Comparing embodiment experiences in expert meditators and non-meditators using the rubber hand illusion.

One assessment of embodiment is the rubber hand illusion (RHI), a visuo-tactile illusion in which individuals attribute a sense of ownership to a rubber hand and disownership to their real hand. Interestingly, interoception seems to influence RHI susceptibility. In this study, we administered the RHI and the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA) to examine embodiment experiences and interoceptive awareness in experienced meditators (n = 15) and non-meditators (n = 15). We found that meditators reported less intensity in rubber hand ownership, but there was no significant difference between groups with respect to disownership of their real hand or drift in finger proprioception. Moreover, we found, from our MAIA results, that disownership experiences were associated with a feeling of trusting one's body in non-meditators and with the ability to maintain attention to unpleasant bodily sensations in meditators. These results suggest a unique relationship between interoceptive awareness and embodiment related to meditation.

Sharing pain and relief: neural correlates of physicians during treatment of patients.

Patient-physician interactions significantly contribute to placebo effects and clinical outcomes. While the neural correlates of placebo responses have been studied in patients, the neurobiology of the clinician during treatment is unknown. This study investigated physicians' brain activations during patient-physician interaction while the patient was experiencing pain, including a 'treatment', 'no-treatment' and 'control' condition. Here, we demonstrate that physicians activated brain regions previously implicated in expectancy for pain-relief and increased attention during treatment of patients, including the right ventrolateral and dorsolateral prefrontal cortices. The physician's ability to take the patients' perspective correlated with increased brain activations in the rostral anterior cingulate cortex, a region that has been associated with processing of reward and subjective value. We suggest that physician treatment involves neural representations of treatment expectation, reward processing and empathy, paired with increased activation in attention-related structures. Our findings further the understanding of the neural representations associated with reciprocal interactions between clinicians and patients; a hallmark for successful treatment outcomes.

The placebo effect in irritable bowel syndrome trials: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite the apparent high placebo response rate in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCT) of patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS), little is known about the variability and predictors of this response. OBJECTIVES: To describe the magnitude of response in placebo arms of IBS clinical trials and to identify which factors predict the variability of the placebo response. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of published, English language, RCT with 20 or more IBS patients who were treated for at least 2 weeks. This analysis is limited to studies that assessed global response (improvement in overall symptoms). The variables considered as potential placebo modifiers were study design, study duration, use of a run-in phase, Jadad score, entry criteria, number of office visits, number of office visits/study duration, use of diagnostic testing, gender, age and type of medication studied. FINDINGS: Forty-five placebo-controlled RCTs met the inclusion criteria. The placebo response ranged from 16.0 to 71.4% with a population-weighted average of 40.2%, 95% CI (35.9-44.4). Significant associations with lower placebo response rates were fulfillment of the Rome criteria for study entry (P=0.049) and an increased number of office visits (P=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Placebo effects in IBS clinical trials measuring a global outcome are highly variable. Entry criteria and number of office visits are significant predictors of the placebo response. More stringent entry criteria and an increased number of office visits appear to independently decrease the placebo response.

Lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials.

