Pennsylvania State University

About: Pennsylvania State University is a education organization based out in State College, Pennsylvania, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 79763 authors who have published 196876 publications receiving 8318601 citations. The organization is also known as: Penn State & PSU.

Social Capital and Value Creation: The Role of Intrafirm Networks

Abstract: Using data collected from multiple respondents in all the business units of a large multinational electronics company, we examined the relationships both among the structural, relational, and cogni...

Epitaxial BiFeO3 multiferroic thin film heterostructures.

Abstract: Enhancement of polarization and related properties in heteroepitaxially constrained thin films of the ferroelectromagnet, BiFeO3, is reported. Structure analysis indicates that the crystal structure of film is monoclinic in contrast to bulk, which is rhombohedral. The films display a room-temperature spontaneous polarization (50 to 60 microcoulombs per square centimeter) almost an order of magnitude higher than that of the bulk (6.1 microcoulombs per square centimeter). The observed enhancement is corroborated by first-principles calculations and found to originate from a high sensitivity of the polarization to small changes in lattice parameters. The films also exhibit enhanced thickness-dependent magnetism compared with the bulk. These enhanced and combined functional responses in thin film form present an opportunity to create and implement thin film devices that actively couple the magnetic and ferroelectric order parameters.

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

Cardiac-resynchronization therapy with or without an implantable defibrillator in advanced chronic heart failure.

Abstract: background We tested the hypothesis that prophylactic cardiac-resynchronization therapy in the form of biventricular stimulation with a pacemaker with or without a defibrillator would reduce the risk of death and hospitalization among patients with advanced chronic heart failure and intraventricular conduction delays. methods A total of 1520 patients who had advanced heart failure (New York Heart Association class III or IV) due to ischemic or nonischemic cardiomyopathies and a QRS interval of at least 120 msec were randomly assigned in a 1:2:2 ratio to receive optimal pharmacologic therapy (diuretics, angiotensin-converting–enzyme inhibitors, beta-blockers, and spironolactone) alone or in combination with cardiac-resynchronization therapy with either a pacemaker or a pacemaker–defibrillator. The primary composite end point was the time to death from or hospitalization for any cause. results As compared with optimal pharmacologic therapy alone, cardiac-resynchronization therapy with a pacemaker decreased the risk of the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.81; P=0.014), as did cardiac-resynchronization therapy with a pacemaker–defibrillator (hazard ratio, 0.80; P=0.01). The risk of the combined end point of death from or hospitalization for heart failure was reduced by 34 percent in the pacemaker group (P<0.002) and by 40 percent in the pacemaker–defibrillator group (P<0.001 for the comparison with the pharmacologic-therapy group). A pacemaker reduced the risk of the secondary end point of death from any cause by 24 percent (P=0.059), and a pacemaker–defibrillator reduced the risk by 36 percent (P=0.003). conclusions In patients with advanced heart failure and a prolonged QRS interval, cardiac-resynchronization therapy decreases the combined risk of death from any cause or first hospitalization and, when combined with an implantable defibrillator, significantly reduces mortality.

Missing data analysis: making it work in the real world.

Abstract: This review presents a practical summary of the missing data literature, including a sketch of missing data theory and descriptions of normalmodel multiple imputation (MI) and maximum likelihood methods. Practical missing data analysis issues are discussed, most notably the inclusion of auxiliary variables for improving power and reducing bias. Solutions are given for missing data challenges such as handling longitudinal, categorical, and clustered data with normal-model MI; including interactions in the missing data model; and handling large numbers of variables. The discussion of attrition and nonignorable missingness emphasizes the need for longitudinal diagnostics and for reducing the uncertainty about the missing data mechanism under attrition. Strategies suggested for reducing attrition bias include using auxiliary variables, collecting follow-up data on a sample of those initially missing, and collecting data on intent to drop out. Suggestions are given for moving forward with research on missing data and attrition.