12 results
Novel recruitment approaches and operational results for a statewide population Cohort for cancer research: The Healthy Oregon Project
- Zhenzhen Zhang, Autumn Shafer, Katie Johnson-Camacho, Andrew Adey, Pavana Anur, Kim A. Brown, Casey Conrad, Rachel Crist, Paige E. Farris, Christina A. Harrington, Lisa K. Marriott, Asia Mitchell, Brian O’Roak, Vanessa Serrato, C. Sue Richards, Paul T. Spellman, Jackilen Shannon
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 8 / Issue 1 / 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 19 January 2024, e32
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background:
Cancer health research relies on large-scale cohorts to derive generalizable results for different populations. While traditional epidemiological cohorts often use costly random sampling or self-motivated, preselected groups, a shift toward health system-based cohorts has emerged. However, such cohorts depend on participants remaining within a single system. Recent consumer engagement models using smartphone-based communication, driving projects, and social media have begun to upend these paradigms.
Methods:We initiated the Healthy Oregon Project (HOP) to support basic and clinical cancer research. HOP study employs a novel, cost-effective remote recruitment approach to effectively establish a large-scale cohort for population-based studies. The recruitment leverages the unique email account, the HOP website, and social media platforms to direct smartphone users to the study app, which facilitates saliva sample collection and survey administration. Monthly newsletters further facilitate engagement and outreach to broader communities.
Results:By the end of 2022, the HOP has enrolled approximately 35,000 participants aged 18–100 years (median = 44.2 years), comprising more than 1% of the Oregon adult population. Among those who have app access, ∼87% provided consent to genetic screening. The HOP monthly email newsletters have an average open rate of 38%. Efforts continue to be made to improve survey response rates.
Conclusion:This study underscores the efficacy of remote recruitment approaches in establishing large-scale cohorts for population-based cancer studies. The implementation of the study facilitates the collection of extensive survey and biological data into a repository that can be broadly shared and supports collaborative clinical and translational research.
The emergence, implementation, and future growth of pharmacogenomics in psychiatry: a narrative review
- Chad A. Bousman, Abdullah Al Maruf, Diogo Ferri Marques, Lisa C. Brown, Daniel J. Müller
-
- Journal:
- Psychological Medicine / Volume 53 / Issue 16 / December 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 29 September 2023, pp. 7983-7993
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Psychotropic medication efficacy and tolerability are critical treatment issues faced by individuals with psychiatric disorders and their healthcare providers. For some people, it can take months to years of a trial-and-error process to identify a medication with the ideal efficacy and tolerability profile. Current strategies (e.g. clinical practice guidelines, treatment algorithms) for addressing this issue can be useful at the population level, but often fall short at the individual level. This is, in part, attributed to interindividual variation in genes that are involved in pharmacokinetic (i.e. absorption, distribution, metabolism, elimination) and pharmacodynamic (e.g. receptors, signaling pathways) processes that in large part, determine whether a medication will be efficacious or tolerable. A precision prescribing strategy know as pharmacogenomics (PGx) assesses these genomic variations, and uses it to inform selection and dosing of certain psychotropic medications. In this review, we describe the path that led to the emergence of PGx in psychiatry, the current evidence base and implementation status of PGx in the psychiatric clinic, and finally, the future growth potential of precision psychiatry via the convergence of the PGx-guided strategy with emerging technologies and approaches (i.e. pharmacoepigenomics, pharmacomicrobiomics, pharmacotranscriptomics, pharmacoproteomics, pharmacometabolomics) to personalize treatment of psychiatric disorders.
