Explore the vast range of titles available.

The ability to read minds has long been a fascination of science fiction, but revolutionary new brain-imaging methods are bringing it closer to scientific reality. The New Mind Readers provides a compelling look at the origins, development, and future of these extraordinary tools, revealing how they are increasingly being used to decode our thoughts and experiences--and how this raises sometimes troubling questions about their application in domains such as marketing, politics, and the law. Russell Poldrack takes readers on a journey of scientific discovery, telling the stories of the visionaries behind these breakthroughs. Along the way, he gives an insider's perspective on what is perhaps the single most important technology in cognitive neuroscience today--functional magnetic resonance imaging, or fMRI, which is providing astonishing new insights into the contents and workings of the mind. He highlights both the amazing power and major limitations of these techniques and describes how applications outside the lab often exceed the bounds of responsible science. Poldrack also details the unique and sometimes disorienting experience of having his own brain scanned more than a hundred times as part of a landmark study of how human brain function changes over time. Written by one of the world's leading pioneers in the field, The New Mind Readers cuts through the hype and misperceptions surrounding these emerging new methods, offering needed perspective on what they can and cannot do--and demonstrating how they can provide new answers to age-old questions about the nature of consciousness and what it means to be human. -- Inside jacket flap.

Rating scales are increasingly used in neurologic research and trials. A key question relating to their use across the range of neurologic diseases, both common and rare, is what sample sizes provide meaningful estimates of reliability and validity. Here, we address two questions: (1) to what extent does sample size influence the stability of reliability and validity estimates; and (2) to what extent does sample size influence the inferences made from reliability and validity testing? We examined data from two studies. In Study 1, we retrospectively reduced the total sample randomly and nonrandomly by decrements of approximately 50 % to generate sub-samples from n  = 713–20. In Study 2, we prospectively generated sub-samples from n  = 20–320, by entry time into study. In all samples we estimated reliability (internal consistency, item total correlations, test–retest) and validity (within scale correlations, convergent and discriminant construct validity). Reliability estimates were stable in magnitude and interpretation in all sub-samples of both studies. Validity estimates were stable in samples of n  ≥ 80, for 75 % of scales in samples of n  = 40, and for 50 % of scales in samples of n  = 20. In this study, sample sizes of a minimum of 20 for reliability and 80 for validity provided estimates highly representative of the main study samples. These findings should be considered provisional and more work is needed to determine if these estimates are generalisable, consistent, and useful.

Background: Clinical guidelines are a constructive response to the reality that practicing physicians require assistance in assimilating and applying the exponentially expanding, often contradictory, body of medical knowledge. They attempt to define practices that meet the needs of most patients under most circumstances. Ideally, specific clinical recommendations contained within practice guidelines are systematically developed by expert panels who have access to all the available evidence, have an understanding of the clinical problem, and have clinical experience with the procedure being assessed, as well as knowledge of relevant research methods. The recent development of American Pain Society (APS) guidelines has created substantial controversy because of their perceived lack of objective analysis and recommendations perceived to be biased due to conflicts of interest. Objectives: To formally and carefully assess the APS guidelines’ evidence synthesis for low back pain for therapeutic interventions using the same methodology utilized by the APS authors. The interventions examined were therapeutic interventions for managing low back pain, including epidural injections, adhesiolysis, facet joint interventions, and spinal cord stimulation. Methods: A literature search by 2 authors was carried out utilizing appropriate databases from 1966 through July 2008. Articles in which conflicts arose were reviewed and mediated by a third author to arrive at a consensus. Selections of manuscripts and methodologic quality assessment was also performed by at least 2 authors utilizing the same criteria applied in the APS guidelines. The guideline reassessment process included the evaluation of individual studies and systematic reviews and their translation into practice recommendations. Results: The conclusions of APS and our critical assessment based on grading of good, fair, and poor, agreed that there is fair evidence for spinal cord stimulation in post lumbar surgery syndrome, and poor evidence for lumbar intraarticular facet joint injections, lumbar interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural steroids for conditions other than disc herniation or radiculitis, sacroiliac joint injections, intradiscal electrothermal therapy, endoscopic adhesiolysis, and intrathecal therapy. However, our assessment of APS guidelines for other interventional techniques, utilizing their own criteria, showed fair evidence for therapeutic lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, caudal epidural injections in disc herniation or radiculitis, percutaneous adhesiolysis in post lumbar surgery syndrome, radiofrequency neurotomy, and transforaminal epidural injections in radiculitis. Also it is illustrated that inclusion of latest literature will change the conclusions, with improved grading – caudal epidural, adhesiolysis, and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks from fair to good or poor to fair. The present critical assessment review illustrates that APS guidelines have utilized multiple studies inappropriately and have excluded appropriate studies. Our integrity assessment shows deep concerns that the APS guidelines illustrating significant methodologic failures which raise concerns about transparency, accountability, consistency, and independence. Conclusion: The current reassessment, using appropriate methodology, shows evidence similar to APS guidelines for several procedures, but differs extensively from published APS guidelines for multiple other procedures including caudal epidural injections, lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, lumbar radiofrequency neurotomy, and percutaneous adhesiolysis. Key words: Guidelines, evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, American Pain Society, interventional pain management, interventional techniques

\"This text provides a study of Jean-Martin Charcot, a founding figure in the history of neurology as a discipline and a colleague of Sigmund Freud. It argues that Charcot's diagnostic and pedagogic models, explaining both how disease is recognized and described and how to teach the act of neurological diagnosis, should be considered through a theatrical lens. Considering the constitution of the living, moving body in terms of performance, Charcot created a situation whereby the line between deceptive acting and real pathology, scientific accuracy and creative falsehood, and indeed between health and unhealth, becomes blurred. The physician becomes a medical subject in his or her own display, transforming medicine into a potentially destabilizing, even grand guignolesque, discourse\"-- Back cover.

