36 results
Depression, anxiety and PTSD symptoms before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK
- K. S. Young, K. L. Purves, C. Hübel, M. R. Davies, K. N. Thompson, S. Bristow, G. Krebs, A. Danese, C. Hirsch, C. E. Parsons, E. Vassos, B. N. Adey, S. Bright, L. Hegemann, Y. T. Lee, G. Kalsi, D. Monssen, J. Mundy, A. J. Peel, C. Rayner, H. C. Rogers, A. ter Kuile, C. Ward, K. York, Y. Lin, A. B. Palmos, U. Schmidt, D. Veale, T. R. Nicholson, T. A. Pollak, S. A. M. Stevelink, T. Moukhtarian, A. R. Martineau, H. Holt, B. Maughan, A. Al-Chalabi, K. Ray Chaudhuri, M. P. Richardson, J. R. Bradley, P. F. Chinnery, N. Kingston, S. Papadia, K. E. Stirrups, R. Linger, M. Hotopf, T. C. Eley, G. Breen
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 53 / Issue 12 / September 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 July 2022, pp. 5428-5441
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
The impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on mental health is still being unravelled. It is important to identify which individuals are at greatest risk of worsening symptoms. This study aimed to examine changes in depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms using prospective and retrospective symptom change assessments, and to find and examine the effect of key risk factors.
MethodOnline questionnaires were administered to 34 465 individuals (aged 16 years or above) in April/May 2020 in the UK, recruited from existing cohorts or via social media. Around one-third (n = 12 718) of included participants had prior diagnoses of depression or anxiety and had completed pre-pandemic mental health assessments (between September 2018 and February 2020), allowing prospective investigation of symptom change.
ResultsProspective symptom analyses showed small decreases in depression (PHQ-9: −0.43 points) and anxiety [generalised anxiety disorder scale – 7 items (GAD)-7: −0.33 points] and increases in PTSD (PCL-6: 0.22 points). Conversely, retrospective symptom analyses demonstrated significant large increases (PHQ-9: 2.40; GAD-7 = 1.97), with 55% reported worsening mental health since the beginning of the pandemic on a global change rating. Across both prospective and retrospective measures of symptom change, worsening depression, anxiety and PTSD symptoms were associated with prior mental health diagnoses, female gender, young age and unemployed/student status.
ConclusionsWe highlight the effect of prior mental health diagnoses on worsening mental health during the pandemic and confirm previously reported sociodemographic risk factors. Discrepancies between prospective and retrospective measures of changes in mental health may be related to recall bias-related underestimation of prior symptom severity.
Psychological and demographic characteristics of 368 patients with dissociative seizures: data from the CODES cohort
- Laura H. Goldstein, Emily J. Robinson, John D. C. Mellers, Jon Stone, Alan Carson, Trudie Chalder, Markus Reuber, Carole Eastwood, Sabine Landau, Paul McCrone, Michele Moore, Iris Mosweu, Joanna Murray, Iain Perdue, Izabela Pilecka, Mark P. Richardson, Nick Medford, on behalf of the CODES Study Group
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 51 / Issue 14 / October 2021
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 May 2020, pp. 2433-2445
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background
We examined demographic, clinical, and psychological characteristics of a large cohort (n = 368) of adults with dissociative seizures (DS) recruited to the CODES randomised controlled trial (RCT) and explored differences associated with age at onset of DS, gender, and DS semiology.
MethodsPrior to randomisation within the CODES RCT, we collected demographic and clinical data on 368 participants. We assessed psychiatric comorbidity using the Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) and a screening measure of personality disorder and measured anxiety, depression, psychological distress, somatic symptom burden, emotional expression, functional impact of DS, avoidance behaviour, and quality of life. We undertook comparisons based on reported age at DS onset (<40 v. ⩾40), gender (male v. female), and DS semiology (predominantly hyperkinetic v. hypokinetic).
ResultsOur cohort was predominantly female (72%) and characterised by high levels of socio-economic deprivation. Two-thirds had predominantly hyperkinetic DS. Of the total, 69% had ⩾1 comorbid M.I.N.I. diagnosis (median number = 2), with agoraphobia being the most common concurrent diagnosis. Clinical levels of distress were reported by 86% and characteristics associated with maladaptive personality traits by 60%. Moderate-to-severe functional impairment, high levels of somatic symptoms, and impaired quality of life were also reported. Women had a younger age at DS onset than men.