Descriptive evaluation of antibody responses to severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid in a nursing home cohort—Arkansas, June–August 2020
- Part of
- Nicole E. Brown, Amanda K. Lyons, Amy J. Schuh, Megan M. Stumpf, Jennifer L. Harcourt, Azaibi Tamin, Mohammad Ata Ur Rasheed, Lisa Mills, Sandra N. Lester, Natalie J. Thornburg, Kenny Nguyen, Veronica Costantini, Jan Vinjé, Jennifer Y. Huang, Sarah E. Gilbert, Paige Gable, Susan Bollinger, Sarah Sabour, Elizabeth Beshearse, Diya Surie, Caitlin Biedron, Christopher J. Gregory, Nakia S. Clemmons, Brett Whitaker, Melissa M. Coughlin, Kathryn A. Seely, Kelley Garner, Trent Gulley, Tafarra Haney, Atul Kothari, Naveen Patil, Alison Laufer Halpin, L. Clifford McDonald, Preeta K. Kutty, Allison C. Brown
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 43 / Issue 11 / November 2022
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 22 November 2021, pp. 1610-1617
- Print publication:
- November 2022
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Objective:
To characterize and compare severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)–specific immune responses in plasma and gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) from nursing home residents during and after natural infection.
Design:Prospective cohort.
Setting:Nursing home.
Participants:SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents.
Methods:A convenience sample of 14 SARS-CoV-2–infected nursing home residents, enrolled 4–13 days after real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction diagnosis, were followed for 42 days. After diagnosis, plasma SARS-CoV-2–specific pan-Immunoglobulin (Ig), IgG, IgA, IgM, and neutralizing antibodies were measured at 5 time points, and GCF SARS-CoV-2–specific IgG and IgA were measured at 4 time points.
Results:All participants demonstrated immune responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Among 12 phlebotomized participants, plasma was positive for pan-Ig and IgG in all 12 participants. Neutralizing antibodies were positive in 11 participants; IgM was positive in 10 participants, and IgA was positive in 9 participants. Among 14 participants with GCF specimens, GCF was positive for IgG in 13 participants and for IgA in 12 participants. Immunoglobulin responses in plasma and GCF had similar kinetics; median times to peak antibody response were similar across specimen types (4 weeks for IgG; 3 weeks for IgA). Participants with pan-Ig, IgG, and IgA detected in plasma and GCF IgG remained positive throughout this evaluation, 46–55 days after diagnosis. All participants were viral-culture negative by the first detection of antibodies.
Conclusions:Nursing home residents had detectable SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in plasma and GCF after infection. Kinetics of antibodies detected in GCF mirrored those from plasma. Noninvasive GCF may be useful for detecting and monitoring immunologic responses in populations unable or unwilling to be phlebotomized.
150 HAM-D6 Outcomes in a Randomized, Controlled Trial Evaluating the Utility of Combinatorial Pharmacogenomics in Depression
- Boadie W. Dunlop, Sagar V. Parikh, Maitrey Patel, Anthony J. Rothschild, Michael E. Thase, Charles DeBattista, Charles R. Conway, Brent P. Forester, Richard C. Shelton, Matthew Macaluso, James Li, Krystal Brown, Lisa Brown, Michael R. Jablonski, John F. Greden
-
- Journal:
- CNS Spectrums / Volume 25 / Issue 2 / April 2020
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 24 April 2020, pp. 295-296
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Background:
The Genomics Used to Improve DEpresssion Decisions (GUIDED) trial assessed outcomes associated with combinatorial pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Analyses used the 17-item Hamilton Depression (HAM-D17) rating scale; however, studies demonstrate that the abbreviated, core depression symptom-focused, HAM-D6 rating scale may have greater sensitivity toward detecting differences between treatment and placebo. However, the sensitivity of HAM-D6 has not been tested for two active treatment arms. Here, we evaluated the sensitivity of the HAM-D6 scale, relative to the HAM-D17 scale, when assessing outcomes for actively treated patients in the GUIDED trial.
Methods:Outpatients (N=1,298) diagnosed with MDD and an inadequate treatment response to >1 psychotropic medication were randomized into treatment as usual (TAU) or combinatorial PGx-guided (guided-care) arms. Combinatorial PGx testing was performed on all patients, though test reports were only available to the guided-care arm. All patients and raters were blinded to study arm until after week 8. Medications on the combinatorial PGx test report were categorized based on the level of predicted gene-drug interactions: ‘use as directed’, ‘moderate gene-drug interactions’, or ‘significant gene-drug interactions.’ Patient outcomes were assessed by arm at week 8 using HAM-D6 and HAM-D17 rating scales, including symptom improvement (percent change in scale), response (≥50% decrease in scale), and remission (HAM-D6 ≤4 and HAM-D17 ≤7).
