Showing 1 – 20 of 83431
Relevance | Newest | Oldest |
  • JAMA July 25, 2017

    Figure 1: Representative Images of Phosphorylated Tau Pathology at CTE Pathological Stages I and II

    CTE indicates chronic traumatic encephalopathy; NFT, neurofibrillary tangle; ptau, phosphorylated tau. For all images, 10-µm paraffin-embedded tissue sections were immunostained with microscopic mouse monoclonal antibody for phosphorylated tau (AT8) (Pierce Endogen). Positive ptau immunostaining appears dark red, hematoxylin counterstain; calibration bar indicates 100 µm. Stage I CTE is characterized by 1 or 2 isolated perivascular epicenters of ptau NFTs and neurites (ie, CTE lesions) at the depths of the cortical sulci. In stage II, 3 or more cortical CTE lesions are found. All hemispheric tissue section images are 50-µm sections immunostained with mouse monoclonal antibody CP-13, directed against phosphoserine 202 of tau (courtesy of Peter Davies, PhD, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research; 1:200); this is considered to be an early site of tau phosphorylation in NFT formation. Positive ptau immunostaining appears dark brown. A, Former college football player with stage I CTE. Two perivascular ptau CTE lesions are evident at sulcal depths of the frontal cortex; there is no neurofibrillary degeneration in the medial temporal lobe (open arrowhead). Perivascular CTE lesion: neurofibrillary tangles and dot-like and threadlike neurites encircle a small blood vessel. B, Former NFL player with stage II CTE. There are multiple perivascular ptau CTE lesions at depths of sulci of the frontal cortex; there is no neurofibrillary degeneration in the medial temporal lobe (open arrowhead). Perivascular CTE lesion: a cluster of NFTs and large dot-like and threadlike neurites surround a small blood vessel.
  • JAMA July 25, 2017

    Figure 2: Representative Images of Phosphorylated Tau Pathology at CTE Pathological Stages III and IV

    CTE indicates chronic traumatic encephalopathy; NFT, neurofibrillary tangle; ptau, phosphorylated tau. For all images, 10-µm paraffin-embedded tissue sections were immunostained with microscopic mouse monoclonal antibody for phosphorylated tau (AT8) (Pierce Endogen). Positive ptau immunostaining appears dark red, hematoxylin counterstain; calibration bar indicates 100 µm. In stage III CTE, multiple CTE lesions and diffuse neurofibrillary degeneration of the medial temporal lobe are found. In stage IV CTE, CTE lesions and NFTs are widely distributed throughout the cerebral cortex, diencephalon, and brain stem. All hemispheric tissue section images are 50-µm sections immunostained with mouse monoclonal antibody CP-13, directed against phosphoserine 202 of tau (courtesy of Peter Davies, PhD, Feinstein Institute for Medical Research; 1:200); this is considered to be an early site of tau phosphorylation in NFT formation. Positive ptau immunostaining appears dark brown. A, Former NFL player with stage III CTE. There are multiple large CTE lesions in the frontal cortex and insula; there is diffuse neurofibrillary degeneration of hippocampus and entorhinal cortex (black arrowhead). Perivascular CTE lesion: a dense collection of NFTs and large dot-like and threadlike neurites enclose several small blood vessels. B, Former NFL player with stage IV CTE. There are large, confluent CTE lesions in the frontal, temporal, and insular cortices and there is diffuse neurofibrillary degeneration of the amygdala and entorhinal cortex (black arrowhead). Perivascular CTE lesion: a large accumulation of NFTs, many of them ghost tangles, encompass several small blood vessels.
  • On the Recognition of Global Excellence in Medical Research

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2015; 314(11):1125-1126. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.10696

    This commentary outlines the history and context of global prizes for health research in the years since the Albert and Mary Lasker Foundation began recognizing biomedical science and clinical research.

  • The DNA Damage Response—Self-awareness for DNA: The 2015 Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2015; 314(11):1111-1112. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.10387

    This Viewpoint discusses the the role of the DNA damage response pathway in disease syndromes and its importance to human health.

  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 4: Pharmaceutical Industry Medical Research Funding by Phase of Research, 2004-2011

    Pharmaceutical industry funding by phase was obtained from Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) annual reports, 2004-2011. Data were 2 years old at time of publication and include both domestic and international research funding from PhRMA members.aData were adjusted to 2012 dollars using the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index.bCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1.cUncategorized funding could not be allotted to a single phase of research.
  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 1: The Anatomy of Medical Research: US and International Comparisons

    EMA indicates European Medicines Agency; FDA, US Food and Drug Administration.
  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 2: US Funding for Medical Research by Source, 1994-2012