ConclusionsOur study highlights the burden of psychopathology and socio-economic deprivation in a large, heterogeneous cohort of patients with DS. The lack of clear differences based on gender, DS semiology and age at onset suggests these factors do not add substantially to the heterogeneity of the cohort.
LO68: Does point-of-care ultrasonography change actual care delivered by shock subcategory in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? An international randomized controlled trial from the SHoC-ED investigators
- P. Atkinson, S. Hunter, M. Peach, L. Taylor, A. Kanji, D. Lewis, J. Milne, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D. Van Hoving, L. Richardson, G. Stoica, J. French
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 21 / Issue S1 / May 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 May 2019, p. S32
- Print publication:
- May 2019
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Although use of point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) protocols for patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the Emergency Department (ED) is widespread, our previously reported SHoC-ED study showed no clear survival or length of stay benefit for patients assessed with PoCUS. In this analysis, we examine if the use of PoCUS changed fluid administration and rates of other emergency interventions between patients with different shock types. The primary comparison was between cardiogenic and non-cardiogenic shock types. Methods: A post-hoc analysis was completed on the database from an RCT of 273 patients who presented to the ED with undifferentiated hypotension (SBP <100 or shock index > 1) and who had been randomized to receive standard care with or without PoCUS in 6 centres in Canada and South Africa. PoCUS-trained physicians performed scans after initial assessment. Shock categories and diagnoses recorded at 60 minutes after ED presentation, were used to allocate patients into subcategories of shock for analysis of treatment. We analyzed actual care delivered including initial IV fluid bolus volumes (mL), rates of inotrope use and major procedures. Standard statistical tests were employed. Sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate difference. Results: Although there were expected differences in the mean fluid bolus volume between patients with non-cardiogenic and cardiogenic shock, there was no difference in fluid bolus volume between the control and PoCUS groups (non-cardiogenic control 1878 mL (95% CI 1550 – 2206 mL) vs. non-cardiogenic PoCUS 1687 mL (1458 – 1916 mL); and cardiogenic control 768 mL (194 – 1341 mL) vs. cardiogenic PoCUS 981 mL (341 – 1620 mL). Likewise there were no differences in rates of inotrope administration, or major procedures for any of the subcategories of shock between the control group and PoCUS group patients. The most common subcategory of shock was distributive. Conclusion: Despite differences in care delivered by subcategory of shock, we did not find any significant difference in actual care delivered between patients who were examined using PoCUS and those who were not. This may help to explain the previously reported lack of outcome difference between groups.
LO22: Does point-of-care ultrasonography improve diagnostic accuracy in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? An international randomized controlled trial from the SHoC-ED investigators
- P. Atkinson, M. Peach, S. Hunter, A. Kanji, L. Taylor, D. Lewis, J. Milne, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D. van Hoving, L. Richardson, G. Stoica, J. French
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 21 / Issue S1 / May 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 May 2019, p. S15
- Print publication:
- May 2019
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of care ultrasound has been reported to improve diagnosis in non-traumatic hypotensive ED patients. We compared diagnostic performance of physicians with and without PoCUS in undifferentiated hypotensive patients as part of an international prospective randomized controlled study. The primary outcome was diagnostic performance of PoCUS for cardiogenic vs. non-cardiogenic shock. Methods: SHoC-ED recruited hypotensive patients (SBP < 100 mmHg or shock index > 1) in 6 centres in Canada and South Africa. We describe previously unreported secondary outcomes relating to diagnostic accuracy. Patients were randomized to standard clinical assessment (No PoCUS) or PoCUS groups. PoCUS-trained physicians performed scans after initial assessment. Demographics, clinical details and findings were collected prospectively. Initial and secondary diagnoses including shock category were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes. Final diagnosis was determined by independent blinded chart review. Standard statistical tests were employed. Sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate difference. Results: 273 patients were enrolled with follow-up for primary outcome completed for 270. Baseline demographics and perceived category of shock were similar between groups. 11% of patients were determined to have cardiogenic shock. PoCUS had a sensitivity of 80.0% (95% CI 54.8 to 93.0%), specificity 95.5% (90.0 to 98.1%), LR+ve 17.9 (7.34 to 43.8), LR-ve 0.21 (0.08 to 0.58), Diagnostic OR 85.6 (18.2 to 403.6) and accuracy 93.7% (88.0 to 97.2%) for cardiogenic shock. Standard assessment without PoCUS had a sensitivity of 91.7% (64.6 to 98.5%), specificity 93.8% (87.8 to 97.0%), LR+ve 14.8 (7.1 to 30.9), LR- of 0.09 (0.01 to 0.58), Diagnostic OR 166.6 (18.7 to 1481) and accuracy of 93.6% (87.8 to 97.2%). There was no significant difference in sensitivity (-11.7% (-37.8 to 18.3%)) or specificity (1.73% (-4.67 to 8.29%)). Diagnostic performance was also similar between other shock subcategories. Conclusion: As reported in other studies, PoCUS based assessment performed well diagnostically in undifferentiated hypotensive patients, especially as a rule-in test. However performance was similar to standard (non-PoCUS) assessment, which was excellent in this study.