Results:At week 8, the guided-care arm demonstrated statistically significant symptom improvement over TAU using HAM-D6 scale (Δ=4.4%, p=0.023), but not using the HAM-D17 scale (Δ=3.2%, p=0.069). The response rate increased significantly for guided-care compared with TAU using both HAM-D6 (Δ=7.0%, p=0.004) and HAM-D17 (Δ=6.3%, p=0.007). Remission rates were also significantly greater for guided-care versus TAU using both scales (HAM-D6 Δ=4.6%, p=0.031; HAM-D17 Δ=5.5%, p=0.005). Patients taking medication(s) predicted to have gene-drug interactions at baseline showed further increased benefit over TAU at week 8 using HAM-D6 for symptom improvement (Δ=7.3%, p=0.004) response (Δ=10.0%, p=0.001) and remission (Δ=7.9%, p=0.005). Comparatively, the magnitude of the differences in outcomes between arms at week 8 was lower using HAM-D17 (symptom improvement Δ=5.0%, p=0.029; response Δ=8.0%, p=0.008; remission Δ=7.5%, p=0.003).
Conclusions:Combinatorial PGx-guided care achieved significantly better patient outcomes compared with TAU when assessed using the HAM-D6 scale. These findings suggest that the HAM-D6 scale is better suited than is the HAM-D17 for evaluating change in randomized, controlled trials comparing active treatment arms.
Funding Acknowledgements:Assurex Health, Inc.
Contributors
-
- By Rony A. Adam, Gloria Bachmann, Nichole M. Barker, Randall B. Barnes, John Bennett, Inbar Ben-Shachar, Jonathan S. Berek, Sarah L. Berga, Monica W. Best, Eric J. Bieber, Frank M. Biro, Shan Biscette, Anita K. Blanchard, Candace Brown, Ronald T. Burkman, Joseph Buscema, John E. Buster, Michael Byas-Smith, Sandra Ann Carson, Judy C. Chang, Annie N. Y. Cheung, Mindy S. Christianson, Karishma Circelli, Daniel L. Clarke-Pearson, Larry J. Copeland, Bryan D. Cowan, Navneet Dhillon, Michael P. Diamond, Conception Diaz-Arrastia, Nicole M. Donnellan, Michael L. Eisenberg, Eric Eisenhauer, Sebastian Faro, J. Stuart Ferriss, Lisa C. Flowers, Susan J. Freeman, Leda Gattoc, Claudine Marie Gayle, Timothy M. Geiger, Jennifer S. Gell, Alan N. Gordon, Victoria L. Green, Jon K. Hathaway, Enrique Hernandez, S. Paige Hertweck, Randall S. Hines, Ira R. Horowitz, Fred M. Howard, William W. Hurd, Fidan Israfilbayli, Denise J. Jamieson, Carolyn R. Jaslow, Erika B. Johnston-MacAnanny, Rohna M. Kearney, Namita Khanna, Caroline C. King, Jeremy A. King, Ira J. Kodner, Tamara Kolev, Athena P. Kourtis, S. Robert Kovac, Ertug Kovanci, William H. Kutteh, Eduardo Lara-Torre, Pallavi Latthe, Herschel W. Lawson, Ronald L. Levine, Frank W. Ling, Larry I. Lipshultz, Steven D. McCarus, Robert McLellan, Shruti Malik, Suketu M. Mansuria, Mohamed K. Mehasseb, Pamela J. Murray, Saloney Nazeer, Farr R. Nezhat, Hextan Y. S. Ngan, Gina M. Northington, Peggy A. Norton, Ruth M. O'Regan, Kristiina Parviainen, Resad P. Pasic, Tanja Pejovic, K. Ulrich Petry, Nancy A. Phillips, Ashish Pradhan, Elizabeth E. Puscheck, Suneetha Rachaneni, Devon M. Ramaeker, David B. Redwine, Robert L. Reid, Carla P. Roberts, Walter Romano, Peter G. Rose, Robert L. Rosenfield, Shon P. Rowan, Mack T. Ruffin, Janice M. Rymer, Evis Sala, Ritu Salani, Joseph S. Sanfilippo, Mahmood I. Shafi, Roger P. Smith, Meredith L. Snook, Thomas E. Snyder, Mary D. Stephenson, Thomas G. Stovall, Richard L. Sweet, Philip M. Toozs-Hobson, Togas Tulandi, Elizabeth R. Unger, Denise S. Uyar, Marion S. Verp, Rahi Victory, Tamara J. Vokes, Michelle J. Washington, Katharine O'Connell White, Paul E. Wise, Frank M. Wittmaack, Miya P. Yamamoto, Christine Yu, Howard A. Zacur
- Edited by Eric J. Bieber, Joseph S. Sanfilippo, University of Pittsburgh, Ira R. Horowitz, Emory University, Atlanta, Mahmood I. Shafi