Artificial intelligence (AI)-based decision support systems (DSS) are utilized in medicine but underlying decision-making processes are usually unknown. Explainable AI (xAI) techniques provide insight into DSS, but little is known on how to design xAI for clinicians. Here we investigate the impact of various xAI techniques on a clinician's interaction with an AI-based DSS in decision-making tasks as compared to a general population. We conducted a randomized, blinded study in which members of the Child Neurology Society and American Academy of Neurology were compared to a general population. Participants received recommendations from a DSS via a random assignment of an xAI intervention (decision tree, crowd sourced agreement, case-based reasoning, probability scores, counterfactual reasoning, feature importance, templated language, and no explanations). Primary outcomes included test performance and perceived explainability, trust, and social competence of the DSS. Secondary outcomes included compliance, understandability, and agreement per question. We had 81 neurology participants with 284 in the general population. Decision trees were perceived as the more explainable by the medical versus general population (P < 0.01) and as more explainable than probability scores within the medical population (P < 0.001). Increasing neurology experience and perceived explainability degraded performance (P = 0.0214). Performance was not predicted by xAI method but by perceived explainability. xAI methods have different impacts on a medical versus general population; thus, xAI is not uniformly beneficial, and there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Further user-centered xAI research targeting clinicians and to develop personalized DSS for clinicians is needed.

PurposeThe goals of this study were to assess the feasibility of a web-based application—electronic Social Network Assessment Program (eSNAP)—to automate the capture and visualization of family caregiver social network data of neuro-oncology patients.MethodsCaregivers were recruited from a neuro-oncology clinic at an NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center. Participants completed baseline questionnaires on a laptop in clinic assessing demographic characteristics. After baseline, participants were randomly assigned to either create a social network visualization using eSNAP (intervention) or to usual care (control) condition. Those who used eSNAP provided likeability/usability data. All participants were asked to complete follow-up questionnaires at 3 and 6 weeks after baseline to determine feasibility of longitudinal study.ResultsWe recruited 40 caregivers of patients with primary malignant brain tumor to participate in this study. Participants rated eSNAP usability and likeability highly, indicating that eSNAP would help them consider their available social support. At 3 weeks, 90% of participants completed questionnaires and 82.5% completed questionnaires at 6 weeks.ConclusionsThere is a need to encourage family caregivers of patients with primary malignant brain tumor to engage their existing social network resources to help alleviate caregiver burden. Our findings suggest that our web-based application to address this issue is feasible to implement with high usability and likeability. This pilot study identified minor changes to the intervention to improve effectiveness and has implications for future research in this understudied population.Trial registrationclinicaltrials.gov, protocol number NCT03026699

Background This update of the guideline on the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) was commissioned by the European Academy of Neurology (EAN) and prepared in collaboration with the European Reference Network for Neuromuscular Diseases (ERN EURO‐NMD) and the support of the European Network for the Cure ALS (ENCALS) and the European Organization for Professionals and Patients with ALS (EUpALS). Methods Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to assess the effectiveness of interventions for ALS. Two systematic reviewers from Cochrane Response supported the guideline panel. The working group identified a total of 26 research questions, performed systematic reviews, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and made specific recommendations. Expert consensus statements were provided where insufficient evidence was available. Results A guideline mapping effort revealed only one other ALS guideline that used GRADE methodology (a National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE] guideline). The available evidence was scarce for many research questions. Of the 26 research questions evaluated, the NICE recommendations could be adapted for 8 questions. Other recommendations required updates of existing systematic reviews or de novo reviews. Recommendations were made on currently available disease‐modifying treatments, multidisciplinary care, nutritional and respiratory support, communication aids, psychological support, treatments for common ALS symptoms (e.g., muscle cramps, spasticity, pseudobulbar affect, thick mucus, sialorrhea, pain), and end‐of‐life management. Conclusions This update of the guideline using GRADE methodology provides a framework for the management of ALS. The treatment landscape is changing rapidly, and further updates will be prepared when additional evidence becomes available.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, most memory clinics have had to suspend their activities. On the other hand, international dementia experts have recommended to provide urgently worldwide support for people living with dementia. This situation urges to play out new strategies to guarantee adequate care. Telemedicine and digital technology (DT) devices, such as smartphones, can be very helpful in remote monitoring and care. Technological devices such as videoconference or smartphone apps might be used for follow-up visits and support to patients and caregivers and to acquire digital markers of clinical progression. Hopefully, this dramatic situation would facilitate the process of progressive familiarization of neurologists with telemedicine and DT approach.

The global burden of neurological disorders is substantial and increasing, especially in low-resource settings. The current increased global interest in brain health and its impact on population wellbeing and economic growth, highlighted in the World Health Organization’s new Intersectoral Global Action Plan on Epilepsy and other Neurological Disorders 2022–2031, presents an opportunity to rethink the delivery of neurological services. In this Perspective, we highlight the global burden of neurological disorders and propose pragmatic solutions to enhance neurological health, with an emphasis on building global synergies and fostering a ‘neurological revolution’ across four key pillars — surveillance, prevention, acute care and rehabilitation — termed the neurological quadrangle. Innovative strategies for achieving this transformation include the recognition and promotion of holistic, spiritual and planetary health. These strategies can be deployed through co-design and co-implementation to create equitable and inclusive access to services for the promotion, protection and recovery of neurological health in all human populations across the life course.In this Perspective, Owolabi et al. propose strategies to improve brain health and address the growing global burden of neurological disorders. They present a new framework — the neurological quadrangle — which aims to provide equitable and effective surveillance, prevention, acute care and rehabilitation of neurological disorders globally.