LO45: Does the use of point of care ultrasonography improve survival in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- P.R. Atkinson, J. Milne, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, M. Peach, L. Taylor, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, D. Lewis
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S43
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) is an established tool in the initial management of patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED). While PoCUS protocols have been shown to improve early diagnostic accuracy, there is little published evidence for any mortality benefit. We report the findings from our international multicenter randomized controlled trial, assessing the impact of a PoCUS protocol on survival and key clinical outcomes. Methods: Recruitment occurred at 7 centres in North America (4) and South Africa (3). Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. Screening at triage identified patients (SBP<100 or shock index>1), randomized to PoCUS or control (standard care and no PoCUS) groups. Demographics, clinical details and study findings were collected prospectively. Initial and secondary diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes, with ultrasound performed in the PoCUS group prior to secondary assessment. The primary outcome measure was 30-day/discharge mortality. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic accuracy, changes in vital signs, acid-base status, and length of stay. Categorical data was analyzed using Fishers test, and continuous data by Student T test and multi-level log-regression testing. (GraphPad/SPSS) Final chart review was blinded to initial impressions and PoCUS findings. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. There was no difference between groups for the primary outcome of mortality; PoCUS 32/129 (24.8%; 95% CI 14.3-35.3%) vs. Control 32/129 (24.8%; 95% CI 14.3-35.3%); RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.869 to 1.15; p=1.00). There were no differences in the secondary outcomes; ICU and total length of stay. Our sample size has a power of 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Other secondary outcomes are reported separately. Conclusion: This is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard care for undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We did not find any mortality or length of stay benefits with the use of a PoCUS protocol, though a larger study is required to confirm these findings. While PoCUS may have diagnostic benefits, these may not translate into a survival benefit effect.
LO43: Does point of care ultrasound improve resuscitation markers in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED 1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- L. Taylor, J. Milne, D. Lewis, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, M. Peach, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, P.R. Atkinson
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S42
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) protocols are commonly used to guide resuscitation for emergency department (ED) patients with undifferentiated non-traumatic hypotension. While PoCUS has been shown to improve early diagnosis, there is a minimal evidence for any outcome benefit. We completed an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the impact of a PoCUS protocol on key resuscitation markers in this group. We report diagnostic impact and mortality elsewhere. Methods: The SHoC-ED1 study compared the addition of PoCUS to standard care within the first hour in the treatment of adult patients presenting with undifferentiated hypotension (SBP<100 mmHg or a Shock Index >1.0) with a control group that did not receive PoCUS. Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. 4 North American, and 3 South African sites participated in the study. Resuscitation outcomes analyzed included volume of fluid administered in the ED, changes in shock index (SI), modified early warning score (MEWS), venous acid-base balance, and lactate, at one and four hours. Comparisons utilized a T-test as well as stratified binomial log-regression to assess for any significant improvement in resuscitation amount the outcomes. Our sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. There was no significant difference in mean total volume of fluid received between the control (1658 ml; 95%CI 1365-1950) and PoCUS groups (1609 ml; 1385-1832; p=0.79). Significant improvements were seen in SI, MEWS, lactate and bicarbonate with resuscitation in both the PoCUS and control groups, however there was no difference between groups. Conclusion: SHOC-ED1 is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard of care in hypotensive ED patients. No significant difference in fluid used, or markers of resuscitation was found when comparing the use of a PoCUS protocol to that of standard of care in the resuscitation of patients with undifferentiated hypotension.