-
- Book:
- Clinical Gynecology
- Published online:
- 05 April 2015
- Print publication:
- 23 April 2015, pp viii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Tod C. Aeby, Melanie D. Altizer, Ronan A. Bakker, Meghann E. Batten, Anita K. Blanchard, Brian Bond, Megan A. Brady, Saweda A. Bright, Ellen L. Brock, Amy Brown, Ashley Carroll, Jori S. Carter, Frances Casey, Weldon Chafe, David Chelmow, Jessica M. Ciaburri, Stephen A. Cohen, Adrianne M. Colton, PonJola Coney, Jennifer A. Cross, Julie Zemaitis DeCesare, Layson L. Denney, Megan L. Evans, Nicole S. Fanning, Tanaz R. Ferzandi, Katie P. Friday, Nancy D. Gaba, Rajiv B. Gala, Andrew Galffy, Adrienne L. Gentry, Edward J. Gill, Philippe Girerd, Meredith Gray, Amy Hempel, Audra Jolyn Hill, Chris J. Hong, Kathryn A. Houston, Patricia S. Huguelet, Warner K. Huh, Jordan Hylton, Christine R. Isaacs, Alison F. Jacoby, Isaiah M. Johnson, Nicole W. Karjane, Emily E. Landers, Susan M. Lanni, Eduardo Lara-Torre, Lee A. Learman, Nikola Alexander Letham, Rachel K. Love, Richard Scott Lucidi, Elisabeth McGaw, Kimberly Woods McMorrow, Christopher A. Manipula, Kirk J. Matthews, Michelle Meglin, Megan Metcalf, Sarah H. Milton, Gaby Moawad, Christopher Morosky, Lindsay H. Morrell, Elizabeth L. Munter, Erin L. Murata, Amanda B. Murchison, Nguyet A. Nguyen, Nan G. O’Connell, Tony Ogburn, K. Nathan Parthasarathy, Thomas C. Peng, Ashley Peterson, Sarah Peterson, John G. Pierce, Amber Price, Heidi J. Purcell, Ronald M. Ramus, Nicole Calloway Rankins, Fidelma B. Rigby, Amanda H. Ritter, Barbara L. Robinson, Danielle Roncari, Lisa Rubinsak, Jennifer Salcedo, Mary T. Sale, Peter F. Schnatz, John W. Seeds, Kathryn Shaia, Karen Shelton, Megan M. Shine, Haller J. Smith, Roger P. Smith, Nancy A. Sokkary, Reni A. Soon, Aparna Sridhar, Lilja Stefansson, Laurie S. Swaim, Chemen M. Tate, Hong-Thao Thieu, Meredith S. Thomas, L. Chesney Thompson, Tiffany Tonismae, Angela M. Tran, Breanna Walker, Alan G. Waxman, C. Nathan Webb, Valerie L. Williams, Sarah B. Wilson, Elizabeth M. Yoselevsky, Amy E. Young
- Edited by David Chelmow, Virginia Commonwealth University, Christine R. Isaacs, Virginia Commonwealth University, Ashley Carroll, Virginia Commonwealth University
-
- Book:
- Acute Care and Emergency Gynecology
- Published online:
- 05 November 2014
- Print publication:
- 30 October 2014, pp ix-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Infection Prevention and Control Guideline for Cystic Fibrosis: 2013 Update
- Part of
- Lisa Saiman, Jane D. Siegel, John J. LiPuma, Rebekah F. Brown, Elizabeth A. Bryson, Mary Jo Chambers, Veronica S. Downer, Jill Fliege, Leslie A. Hazle, Manu Jain, Bruce C. Marshall, Catherine O’Malley, Suzanne R. Pattee, Gail Potter-Bynoe, Siobhan Reid, Karen A. Robinson, Kathryn A. Sabadosa, H. Joel Schmidt, Elizabeth Tullis, Jennifer Webber, David J. Weber
-
- Journal:
- Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology / Volume 35 / Issue S1 / August 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 10 May 2016, pp. s1-s67
- Print publication:
- August 2014
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
The 2013 Infection Prevention and Control (IP&C) Guideline for Cystic Fibrosis (CF) was commissioned by the CF Foundation as an update of the 2003 Infection Control Guideline for CF. During the past decade, new knowledge and new challenges provided the following rationale to develop updated IP&C strategies for this unique population:
