Telehealth is the use of information and communications technology by healthcare professionals to provide care to patients. When this technology is being used specifically for genetic services, it is called telegenetics. Previous studies that examine the small-scale use of telegenetics for the field of genetic counseling have shown that the technology may provide a way to address the problem of patient access to genetic counseling services, assuming its efficacy. Patients are satisfied with telegenetics, but genetic counselors hold more reservations. Because of this and the many regulatory barriers in its way, telegenetics was only slowly being adopted when the coronavirus was declared a pandemic in March 2020. The pandemic forced a switch to telegenetics at a scale never seen before. This study begins with a literature review to assess the situation of telegenetics before and during the pandemic. It then surveys practicing genetic counselors in Arizona in order to reveal what they think about telegenetics when it is the encouraged, and sometimes only, modality. Since the literature review revealed that genetic counselors, not patients, are the ones with concerns, it is important to hear their points of view. This study reveals that genetic counselors want telegenetics as an option but not as a replacement for in-person appointments. All respondents agreed that increased patient access is the main benefit of telegenetics. There are reported challenges that must be overcome, but genetic counselors in Arizona overwhelming believe that telegenetics use will be continued in the future.
Critical flicker fusion thresholds (CFFTs) describe when quick amplitude modulations of a light source become undetectable as the frequency of the modulation increases and are thought to underlie a number of visual processing skills, including reading. Here, we compare the impact of two vision-training approaches, one involving contrast sensitivity training and the other directional dot-motion training, compared to an active control group trained on Sudoku. The three training paradigms were compared on their effectiveness for altering CFFT. Directional dot-motion and contrast sensitivity training resulted in significant improvement in CFFT, while the Sudoku group did not yield significant improvement. This finding indicates that dot-motion and contrast sensitivity training similarly transfer to effect changes in CFFT. The results, combined with prior research linking CFFT to high-order cognitive processes such as reading ability, and studies showing positive impact of both dot-motion and contrast sensitivity training in reading, provide a possible mechanistic link of how these different training approaches impact reading abilities.
Although autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a serious lifelong condition, its underlying neural mechanism remains unclear. Recently, neuroimaging-based classifiers for ASD and typically developed (TD) individuals were developed to identify the abnormality of functional connections (FCs). Due to over-fitting and interferential effects of varying measurement conditions and demographic distributions, no classifiers have been strictly validated for independent cohorts. Here we overcome these difficulties by developing a novel machine-learning algorithm that identifies a small number of FCs that separates ASD versus TD. The classifier achieves high accuracy for a Japanese discovery cohort and demonstrates a remarkable degree of generalization for two independent validation cohorts in the USA and Japan. The developed ASD classifier does not distinguish individuals with major depressive disorder and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder from their controls but moderately distinguishes patients with schizophrenia from their controls. The results leave open the viable possibility of exploring neuroimaging-based dimensions quantifying the multiple-disorder spectrum.
As life expectancy increases worldwide, age related diseases are becoming greater health concerns. One of the most prevalent age-related diseases in the United States is dementia, with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) being the most common form, accounting for 60-80% of cases. Genetics plays a large role in a person’s risk of developing AD. Familial AD, which makes up less than 1% of all AD cases, is caused by autosomal dominant gene mutations and has almost 100% penetrance. Genetic risk factors are believed to make up about 49%-79% of the risk in sporadic cases. Many different genetic risk factors for both familial and sporadic AD have been identified, but there is still much work to be done in the field of AD, especially in non-Caucasian populations. This review summarizes the three major genes responsible for familial AD, namely APP, PSEN1 and PSEN2. Also discussed are seven identified genetic risk factors for sporadic AD, single nucleotide polymorphisms in the APOE, ABCA7, NEDD9, CASS4, PTK2B, CLU, and PICALM genes. An overview of the main function of the proteins associated with the genes is given, along with the supposed connection to AD pathology.
Within the last decade, there has been a lot of hype surrounding the potential medical applications of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) technologies. During the same timespan, big tech companies such as Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Google have entered the healthcare market as developers of health-based AI and ML technologies. This project aims to create a comprehensive map of the existing health-AI market landscape for the standard biotech reader and to provide a critical commentary on the existing market structure.
In 2015, the FDA began a process to reevaluate and update the regulations surrounding homeopathic products to better fit their present risk-based model. Past regulations were set in 1938; and as the world evolved, these have been found to set inadequate standards. By reviewing the agency’s guidance drafts and core regulatory documents, we come to understand that these changes are motivated by a desire for homeopathic remedies to follow high standards that apply to other products for the benefit of the U.S. consumers. FDA has made significant advances by proposing new Guidances on homeopathic products, listening to homeopathic community and consumers, and withdrawing the Compliance Policy Guide 400.400 issued in 1988.
We recommend for homeopathic manufacturers and practitioners to see the FDA as an ally and cooperate fully with the proposed changes for the regulation the agency gives out. Doing so will give the homeopathic community the best chance at continuing to sell their products and reach their consumers in the United States. In the same token, the FDA should do their best to involve homeopathic professionals in some way in this regulatory process, to encourage participation and compliance by the broader homeopathic community. Doing so ensures a climate of teamwork among different facets of the medical community in the United States.