LO07: Does point of care ultrasonography improve diagnostic accuracy in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- M. Peach, J. Milne, D. Lewis, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, L. Taylor, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, P.R. Atkinson
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S29
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of care ultrasonography (PoCUS) is an established tool in the initial management of hypotensive patients in the emergency department (ED). It has been shown rule out certain shock etiologies, and improve diagnostic certainty, however evidence on benefit in the management of hypotensive patients is limited. We report the findings from our international multicenter RCT assessing the impact of a PoCUS protocol on diagnostic accuracy, as well as other key outcomes including mortality, which are reported elsewhere. Methods: Recruitment occurred at 4 North American and 3 Southern African sites. Screening at triage identified patients (SBP<100 mmHg or shock index >1) who were randomized to either PoCUS or control groups. Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. Demographics, clinical details and findings were collected prospectively. Initial and secondary diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes, with ultrasound performed in the PoCUS group prior to secondary assessment. Final chart review was blinded to initial impressions and PoCUS findings. Categorical data was analyzed using Fishers two-tailed test. Our sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. The perceived shock category changed more frequently in the PoCUS group 20/127 (15.7%) vs. control 7/125 (5.6%); RR 2.81 (95% CI 1.23 to 6.42; p=0.0134). There was no significant difference in change of diagnostic impression between groups PoCUS 39/123 (31.7%) vs control 34/124 (27.4%); RR 1.16 (95% CI 0.786 to 1.70; p=0.4879). There was no significant difference in the rate of correct category of shock between PoCUS (118/127; 93%) and control (113/122; 93%); RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.936 to 1.08; p=1.00), or for correct diagnosis; PoCUS 90/127 (70%) vs control 86/122 (70%); RR 0.987 (95% CI 0.671 to 1.45; p=1.00). Conclusion: This is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard care for undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We found that the use of PoCUS did change physicians’ perceived shock category. PoCUS did not improve diagnostic accuracy for category of shock or diagnosis.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Increased visual gamma power in schizoaffective bipolar disorder
- J. A. Brealy, A. Shaw, H. Richardson, K. D. Singh, S. D. Muthukumaraswamy, P. A. Keedwell
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 45 / Issue 4 / March 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 13 August 2014, pp. 783-794
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Background.
Electroencephalography and magnetoencephalography (MEG) studies have identified alterations in gamma-band (30–80 Hz) cortical activity in schizophrenia and mood disorders, consistent with neural models of disturbed glutamate (and GABA) neuron influence over cortical pyramidal cells. Genetic evidence suggests specific deficits in GABA-A receptor function in schizoaffective bipolar disorder (SABP), a clinical syndrome with features of both bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. This study investigated gamma oscillations in this under-researched disorder.
Method.MEG was used to measure induced gamma and evoked responses to a visual grating stimulus, known to be a potent inducer of primary visual gamma oscillations, in 15 individuals with remitted SABP, defined using Research Diagnostic Criteria, and 22 age- and sex-matched healthy controls.
Results.Individuals with SABP demonstrated increased sustained visual cortical power in the gamma band (t35 = −2.56, p = 0.015) compared to controls. There were no group differences in baseline gamma power, transient or sustained gamma frequency, alpha band responses or pattern onset visual-evoked responses.
Conclusions.Gamma power is increased in remitted SABP, which reflects an abnormality in the cortical inhibitory-excitatory balance. Although an interaction between gamma power and medication can not be ruled out, there were no group differences in evoked responses or baseline measures. Further work is needed in other clinical populations and at-risk relatives. Pharmaco-magnetoencephalography studies will help to elucidate the specific GABA and glutamate pathways affected.