1. The need to integrate relevant recommendations from evidence-based guidelines published since 2003 into IP&C practices for CF. These included guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)/Healthcare Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee (HICPAC), the World Health Organization (WHO), and key professional societies, including the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA). During the past decade, new evidence has led to a renewed emphasis on source containment of potential pathogens and the role played by the contaminated healthcare environment in the transmission of infectious agents. Furthermore, an increased understanding of the importance of the application of implementation science, monitoring adherence, and feedback principles has been shown to increase the effectiveness of IP&C guideline recommendations.
2. Experience with emerging pathogens in the non-CF population has expanded our understanding of droplet transmission of respiratory pathogens and can inform IP&C strategies for CF. These pathogens include severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and the 2009 influenza A H1N1. Lessons learned about preventing transmission of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and multidrug-resistant gram-negative pathogens in non-CF patient populations also can inform IP&C strategies for CF.
Science with the Murchison Widefield Array
- Part of
- Judd D. Bowman, Iver Cairns, David L. Kaplan, Tara Murphy, Divya Oberoi, Lister Staveley-Smith, Wayne Arcus, David G. Barnes, Gianni Bernardi, Frank H. Briggs, Shea Brown, John D. Bunton, Adam J. Burgasser, Roger J. Cappallo, Shami Chatterjee, Brian E. Corey, Anthea Coster, Avinash Deshpande, Ludi deSouza, David Emrich, Philip Erickson, Robert F. Goeke, B. M. Gaensler, Lincoln J. Greenhill, Lisa Harvey-Smith, Bryna J. Hazelton, David Herne, Jacqueline N. Hewitt, Melanie Johnston-Hollitt, Justin C. Kasper, Barton B. Kincaid, Ronald Koenig, Eric Kratzenberg, Colin J. Lonsdale, Mervyn J. Lynch, Lynn D. Matthews, S. Russell McWhirter, Daniel A. Mitchell, Miguel F. Morales, Edward H. Morgan, Stephen M. Ord, Joseph Pathikulangara, Thiagaraj Prabu, Ronald A. Remillard, Timothy Robishaw, Alan E. E. Rogers, Anish A. Roshi, Joseph E. Salah, Robert J. Sault, N. Udaya Shankar, K. S. Srivani, Jamie B. Stevens, Ravi Subrahmanyan, Steven J. Tingay, Randall B. Wayth, Mark Waterson, Rachel L. Webster, Alan R. Whitney, Andrew J. Williams, Christopher L. Williams, J. Stuart B. Wyithe
-
- Journal:
- Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia / Volume 30 / 2013
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 April 2013, e031
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Significant new opportunities for astrophysics and cosmology have been identified at low radio frequencies. The Murchison Widefield Array is the first telescope in the southern hemisphere designed specifically to explore the low-frequency astronomical sky between 80 and 300 MHz with arcminute angular resolution and high survey efficiency. The telescope will enable new advances along four key science themes, including searching for redshifted 21-cm emission from the EoR in the early Universe; Galactic and extragalactic all-sky southern hemisphere surveys; time-domain astrophysics; and solar, heliospheric, and ionospheric science and space weather. The Murchison Widefield Array is located in Western Australia at the site of the planned Square Kilometre Array (SKA) low-band telescope and is the only low-frequency SKA precursor facility. In this paper, we review the performance properties of the Murchison Widefield Array and describe its primary scientific objectives.