    Data were calculated according to methods outlined in eTable 1 in the Supplement. ARRA indicates American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.aData were adjusted to 2012 dollars using the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index.bThe National Institutes of Health and other federal sources include stimulus provided by ARRA in 2009 and 2010.cData from 1994-2002 and 2011-2012 were estimated based on linear regression analysis of industry market share.dCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1. The CAGR was calculated separately for 2 different periods with a single overlapping year: 1994-2004 and 2004-2012. The cut point was chosen at 2004 given the changes seen in funding from the National Institutes of Health in that year.
  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 3: Growth in US Funding for Medical Research by Source, 1994-2012

    Data were calculated according to methods outlined in eTable 1 in the Supplement.aAdjusted to 2012 dollars using the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index.bCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1.
  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 8: Global Medical Research Funding in Select Countries/Regions, 2011

    The regions/countries/economies in the analysis include the major countries of North America (United States, Canada), Europe (including the 10 largest European countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), and Asia-Oceania (Australia, China, India, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea). Data for African and South American countries and Russia were not available. Data were calculated according to methods outlined in eTable 6 in the Supplement.aData were converted to US currency using an average annual exchange rate for the respective year and adjusted to 2012 dollars using the Biomedical Research and Development Price Index.bPublic research and development funding included that from government agencies, higher educational institutes, and not-for-profit organizations.cIndustry research and development funding included pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device firms.dCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1.eGlobal total for medical research funding includes research and development expenditures from 36 major world countries across 4 continents.fOther Asia includes India, Singapore, and South Korea.
  • JAMA January 13, 2015

    Figure 13: Medical Research Articles and Citations by Selected Countries/Regions, 2000-2010

    NA indicates not available. Medical research was defined as the life sciences and psychology, excluding agricultural science. Article counts reported by the National Science Foundation were from the Thomas Reuters Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index, classified by year of publication and assigned to countries on the basis of institutional addresses listed on each article. Articles were counted on a fractional basis; ie, for articles with collaborating institutions from multiple countries, each country received fractional credit on the basis of proportion of its participating institutions. Citations were based on a 3-year period with 2-year lag; eg, citations for 2000 are references made in articles in 2000 to articles published in 1996-1998. The citation index of highly cited articles was defined as the share of the world’s top 1% cited biomedical research articles divided by the share of the world’s biomedical research articles in the cited year window.aCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1.bOther includes the remaining 159 nations of the world within the original database.cOther Asia includes India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand.dThe European Union includes 27 European nations.
  • The Anatomy of Medical Research: US and International Comparisons

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2015; 313(2):174-189. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.15939

    This Special Communication compares investment in medical research in the United States and other developed countries over the past 2 decades by quantifying total public and private investment and personnel and evaluating resulting patents, publications, drug and device approvals, and value created.

  • Open Access to Clinical Trials Data

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2014; 312(10):1002-1003. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.9647
  • World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2013; 310(20):2191-2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053
  • JAMA November 13, 2013

    Figure 2: Historical National Health Expenditures by Category, 1980-2011

    The national health care expenditures were calculated based on data obtained from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and then adjusted for inflation using gross domestic product (GDP) deflator obtained from the Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis.aAdjusted to 2011 dollar value using GDP deflator.bCompound annual growth rate (CAGR) supposing that year A is x and year B is y, CAGR = (y/x){1/(B−A)}−1.cIncludes government activities such as epidemiological surveillance, inoculations, immunization/vaccination services, disease prevention programs, the operation of public health laboratories, and other such functions.dInvestment is the sum of medical sector purchases of structures and equipment and expenditures for noncommercial medical research by nonprofit or government entities.eIncludes all administrative expenditures, including the net cost of private health insurance.fEquipment includes durable and nondurable medical products.gIncludes physician, clinical, dental, home health care, and other professional services.hIncludes hospital care, nursing and continuing care retirement facilities, and other health/residential/personal care.
  • The Peer Review Congresses: Improving Peer Review and Biomedical Publication

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 310(17):1799-1800. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.280834
  • JAMA September 11, 2013

    Figure: 2013 Lasker Awards Honor Biomedical Researchers and Champions of Public Service

    Richard H. Scheller, PhD, (left), and Thomas C. Südhof, MD, (right), earned the Albert Lasker Basic Medical Research Award for research that illuminated the process of neurotransmitter release that allows the billions of neurons in the brain to communicate with each other.
  • JAMA September 11, 2013

    Figure: 2013 Lasker Awards Honor Biomedical Researchers and Champions of Public Service

    Graeme M. Clark, MB, MS, PhD (left), Ingeborg Hochmair, PhD (middle), and Blake S. Wilson (right) received the 2013 Lasker ~ DeBakey Clinical Medical Research Award for their work in developing the modern cochlear implant that allows severely deaf people to hear.
  • Research Letters in JAMA : Small but Mighty

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 310(6):589-590. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.8102
  • Talking to Patients in the 21st Century

    Abstract Full Text
    JAMA. 2013; 309(22):2384-2385. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.7159
  • Thank You to JAMA Peer Reviewers and Authors

    Abstract Full Text
    free access
    JAMA. 2013; 309(10):1034-1034. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.1885