Contributors
-
- By John A. Bargh, Lisa Feldman Barrett, Veronica Benet-Martínez, Elliot T. Berkman, Jim Blascovich, Marilynn B. Brewer, Heining Cham, Tanya L. Chartrand, Robert B. Cialdini, William D. Crano, William A. Cunningham, Rick Dale, Jan De Houwer, Alice H. Eagly, J. Mark Eddy, Craig K. Enders, Leandre R. Fabrigar, Susan T. Fiske, Shelly L. Gable, Bertram Gawronski, Kevin J. Grimm, K. Paige Harden, Richard E. Heyman, Oliver P. John, Blair T. Johnson, Charles M. Judd, Deborah A. Kashy, David A. Kenny, Norbert L. Kerr, Nuri Kim, Jon A. Krosnick, Paul J. Lavrakas, Matthew D. Lieberman, Kristen A. Lindquist, Todd D. Little, Yu Liu, Michael F. Lorber, Michael R. Maniaci, Kerry L. Marsh, Gina L. Mazza, Gary H. McClelland, Dominique Muller, Elizabeth Levy Paluck, Karen S. Quigley, Harry T. Reis, Mijke Rhemtulla, Michael J. Richardson, Ronald D. Rogge, Alexander M. Schoemann, Eliot R. Smith, R. Scott Tindale, Eric Turkheimer, Penny S. Visser, Duane T. Wegener, Stephen G. West, Tessa V. West, Keith F. Widaman, Vincent Y. Yzerbyt
- Edited by Harry T. Reis, University of Rochester, New York, Charles M. Judd, University of Colorado Boulder
-
- Book:
- Handbook of Research Methods in Social and Personality Psychology
- Published online:
- 05 June 2014
- Print publication:
- 24 February 2014, pp vii-viii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Not so soft? Delayed release reduces long-term survival in a passerine reintroduction
- Kate Richardson, Isabel C. Castro, Dianne H. Brunton, Doug P. Armstrong
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Reintroduction success depends in part on the release strategy used. Benefits are attributed to particular release strategies but few studies have tested these assumptions. We examined the effect of delayed release (a form of so-called soft release) on the survival of a threatened passerine, the New Zealand hihi Notiomystis cincta, for up to 7 months after translocation. Birds were captured at the source site and then held in captivity for disease screening. They were then taken to the release site, where 30 were released immediately and 28 were held for a further 2–4 days in an on-site aviary. Twenty-four birds were fitted with radio-transmitters. A 1,300 ha area around the release site was searched fortnightly, and survival was analysed using a multi-state model that accounted for the effect of transmitters on detection probability. Our results indicated that delayed release had a negative effect on long-term survival, but no effect was apparent in the first 6 weeks. Survival probability from 6 weeks to 7 months post-release was 0.77 ± SE 0.20 for immediate-release birds and 0.04 ± SE 0.06 for delayed-release birds. Our results suggest that there is a misconception about the benefits of delayed-release strategies during translocation of wild animals. Studies that have demonstrated a benefit of delayed release in other bird species used captive-bred individuals, and we suggest that wild individuals perceive captivity differently. We recommend that biological context is considered before delayed release is used in translocations.
Contributors
-
- By Chittima Aryuthaka, William J. Baker, Chris Banks, David R. Bellwood, David Bickford, Rafe M. Brown, Mark de Bruyn, Patrick Campbell, Charles H. Cannon, Gary R. Carvalho, Craig M. Costion, Thomas L. P. Couvreur, Ben J. Evans, Nicholas J. Evans, Matthias Glaubrecht, David J. Gower, Robert Hall, Fabian Herder, Aljosja Hooijer, Agata Hoscilo, Chawaporn Jittanoon, Kenneth G. Johnson, Michael A. Kendall, Peter B. Mather, Yaowaluk Monthum, Robert J. Morley, Alexandra N. Muellner, Vincent Nijman, Les R. Noble, Kevin M. O’Neill, Susan Page, Gordon L. J. Paterson, Sinlan Poo, Mary Rose C. Posa, Richard Ree, Willem Renema, James E. Richardson, Jack Rieley, Kristina von Rintelen, Thomas von Rintelen, Brian R. Rosen, Lukas Rüber, Christoph D. Schubart, Chris R. Shepherd, Bryan L. Stuart, Matthew Todd, Campbell O. Webb, Suzanne T. Williams, John van Wyhe
- Edited by David Gower, Natural History Museum, London, Kenneth Johnson, Natural History Museum, London, James Richardson, Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, Brian Rosen, Natural History Museum, London, Lukas Rüber, Suzanne Williams, Natural History Museum, London
-
- Book:
- Biotic Evolution and Environmental Change in Southeast Asia
- Published online:
- 05 August 2012
- Print publication:
- 19 July 2012, pp vii-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Use of Aphelinus semiflavus Howard for Control of Aphids in a Greenhouse1
- H. P. Richardson, P. H. Westdal
-
- Journal:
- The Canadian Entomologist / Volume 97 / Issue 1 / January 1965
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 May 2012, pp. 110-111
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
In planning control programs for the apple maggot, fairly precise information on the emergence and movements of the adult is required. Generally records of emergence are obtained by the use of cages which trap the flies as they emerge from the soil. Bait lures have also been used and Neilson (1960) and others have described their methods. The construction of the cages, their establishment within the orchard. and their careful examination each day for removal of flies is time consuming. The hanging of pans within apple trees containing liquid bait lures is also troublesome and time consuming. The lures require frequent replenishing and become diluted in rainy weather and evaporate in fine weather. Searching for maggot adults in the bottom of thc pans among other fauna is time consuming.
