University of Kentucky

About: University of Kentucky is a education organization based out in Lexington, Kentucky, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 43933 authors who have published 92195 publications receiving 3256087 citations. The organization is also known as: UK.

Mutations in the FUS/TLS gene on chromosome 16 cause familial amyotrophic lateral sclerosis.

Abstract: Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a fatal degenerative motor neuron disorder Ten percent of cases are inherited; most involve unidentified genes We report here 13 mutations in the fused in sarcoma/translated in liposarcoma (FUS/TLS) gene on chromosome 16 that were specific for familial ALS The FUS/TLS protein binds to RNA, functions in diverse processes, and is normally located predominantly in the nucleus In contrast, the mutant forms of FUS/TLS accumulated in the cytoplasm of neurons, a pathology that is similar to that of the gene TAR DNA-binding protein 43 (TDP43), whose mutations also cause ALS Neuronal cytoplasmic protein aggregation and defective RNA metabolism thus appear to be common pathogenic mechanisms involved in ALS and possibly in other neurodegenerative disorders

Construct Validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Meditating and Nonmeditating Samples.

Abstract: Previous research on assessment of mindfulness by self-report suggests that it may include five component skills: observing, describing, acting with awareness, nonjudging of inner experience, and nonreactivity to inner experience. These elements of mindfulness can be measured with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). The authors investigated several aspects of the construct validity of the FFMQ in experienced meditators and nonmeditating comparison groups. Consistent with predictions, most mindfulness facets were significantly related to meditation experience and to psychological symptoms and well-being. As expected, relationships between the observing facet and psychological adjustment varied with meditation experience. Regression and mediation analyses showed that several of the facets contributed independently to the prediction of well-being and significantly mediated the relationship between meditation experience and well-being. Findings support the construct validity of the FFMQ in a combination of samples not previously investigated.

Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (DC/TMD) for Clinical and Research Applications: recommendations of the International RDC/TMD Consortium Network* and Orofacial Pain Special Interest Group†

Abstract: Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) are a significant public health problem affecting approximately 5% to 12% of the population.1 TMD is the second most common musculoskeletal condition (after chronic low back pain) resulting in pain and disability.1 Pain-related TMD can impact the individual's daily activities, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life. Overall, the annual TMD management cost in the USA, not including imaging, has doubled in the last decade to $4 billion.1 Patients often seek consultation with dentists for their TMD, especially for pain-related TMD. Diagnostic criteria for TMD with simple, clear, reliable, and valid operational definitions for the history, examination, and imaging procedures are needed to render physical diagnoses in both clinical and research settings. In addition, biobehavioral assessment of pain-related behavior and psychosocial functioning—an essential part of the diagnostic process—is required and provides the minimal information whereby one can determine whether the patient's pain disorder, especially when chronic, warrants further multidisciplinary assessment. Taken together, a new dual-axis Diagnostic Criteria for TMD (DC/TMD) will provide evidence-based criteria for the clinician to use when assessing patients, and will facilitate communication regarding consultations, referrals, and prognosis.2 The research community benefits from the ability to use well-defined and clinically relevant characteristics associated with the phenotype in order to facilitate more generalizable research. When clinicians and researchers use the same criteria, taxonomy, and nomenclature, then clinical questions and experience can be more easily transferred into relevant research questions, and research findings are more accessible to clinicians to better diagnose and manage their patients. The Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders (RDC/TMD) have been the most widely employed diagnostic protocol for TMD research since its publication in 1992.3 This classification system was based on the biopsychosocial model of pain4 that included an Axis I physical assessment, using reliable and well-operationalized diagnostic criteria, and an Axis II assessment of psychosocial status and pain-related disability. The intent was to simultaneously provide a physical diagnosis and identify other relevant characteristics of the patient that could influence the expression and thus management of their TMD. Indeed, the longer the pain persists, the greater the potential for emergence and amplification of cognitive, psychosocial, and behavioral risk factors, with resultant enhanced pain sensitivity, greater likelihood of additional pain persistence, and reduced probability of success from standard treatments.5 The RDC/TMD (1992) was intended to be only a first step toward improved TMD classification, and the authors stated the need for future investigation of the accuracy of the Axis I diagnostic algorithms in terms of reliability and criterion validity—the latter involving the use of credible reference standard diagnoses. Also recommended was further assessment of the clinical utility of the Axis II instruments. The original RDC/TMD Axis I physical diagnoses have content validity based on the critical review by experts of the published diagnostic approach in use at that time and were tested using population-based epidemiologic data.6 Subsequently, a multicenter study showed that, for the most common TMD, the original RDC/TMD diagnoses exhibited sufficient reliability for clinical use.7 While the validity of the individual RDC/TMD diagnoses has been extensively investigated, assessment of the criterion validity for the complete spectrum of RDC/TMD diagnoses had been absent until recently.8 For the original RDC/TMD Axis II instruments, good evidence for their reliability and validity for measuring psychosocial status and pain-related disability already existed when the classification system was published.9–13 Subsequently, a variety of studies have demonstrated the significance and utility of the original RDC/TMD biobehavioral measures in such areas as predicting outcomes of clinical trials, escalation from acute to chronic pain, and experimental laboratory settings.14–20 Other studies have shown that the original RDC/TMD biobehavioral measures are incomplete in terms of prediction of disease course.21–23 The overall utility of the biobehavioral measures in routine clinical settings has, however, yet to be demonstrated, in part because most studies have to date focused on Axis I diagnoses rather than Axis II biobehavioral factors.24 The aims of this article are to present the evidence-based new Axis I and Axis II DC/TMD to be used in both clinical and research settings, as well as present the processes related to their development.

Brain Infarction and the Clinical Expression of Alzheimer Disease: The Nun Study

Abstract: Objective. —To determine the relationship of brain infarction to the clinical expression of Alzheimer disease (AD). Design. —Cognitive function and the prevalence of dementia were determined for participants in the Nun Study who later died. At autopsy, lacunar and larger brain infarcts were identified, and senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the neocortex were quantitated. Participants with abundant senile plaques and some neurofibrillary tangles in the neocortex were classified as having met the neuropathologic criteria for AD. Setting. —Convents in the Midwestern, Eastern, and Southern United States. Participants. —A total of 102 college-educated women aged 76 to 100 years. Main Outcome Measures. —Cognitive function assessed by standard tests and dementia and AD assessed by clinical and neuropathologic criteria. Results. —Among 61 participants who met the neuropathologic criteria for AD, those with brain infarcts had poorer cognitive function and a higher prevalence of dementia than those without infarcts. Participants with lacunar infarcts in the basal ganglia, thalamus, or deep white matter had an especially high prevalence of dementia, compared with those without infarcts (the odds ratio [OR] for dementia was 20.7,95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.5-288.0). Fewer neuropathologic lesions of AD appeared to result in dementia in those with lacunar infarcts in the basal ganglia, thalamus, or deep white matter than in those without infarcts. In contrast, among 41 participants who did not meet the neuropathologic criteria for AD, brain infarcts were only weakly associated with poor cognitive function and dementia. Among all 102 participants, atherosclerosis of the circle of Willis was strongly associated with lacunar and large brain infarcts. Conclusion. —These findings suggest that cerebrovascular disease may play an important role in determining the presence and severity of the clinical symptoms of AD.