Contributors
-
- By Basem Abdelmalak, Joseph Abdelmalak, Alaa A. Abd-Elsayed, David L. Adams, Eric E. Adelman, Maged Argalious, Endrit Bala, Gene H. Barnett, Sheron Beltran, Andrew Bielaczyc, William Bingaman, James M. Blum, Alina Bodas, Vera Borzova, Richard Bowers, Adam Brown, Chad M. Brummett, Alexandra S. Bullough, James F. Burke, Juan P. Cata, Neeraj Chaudhary, Michael J. Claybon, Miguel Cruz, Milind Deogaonkar, Vikram Dhawan, Thomas Didier, D. John Doyle, Zeyd Ebrahim, Hesham Elsharkawy, Wael Ali Sakr Esa, Ehab Farag, Ryen D. Fons, Joseph J. Gemmete, Matt Giles, Phil Gillen, Goodarz Golmirzaie, Marcos Gomes, Lisa Grilly, Maged Guirguis, David W. Healy, Heather Hervey-Jumper, Shawn L. Hervey-Jumper, Paul E. Hilliard, Samuel A. Irefin, George K. Istaphanous, Teresa L. Jacobs, Ellen Janke, Greta Jo, James W. Jones, Rami Karroum, Allen Keebler, Stephen J. Kimatian, Colleen G. Koch, Robert Scott Kriss, Andrea Kurz, Jia Lin, Michael D. Maile, Negmeldeen F. Mamoun, Mariel Manlapaz, Edward Manno, Donn Marciniak, Piyush Mathur, Nicholas F. Marko, Matthew Martin, George A. Mashour, Marco Maurtua, Scott T. McCardle, Julie McClelland, Uma Menon, Paul S. Moor, Laurel E. Moore, Ruairi Moulding, Dileep R. Nair, Todd Nelson, Julie Niezgoda, Edward Noguera, Jerome O’Hara, Aditya S. Pandey, Mauricio Perilla, Paul Picton, Marc J. Popovich, J. Javier Provencio, Venkatakrishna Rajajee, Mohit Rastogi, Stacy Ritzman, Lauryn R. Rochlen, Leif Saager, Vivek Sabharwal, Oren Sagher, Kenneth Saliba, Milad Sharifpour, Lesli E. Skolarus, Paul Smythe, Wolf H. Stapelfeldt, William R. Stetler, Peter Stiles, Vijay Tarnal, Khoi D. Than, B. Gregory Thompson, Alparslan Turan, Christopher R. Turner, Justin Upp, Sumeet Vadera, Jennifer Vance, Anthony C. Wang, Robert J. Weil, Marnie B. Welch, Karen K. Wilkins, Erin S. Williams, George N. Youssef, Asma Zakaria, Sherif S. Zaky, Andrew Zura
- Edited by George A. Mashour, Ehab Farag
-
- Book:
- Case Studies in Neuroanesthesia and Neurocritical Care
- Published online:
- 03 May 2011
- Print publication:
- 03 February 2011, pp x-xvi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributing Authors
-
- By Brendan J. Astley, Michael Dale Bassett, Andrew M. Bauer, Lisa L. Bethea, Norman Bolden, Vera V. Borzova, Jeffrey A. Brown, Melvyn J. Y. Chin, Sheila Chiu-Miller, Varun Dixit, Jennifer Eismon, Ryan J. Gunselman, Maureen S. Harders, Alma Hoxha, Kelly P. Jones, Matthew A. Joy, Robert C. Lee, Jessica A. Lovich-Sapola, Joni Maga, Donn Marciniak, Cristian M. Prada, Aditya Reddy, Kasia Petelenz Rubin, Kamaljit K. Sidhu, Kanwaljit Rani Sidhu, Donald M. Voltz, Karl Wagner
- Jessica A. Lovich-Sapola
-
- Book:
- Anesthesia Oral Board Review
- Published online:
- 04 August 2010
- Print publication:
- 30 October 2009, pp xiii-xiv