DISPOSABLE CAGE AND POT FOR VIRUS TRANSMISSION STUDIES WITH LEAFHOPPERS
- H. P. Richardson, P. H. Westdal
-
- Journal:
- The Canadian Entomologist / Volume 99 / Issue 7 / July 1967
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 May 2012, pp. 769-770
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The cage and pot described here were used successfully in extensive studies on the transmission of aster yellows virus by the six spotted leafhopper, Macrosteles fascifrons (Stål) (Richardson 1966). The use of this composite unit results in a saving of labour, cost, and greenhouse space.
The materials for the testing unit consist of a round peat pot, 3 in. in diameter and 3 in. deep, and a 1-lb polyethylene bag approximately 8 in. long, with an opening 3 in. in diameter. The seedling growing in the pot is covered by the inverted bag and the mouth of the bag is then pulled down over the rim of the pot and secured with a rubber band (Fig. 1). Several hundred small holes are made in the bag to permit air exchange.
The Painted Leafhopper, Endria inimica (Say), a Vector of Wheat Striate Mosaic Virus in Manitoba1
- P. H. Westdal, H. P. Richardson
-
- Journal:
- The Canadian Entomologist / Volume 98 / Issue 9 / September 1966
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 May 2012, pp. 922-931
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The painted leafhopper, Endria inimica (Say), occurs in grasslands in southern Canada and the northern states of the U.S.A. It is the only known vector of wheat striate mosaic virus (WSMV) in North America. In Manitoba the insect is not abundant. It does not migrate into the province, and overwinters in the egg stage only. There are two generations per year, the first completing development on grasses about 1 July and the second developing mainly on cereals in summer. E. inimica has a high rate of development at 90° F.; the lower limit is near 60° F. At 80 ± 5° F. the life cycle was completed in 45.8 days. In the field, in summer, the life cycle was completed in 42 days. A description of the life stages of the insect is presented.
WSMV has occurred only in trace amounts in Manitoba. Leafhoppers collected in the field showed a low frequency of virus transmission and the source of overwintered virus appeared to be small. The disease does not appear to constitute a serious problem in Manitoba.
Biology of Pachygonatopus minimus Fenton (Hymenoptera: Dryinidae) a Parasite of the Six-spotted Leafhopper, Macrosteles fascifrons (Stål), in Manitoba1
- C. F. Barrett, P. H. Westdal, H. P. Richardson
-
- Journal:
- The Canadian Entomologist / Volume 97 / Issue 2 / February 1965
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 31 May 2012, pp. 216-221
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The six-spotted leafhopper, Macrosteles fascifrons (Stål), is the only known host of Pachygonatopus minimus Fenton; parasitism has reached 37%. The female adult is also a predator of the leafhopper. In the adult stage of the parasite the sexes differ in form, color and habits; the male is winged and the female wingless. The egg is laid in the abdomen of the host. As the larva develops it protrudes through an intersegmental membrane. There are five larval instars. The first four are sedentary and attached to the host; the fifth is an active feeding stage. The larva spins a cocoon within which it pupates. The period from egg to adult is about 28 days. P. minimus does not provide effective control of the leafhopper.