OBJECTIVES: To research the lay public's understanding of equipoise and randomisation in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to look at why information on this may not be not taken in or remembered, as well as the effects of providing information designed to overcome barriers. DESIGN: Investigations were informed by an update of systematic review on patients' understanding of consent information in clinical trials, and by relevant theory and evidence from experimental psychology. Nine investigations were conducted with nine participants. SETTING: Access (return to education), leisure and vocational courses at Further Education Colleges in the Midlands, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Healthy adults with a wide range of educational backgrounds and ages. INVESTIGATIONS: Participants read hypothetical scenarios and wrote brief answers to subsequent questions. Sub-samples of participants were interviewed individually to elaborate on their written answers. Participants' background assumptions concerning equipoise and randomisation were examined and ways of helping participants recognise the scientific benefits of randomisation were explored. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Judgments on allocation methods; treatment preferences; the acceptability of random allocation; whether or not individual doctors could be completely unsure about the best treatment; whether or not doctors should reveal treatment preferences under conditions of collective equipoise; and how sure experts would be about the best treatment following random allocation vs doctor/patient choice. Assessments of understanding hypothetical trial information. RESULTS: Recent literature continues to report trial participants' failure to understand or remember information about randomisation and equipoise, despite the provision of clear and readable trial information leaflets. In current best practice, written trial information describes what will happen without offering accessible explanations. As a consequence, patients may create their own incorrect interpretations and consent or refusal may be inadequately informed. In six investigations, most participants identified which methods of allocation were random, but judged the random allocation methods to be unacceptable in a trial context; the mere description of a treatment as new was insufficient to engender a preference for it over a standard treatment; around half of the participants denied that a doctor could be completely unsure about the best treatment. A majority of participants judged it unacceptable for a doctor to suggest letting chance decide when uncertain of the best treatment, and, in the absence of a justification for random allocation, participants did not recognise scientific benefits of random allocation over normal treatment allocation methods. The pattern of results across three intervention studies suggests that merely supplementing written trial information with an explanation is unlikely to be helpful. However, when people manage to focus on the trial's aim of increasing knowledge (as opposed to making treatment decisions about individuals), and process an explanation actively, they may be helped to understand the scientific reasons for random allocation. CONCLUSIONS: This research was not carried out in real healthcare settings. However, participants who could correctly identify random allocation methods, yet judged random allocation unacceptable, doubted the possibility of individual equipoise and saw no scientific benefits of random allocation over doctor/patient choice, are unlikely to draw upon contrasting views if invited to enter a real clinical trial. This suggests that many potential trial participants may have difficulty understanding and remembering trial information that conforms to current best practice in its descriptions of randomisation and equipoise. Given the extent of the disparity between the assumptions underlying trial design and the assumptions held by the lay public, the solution is unlikely to be simple. Nevertheless, the results suggest that including an accessible explanation of the scientific benefits of randomisation may be beneficial provided potential participants are also enabled to reflect on the trial's aim of advancing knowledge, and to think actively about the information presented. Further areas for consideration include: the identification of effective combinations of written and oral information; helping participants to reflect on the aim of advancing knowledge; and an evidence-based approach to leaflet construction.

Synthesis of N,N-dialkylaniline-2'-deoxyuridine conjugates for DNA-mediated electron transfer studies.

Syntheses of two analogs of deoxyuridine with N,N-dialkylaniline chromophores are reported. 5-[3-(N-methylphenylamino)propanoyl]-2'-deoxyuridine (1) and 5-[2-(4-N,N-dimethylaminophenyl)ethyl)]-2'-deoxyuridine (2) are prepared by palladium-mediated coupling. Preparation of 2 was facilitated by in situ transient O4-trimethylsilyl protection during alkynylation which suppressed secondary cyclization of the coupling adduct.

State of the state's health care.

California leaders tell us what's right and what's wrong with our health care system. While consensus on health care reform is far from being reached, all agree that universal access, cost control and preventive services must be part of any health reform plan.

Individual differences in cognitive strategy and personality traits as measured by the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire.

The relationship between personality and preference for use of the right or left hemisphere of the brain in cognitive processing was investigated. Lateral eye movements were recorded as 50 female and 20 male right-handed subjects considered questions requiring reflection. The questions were not obviously "verbal" or "spatial" in nature but did require differing levels of reflection. Questions requiring higher levels of reflection produced a higher rate of lateral eye movement responses. Percent right eye movement for individual subjects was then correlated with scores on the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, using both first-order factors and the second-order factor Cortertia, which has some face validity as describing the personality generally ascribed to those who produce mostly right lateral eye movements. No correlation was found between the preferred directions of eye movements and 16 PF factors, which suggests that the lateral eye movements reflect thinking and problem-solving strategies but are not associated with personality styles.