension in one or a few studies. The strength of evidence was moderate for the effect of mixed interventions on health care service use; the effect of intensive self-management inventions on behavior; and the effect of disease-management interventions on disease prevalence/severity. The effects of other mixed interventions on other health outcomes, including knowledge, self-efficacy, adherence, and quality of life, and costs were mixed; thus, the strength of evidence was insufficient. Conclusions The field of health literacy has advanced since the 2004 report. Future research priorities include justifying appropriate cutoffs for health literacy levels prior to conducting studies; developing tools that measure additional related skills, particularly oral (spoken) health literacy; and examining mediators and moderators of the effect of health literacy. Priorities in advancing the design features of interventions include testing novel approaches to increase motivation, techniques for delivering information orally or numerically, "work around" interventions such as patient advocates; determining the effective components of already-tested interventions; determining the cost-effectiveness of programs; and determining the effect of policy and practice interventions.

/pdf/health-literacy-interventions-and-outcomes-an-updated-chswt8nilu.pdf

Health literacy interventions and outcomes: an updated systematic review.

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) regulates the survival and growth of neurons, and influences synaptic efficiency and plasticity. Several studies report reduced peripheral (blood) levels of BDNF in schizophrenia, but findings are inconsistent. We undertook the first systematic review with meta-analysis of studies examining blood BDNF levels in schizophrenia compared with healthy controls, and examined potential effects of age, gender and medication. Included are individual studies of BDNF blood (serum or plasma) levels in schizophrenia (including schizoaffective disorder, or first episode psychosis), compared with age-matched healthy controls, obtained by electronic Medline and Embase searches, and hand searching. The decision to include or exclude studies, data extraction and quality assessment were completed by two independent reviewers. The initial search revealed 378 records, of which 342 were excluded on reading the Abstract, because they did not examine BDNF blood levels in schizophrenia compared with healthy controls. Of 36 papers screened in full, 17 were eligible for inclusion, but one was subsequently removed as an outlier. The remaining 16 studies provided moderate quality evidence of reduced blood BDNF levels in schizophrenia (Hedges g=−0.458, 95% confidence interval=−0.770 to −0.146, P<0.004, random effects model). Subgroup analyses reveal reduced BDNF in both drug-naive and medicated patients, and in males and females with schizophrenia. Meta-regressions showed an association between reduced BDNF in schizophrenia and increasing age, but no effects of medication dosage. Overall, blood levels of BDNF are reduced in medicated and drug-naive patients with schizophrenia; this evidence is of moderate quality, that is, precise but with considerable, unexplained heterogeneity across study results.

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels in schizophrenia: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Systematic meta-review and quality assessment of the structural brain alterations in schizophrenia

Background Childhood adversity is a putative risk factor for schizophrenia, although evidence supporting this suggestion is inconsistent and controversial. The aim of this review was to pool and quality assess the current evidence pertaining to childhood adversity in people with schizophrenia compared to other psychiatric disorders and to non-psychiatric controls. Method Included were case-control, cohort and cross-sectional studies. Medline, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases were searched. Study reporting was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist and pooled evidence quality was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results Twenty-five studies met inclusion criteria. Moderate to high quality evidence suggests increased rates of childhood adversity in schizophrenia compared to controls [odds ratio (OR) 3.60, p < 0.00001]. Increased childhood adversity was also reported in schizophrenia compared to anxiety disorders (OR 2.54, p = 0.007), although the effect was not significant in the subgroup analysis of five studies assessing only sexual abuse. No differences in rates of childhood adversity were found between schizophrenia and affective psychosis, depression and personality disorders whereas decreased rates of childhood adversity were found in schizophrenia relative to dissociative disorders and post-traumatic stress disorder (OR 0.03, p < 0.0001). Conclusions This is the first meta-analysis to report a medium to large effect of childhood adversity in people with schizophrenia and to assess specificity for schizophrenia. Further research is required that incorporates longitudinal design and other potentially causal variables to assess additive and/or interactive effects.

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/ioppn/depts/fans/sackler-group/Publications/20131/Childhoodadversityinschizophrenia-asystematicmata-analysis.pdf

Sandra Matheson

Papers

Brain-derived neurotrophic factor levels in schizophrenia: a systematic review with meta-analysis

Systematic meta-review and quality assessment of the structural brain alterations in schizophrenia

Childhood adversity in schizophrenia: a systematic meta-analysis.

Morning cortisol levels in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: a meta-analysis.

A systematic meta-review grading the evidence for non-genetic risk factors and putative antecedents of schizophrenia