Contributors
-
- By Nozomi Akanuma, Gonzalo Alarcón, R. Arunachalam, Sarah H. Bernard, Frank M. C. Besag, Istvan Bodi, Stephen Brown, Franz Brunnhuber, Antonella Cerquiglini, J. Helen Cross, R. Shane Delamont, Archana Desurkar, Lee Drummond, Rona Eade, Robert D. C. Elwes, Bidi Evans, Peter Fenwick, Colin D. Ferrie, Paul L. Furlong, Laura H. Goldstein, Sally Gomersall, Sushma Goyal, Jane Hanna, Yvonne Hart, Dominic C. Heaney, Graham E. Holder, Mrinalini Honavar, Elaine Hughes, Jozef M. Jarosz, John G. R. Jefferys, Jane Juler, Mathias Koepp, Michalis Koutroumanidis, Maureen Lahiff, Louis Lemieux, David McCormick, Brian Meldrum, John D. C. Mellers, Nicholas Moran, John Moriarty, Robin G. Morris, Nandini Mullatti, Lina Nashef, Jennifer Nightingale, T. J. von Oertzen, Corina O'Neill, Philip N. Patsalos, Stella Pearson, Charles E. Polkey, Ronit Pressler, Edward H. Reynolds, Mark P. Richardson, Leone Ridsdale, Robert Robinson, Greg Rogers, Euan M. Ross, Richard P. Selway, Stefano Seri, Simeran Sharma, Graeme J. Sills, Andrew Simmons, Shiri Spector, Mark Stevenson, Jade N. Thai, Brian Toone, Antonio Valentín, Nuria T. Villagra, Matthew Walker, William Whitehouse
- Edited by Gonzalo Alarcón, King's College London, Antonio Valentín, King's College London
-
- Book:
- Introduction to Epilepsy
- Published online:
- 05 July 2012
- Print publication:
- 26 April 2012, pp xii-xv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Yasir Abu-Omar, Matthew E. Atkins, Joseph E. Arrowsmith, Alan Ashworth, Rubia Baldassarri, Craig R. Bailey, David J. Barron, Christiana C. Burt, David Cardone, Coralie Carle, Jose Coddens, Alan M. Cohen, Simon Colah, Sarah Conolly, David J. Daly, Helen M. Daly, Stefan G. De Hert, Ravi J. De Silva, Mark Dougherty, John J. Dunning, Maros Elsik, Betsy Evans, Florian Falter, Nigel Farnum, Jens Fassl, Juliet E. Foweraker, Simon P. Fynn, Andrew I. Gardner, Margaret I. Gillham, Martin J. Goddard, Maximilien J. Gourdin, Jon Graham, Stephen J. Gray, Cameron Graydon, Fabio Guarracino, Roger M. O. Hall, Michael Haney, Charles W. Hogue, Ben W. Howes, Bevan Hughes, Siân I. Jaggar, David P. Jenkins, Jörn Karhausen, Todd Kiefer, Khalid Khan, Andrew A. Klein, John D. Kneeshaw, Andrew C. Knowles, Catherine V. Koffel, R. Clive Landis, Trevor W. R. Lee, Clive J. Lewis, Jonathan H. Mackay, Amod Manocha, Jonathan B. Mark, Sarah Marstin, William T. McBride, Kenneth H. McKinlay, Alan F. Merry, Berend Mets, Britta Millhoff, Kevin P. Morris, Samer A. M. Nashef, Andrew Neitzel, Stephane Noble, Rabi Panigrahi, Barbora Parizkova, J. M. Tom Pierce, Mihai V. Podgoreanu, Hans-Joachim Priebe, Paul Quinton, C. Ramaswamy Rajamohan, Doris M. Rassl, Tom Rawlings, Fiona E. Reynolds, Andrew J. Richardson, David Riddington, Andrew Roscoe, Paul H. M. Sadleir, Ving Yuen See Tho, Herve Schlotterbeck, Maura Screaton, Shitalkumar Shah, Harjot Singh, Jon H. Smith, M. L. Srikanth, Yeewei W. Teo, Kamen P. Valchanov, Jean-Pierre van Besouw, Isabeau A. Walker, Stephen T. Webb, Francis C. Wells, John Whitbread, Charles Willmott, Patrick Wouters
- Edited by Jonathan H. Mackay, Joseph E. Arrowsmith
-
- Book:
- Core Topics in Cardiac Anesthesia
- Published online:
- 05 April 2012
- Print publication:
