Task demands and limb apraxia in stroke

The present study was designed to examine the frequency and severity of apraxia in patients with left- or right-hemisphere stroke in both pantomime and imitation conditions and to compare the frequency of apraxia in each stroke group across the three patterns of apraxia described in Roy's model (Roy, 1996). Ninety-nine stroke patients and 15 age-matched healthy adults performed eight transitive gestures to pantomime and to imitation. Gestural performance was quantified as accuracy on five performance dimensions; a composite score, an arithmetic combination of the five performance dimensions, was used as an index of the overall accuracy. Analyses revealed a comparable proportion of patients in each stroke group were classified as apraxic in the imitation condition, but a higher proportion of left stroke patients were apraxic in the pantomime condition. The severity of apraxia in each stroke group and the performance dimensions affected were, however, comparable. Analyses of the patterns of apraxia (pantomime alone, imitation alone or apraxia in both conditions) revealed a higher frequency of apraxia in both stroke groups for the pattern reflecting apraxia in both conditions, indicating that a disruption at the movement execution stage of gesture performance was most common.     

A critical review of a recent decade of stuttering research

The purpose of the present investigation was to catalogue and evaluate portions of the literature on stuttering from 1967 to 1977. Of particular interest was the identification of the research literature. Of 287 articles located and evaluated, 181 were research reports. These reports were categorized according to topics, subject selection, subjects' characteristics, type of research designs and use of randomization, reliability, and statistical methods. Unhappily, many of the faults identified in reviews ten to twenty years earlier tended to persist, and many of the deficiencies recently cited by authorities in the field were found to characterize this literature.     

Effectiveness of antidepressants: an evidence myth constructed from a thousand randomized trials?

Antidepressants, in particular newer agents, are among the most widely prescribed medications worldwide with annual sales of billions of dollars. The introduction of these agents in the market has passed through seemingly strict regulatory control. Over a thousand randomized trials have been conducted with antidepressants. Statistically significant benefits have been repeatedly demonstrated and the medical literature is flooded with several hundreds of "positive" trials (both pre-approval and post-approval). However, two recent meta-analyses question this picture. The first meta-analysis used data that were submitted to FDA for the approval of 12 antidepressant drugs. While only half of these trials had formally significant effectiveness, published reports almost ubiquitously claimed significant results. "Negative" trials were either left unpublished or were distorted to present "positive" results. The average benefit of these drugs based on the FDA data was of small magnitude, while the published literature suggested larger benefits. A second meta-analysis using also FDA-submitted data examined the relationship between treatment effect and baseline severity of depression. Drug-placebo differences increased with increasing baseline severity and the difference became large enough to be clinically important only in the very small minority of patient populations with severe major depression. In severe major depression, antidepressants did not become more effective, simply placebo lost effectiveness. These data suggest that antidepressants may be less effective than their wide marketing suggests. Short-term benefits are small and long-term balance of benefits and harms is understudied. I discuss how the use of many small randomized trials with clinically non-relevant outcomes, improper interpretation of statistical significance, manipulated study design, biased selection of study populations, short follow-up, and selective and distorted reporting of results has built and nourished a seemingly evidence-based myth on antidepressant effectiveness and how higher evidence standards, with very large long-term trials and careful prospective meta-analyses of individual-level data may reach closer to the truth and clinically useful evidence.     

The 9th annual INDUS-EM 2013 Emergency Medicine Summit, “Principles,Practices, and Patients,” a level one international meeting,Kerala University of Health Sciences and Jubilee Mission Medical College and Research Institute,Thrissur, Kerala,India, October 23–27, 2013

INDUS-EM is India’s only level one conference imparting and exchanging quality knowledge in acute care. Specifically, in general and specialized emergency care and training in trauma, burns, cardiac, stroke, environmental and disaster medicine. It provides a series of exchanges regarding academic development and implementation of training tools related to developing future academic faculty and residents in Emergency Medicine in India. The INDUS-EM leadership and board of directors invited scholars from multiple institutions to participate in this advanced educational symposium that was held in Thrissur, Kerala in October 2013.