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Pina Amin, Sir Sabaratnam Arulkumaran, Sarah L. Bell, M. J. Blott, Hajeera Butt, Edwin Chandraharan, Joanna Crofts, Mark Denbow, Mandish K. Dhanjal, Stergios K. Doumouchtsis, Timothy J. Draycott, Rohan D'Souza, David Fraser, Guy Jackson, Nina Johns, Tracey Johnston, Justin C. Konje, Audrey Long, Louay S. Louis, Paul A. Mannix, Mahishee Mehta, Nutan Mishra, Sambit Mukhopadhyay, Deirdre J. Murphy, Vivek Nama, Osric Navti, Catherine Nelson-Piercy, Jane E. Norman, Geraldine O'Sullivan, Sara Paterson-Brown, Leonie Penna, Neelam Potdar, Helen Scholefield, Jason Scott, Dimitrios M. Siassakos, Gordon C. S. Smith, Lisa Story, Bryony Strachan, Devi Subramanian, Abdul H. Sultan, Ranee Thakar, Austin Ugwumadu, Rajesh Varma, James J. Walker, Steve Walkinshaw, Richard Warren, Melissa Whitten, Melissa K. Whitworth, Julian Woolfson, Steve Yentis
- Edited by Richard Warren, Sabaratnam Arulkumaran
-
- Book:
- Best Practice in Labour and Delivery
- Published online:
- 15 March 2010
- Print publication:
- 17 September 2009, pp vii-x
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Graham Allan, Donna M. Allen, Irwin Altman, Arthur Aron, Donald H. Baucom, Steven R. H. Beach, Ellen Berscheid, Rosemary Blieszner, Jeffrey Boase, Tyfany M. J. Boettcher, Barbara B. Brown, Abraham P. Buunk, Lorne Campbell, Daniel J. Canary, Rodney Cate, John P. Caughlin, Mahnaz Charania, Jennie Y. Chen, F. Scott Christopher, Jennifer A. Clarke, Marilyn Coleman, W. Andrew Collins, Michael K. Coolsen, Nathan R. Cottle, Carolyn E. Cutrona, Marianne Dainton, Valerian J. Derlega, Lisa M. Diamond, Pieternel Dijkstra, Steve Duck, Pearl A. Dykstra, Norman B. Epstein, Beverley Fehr, Frank D. Fincham, Helen E. Fisher, Julie Fitness, Garth J. O. Fletcher, Myron D. Friesen, Lawrence Ganong, Kelli A. Gardner, Jenny de Jong Gierveld, Robin Goodwin, Christine R. Gray, Kathryn Greene, David W. Harris, Willard W. Hartup, John H. Harvey, Kathi L. Heffner, Ted L. Huston, William J. Ickes, Emily A. Impett, Michael P. Johnson, Deborah J. Jones, Deborah A. Kashy, Janice K. Kiecolt‐Glaser, Jeffrey L. Kirchner, Brighid M. Kleinman, Galena H. Kline, Mark L. Knapp, Ascan Koerner, Jean‐Philippe Laurenceau, Kim Leon, Timothy J. Loving, Stephanie D. Madsen, Howard J. Markman, Alicia Mathews, Mario Mikulincer, Patricia Noller, Nickola C. Overall, Letitia Anne Peplau, Daniel Perlman, Sally Planalp, Urmila Pillay, Nicole D. Pleasant, Caryl E. Rusbult, Barbara R. Sarason, Irwin G. Sarason, Phillip R. Shaver, Alan L. Sillars, Jeffry A. Simpson, Susan Sprecher, Susan Stanton, Greg Strong, Catherine A. Surra, Anita L. Vangelisti, C. Arthur VanLear, Theo van Tilburg, Barry Wellman, Amy Wenzel, Carol M. Werner, Adam R. West, Sarah W. Whitton, Heike A. Winterheld
- Edited by Anita L. Vangelisti, University of Texas, Austin, Daniel Perlman, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personal Relationships
- Published online:
- 05 June 2012
- Print publication:
- 05 June 2006, pp xvii-xxii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation