| 1. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(author)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Ebersole, Charles R., et al.
(author)
-
Many Labs 5: Testing Pre-Data-Collection Peer Review as an Intervention to Increase Replicability
- 2020
-
In: Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science. - : Sage. - 2515-2467 .- 2515-2459. ; 3:3, s. 309-331
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Replication studies in psychological science sometimes fail to reproduce prior findings. If these studies use methods that are unfaithful to the original study or ineffective in eliciting the phenomenon of interest, then a failure to replicate may be a failure of the protocol rather than a challenge to the original finding. Formal pre-data-collection peer review by experts may address shortcomings and increase replicability rates. We selected 10 replication studies from the Reproducibility Project: Psychology (RP:P; Open Science Collaboration, 2015) for which the original authors had expressed concerns about the replication designs before data collection; only one of these studies had yielded a statistically significant effect (p < .05). Commenters suggested that lack of adherence to expert review and low-powered tests were the reasons that most of these RP:P studies failed to replicate the original effects. We revised the replication protocols and received formal peer review prior to conducting new replication studies. We administered the RP:P and revised protocols in multiple laboratories (median number of laboratories per original study = 6.5, range = 3-9; median total sample = 1,279.5, range = 276-3,512) for high-powered tests of each original finding with both protocols. Overall, following the preregistered analysis plan, we found that the revised protocols produced effect sizes similar to those of the RP:P protocols (Delta r = .002 or .014, depending on analytic approach). The median effect size for the revised protocols (r = .05) was similar to that of the RP:P protocols (r = .04) and the original RP:P replications (r = .11), and smaller than that of the original studies (r = .37). Analysis of the cumulative evidence across the original studies and the corresponding three replication attempts provided very precise estimates of the 10 tested effects and indicated that their effect sizes (median r = .07, range = .00-.15) were 78% smaller, on average, than the original effect sizes (median r = .37, range = .19-.50).
|
|
| 6. |
- Koushik, Anita, et al.
(author)
-
Intake of fruits and vegetables and risk of pancreatic cancer in a pooled analysis of 14 cohort studies
- 2012
-
In: American Journal of Epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0002-9262 .- 1476-6256. ; 176:5, s. 373-386
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Fruit and vegetable intake may protect against pancreatic cancer, since fruits and vegetables are rich in potentially cancer-preventive nutrients. Most case-control studies have found inverse associations between fruit and vegetable intake and pancreatic cancer risk, although bias due to reporting error cannot be ruled out. In most prospective studies, inverse associations have been weaker and imprecise because of small numbers of cases. The authors examined fruit and vegetable intake in relation to pancreatic cancer risk in a pooled analysis of 14 prospective studies from North America, Europe, and Australia (study periods between 1980 and 2005). Relative risks and 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were estimated separately for the 14 studies using the Cox proportional hazards model and were then pooled using a random-effects model. Of 862,584 men and women followed for 7-20 years, 2,212 developed pancreatic cancer. The pooled multivariate relative risks of pancreatic cancer per 100-g/day increase in intake were 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99, 1.03) for total fruits and vegetables, 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.03) for total fruits, and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.06) for total vegetables. Associations were similar for men and women separately and across studies. These results suggest that fruit and vegetable intake during adulthood is not associated with a reduced pancreatic cancer risk.
|
|
| 7. |
- Yusuf, D, et al.
(author)
-
The transcription factor encyclopedia
- 2012
-
In: Genome biology. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1474-760X .- 1465-6906. ; 13:3, s. R24-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Shorter, G. W., et al.
(author)
-
Few Interventions Support the Affected Other on Their Own: a Systematic Review of Individual Level Psychosocial Interventions to Support Those Harmed by Others Alcohol Use
- 2023
-
In: International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. - : SPRINGER. - 1557-1874 .- 1557-1882.
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Over 100 million individuals worldwide experience negative outcomes as a function of a family member or loved ones substance use. Other reviews have summarized evidence on interventions; however, success often depends on the behavior of the individual causing harm, and they may not be ready or able to change. The aim of this study was to identify and describe evaluations of psychosocial interventions which can support those affected by alcohol harm to others independent of their drinking relative or friend. A systematic review/narrative synthesis of articles from 11 databases pre-registered on PROSPERO (CRD42021203204) was conducted. Those experiencing the harm were spouses/partners or adult children/students who have parents with alcohol problems. Studies (n = 7) were from the UK, the USA, Korea, Sweden, Mexico, and India. Most participants were female (71-100%). Interventions varied from guided imagery, cognitive behavioral therapy, motivational interviewing, and anger management. Independent interventions may support those affected by anothers alcohol use, although there was considerable variation in outcomes targeted by the intervention design. Small-scale studies suggest psychosocial interventions ease suffering from alcohols harm to others, independent of the drinking family member. Understanding affected others experience and need is important given the impact of alcohols harm to others; however, there is a lack of quality evidence and theoretical underpinning informing strategies to support these individuals.
|
|