- 15 March 2012, pp x-xiii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Avishek Adhikari, Susanne E. Ahmari, Anne Marie Albano, Carlos Blanco, Desiree K. Caban, Jonathan S. Comer, Jeremy D. Coplan, Ana Alicia De La Cruz, Emily R. Doherty, Bruce Dohrenwend, Amit Etkin, Brian A. Fallon, Michael B. First, Abby J. Fyer, Angela Ghesquiere, Jay A. Gingrich, Robert A. Glick, Joshua A. Gordon, Ethan E. Gorenstein, Marco A. Grados, James P. Hambrick, James Hanks, Kelli Jane K. Harding, Richard G. Heimberg, Rene Hen, Devon E. Hinton, Myron A. Hofer, Matthew J. Kaplowitz, Sharaf S. Khan, Donald F. Klein, Karestan C. Koenen, E. David Leonardo, Roberto Lewis-Fernández, Jeffrey A. Lieberman, Michael R. Liebowitz, Sarah H. Lisanby, Antonio Mantovani, John C. Markowitz, Patrick J. McGrath, Caitlin McOmish, Jeffrey M. Miller, Jan Mohlman, Elizabeth Sagurton Mulhare, Philip R. Muskin, Navin Arun Natarajan, Yuval Neria, Nicole R. Nugent, Mayumi Okuda, Mark Olfson, Laszlo A. Papp, Sapana R. Patel, Anthony Pinto, Kristin Pontoski, Jesse W. Richardson-Jones, Carolyn I. Rodriguez, Steven P. Roose, Moira A. Rynn, Franklin Schneier, M. Katherine Shear, Ranjeeb Shrestha, Helen Blair Simpson, Smit S. Sinha, Natalia Skritskaya, Jami Socha, Eun Jung Suh, Gregory M. Sullivan, Anthony J. Tranguch, Hilary B. Vidair, Tor D. Wager, Myrna M Weissman, Noelia V. Weisstaub
- Edited by Helen Blair Simpson, Columbia University, New York, Yuval Neria, Columbia University, New York, Roberto Lewis-Fernández, Columbia University, New York, Franklin Schneier, Columbia University, New York
-
- Book:
- Anxiety Disorders
- Published online:
- 10 November 2010
- Print publication:
- 26 August 2010, pp vii-xii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Joanne R. Adler, David A. Alexander, Laurence Alison, Catherine C. Ayoub, Peter Banister, Anthony R. Beech, Amanda Biggs, Julian Boon, Adrian Bowers, Neil Brewer, Eric Broekaert, Paula Brough, Jennifer M. Brown, Kevin Browne, Elizabeth A. Campbell, David Canter, Michael Carlin, Shihning Chou, Martin A. Conway, Claire Cooke, David Cooke, Ilse Derluyn, Robert J. Edelmann, Vincent Egan, Tom Ellis, Marie Eyre, David P. Farrington, Seena Fazel, Daniel B. Fishman, Victoria Follette, Katarina Fritzon, Elizabeth Gilchrist, Nathan D. Gillard, Renée Gobeil, Agnieszka Golec de Zavala, Jane Goodman-Delahunty, Lynsey Gozna, Don Grubin, Gisli H. Gudjonsson, Helinä Häkkänen-Nyholm, Guy Hall, Nathan Hall, Roisin Hall, Sean Hammond, Leigh Harkins, Grant T. Harris, Camilla Herbert, Robert D. Hoge, Todd E. Hogue, Clive R. Hollin, Lorraine Hope, Miranda A. H. Horvath, Kevin Howells, Carol A. Ireland, Jane L. Ireland, Mark Kebbell, Michael King, Bruce D. Kirkcaldy, Heidi La Bash, Cara Laney, William R. Lindsay, Elizabeth F. Loftus, L. E. Marshall, W. L. Marshall, James McGuire, Neil McKeganey, T. M. McMillan, Mary McMurran, Joav Merrick, Becky Milne, Joanne M. Nadkarni, Claire Nee, M. D. O’Brien, William O’Donohue, Darragh O’Neill, Jane Palmer, Adria Pearson, Derek Perkins, Devon L. L. Polaschek, Louise E. Porter, Charlotte C. Powell, Graham E. Powell, Martine Powell, Christine Puckering, Ethel Quayle, Vernon L. Quinsey, Marnie E. Rice, Randall Richardson-Vejlgaard, Richard Rogers, Louis B Schlesinger, Carolyn Semmler, G. A. Serran, Ralph C. Serin, John L. Taylor, Max Taylor, Brian Thomas-Peter, Paul A. Tiffin, Graham Towl, Rosie Travers, Arlene Vetere, Graham Wagstaff, Helen Wakeling, Fiona Warren, Brandon C. Welsh, David Wexler, Margaret Wilson, Dan Yarmey, Susan Young
- Edited by Jennifer M. Brown, London School of Economics and Political Science, Elizabeth A. Campbell, University of Glasgow
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Handbook of Forensic Psychology
- Published online:
- 06 July 2010
- Print publication:
- 29 April 2010, pp xix-xxiii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation