Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Consensus Development Conference, NIH”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30Linked to original sources
PubMed2004

Executive summary: conference on Dietary Supplement Use in the Elderly--proceedings of the conference held January 14-15, 2003, Natcher Auditorium, National, Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

Several issues prompted the need for this conference. Among these were the reported high prevalence (> 50%) of use of supplements among individuals over 50 years of age, inadequate scientific evidence supporting the safety and benefits of use among these individuals, and a report issued by the General Accounting Office (GAO) in 2001. This GAO report entitled "Health Products for Seniors: 'Anti-Aging' Products Pose Potential for Physical and Economic Harm," arose from concerns among legislators that seniors were spending money from their limited incomes on products that were not only ineffective but also potentially harmful. The conference was organized around three sessions to address the issues highlighted above, which were usage of dietary supplements among the elderly, age-related changes and issues that affect the use of supplements, and the evidence base supporting the use of supplements in disease prevention and health maintenance. Each session was followed by a panel discussion. This Executive Summary is organized around the three major discussion topics. The summary does not explicitly follow the order of the conference presentations; rather it is intended to capture and examine the current research gaps in knowledge and identify future research opportunities. These research opportunities, as expressed by the conference speakers, panelists, and attendees are summarized at the end of this paper under five thematic areas: usage behaviors, methodology, pre-clinical studies and clinical studies, informational databases, and education and dissemination.

Aged↗
PubMed2003

Summary and recommendations of a National Cancer Institute workshop on issues limiting the clinical use of Monte Carlo dose calculation algorithms for megavoltage external beam radiation therapy.

Due to the significant interest in Monte Carlo dose calculations for external beam megavoltage radiation therapy from both the research and commercial communities, a workshop was held in October 2001 to assess the status of this computational method with regard to use for clinical treatment planning. The Radiation Research Program of the National Cancer Institute, in conjunction with the Nuclear Data and Analysis Group at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, gathered a group of experts in clinical radiation therapy treatment planning and Monte Carlo dose calculations, and examined issues involved in clinical implementation of Monte Carlo dose calculation methods in clinical radiotherapy. The workshop examined the current status of Monte Carlo algorithms, the rationale for using Monte Carlo, algorithmic concerns, clinical issues, and verification methodologies. Based on these discussions, the workshop developed recommendations for future NCI-funded research and development efforts. This paper briefly summarizes the issues presented at the workshop and the recommendations developed by the group.

Algorithms↗
PubMed1991

Words without action? The production, dissemination, and impact of consensus recommendations.

When existing evaluations find little or no evidence of consensus recommendations leading to action, one can justifiably ask why so much of this review was dedicated to analyzing alternative ways of producing such "words without action." There are, however, at least two reasons why consensus recommendations should be produced with care and attention to validity. First, recommendations do sometimes have an impact on behavior as a consequence of mere dissemination activity--the Dutch program, for instance, was more successful than most. This success may occur when the target audience is already particularly receptive to change and the message is timely and delivered by a credible source in a clinically relevant way. Thus, although "such a conjunction of favorable conditions is probably the exception rather than the rule for consensus topics" (46, 240) it does happen. Second, the output from consensus processes is increasingly a potential input to other processes. Consensus recommendations can be used as the criteria for evaluation and appraisal aimed at changing practice behavior, making administrative decisions on resource allocation, or defining research protocols. For instance, quality assurance activities, such as peer assessment, practitioner certification, or utilization review, are actively seeking criteria with which to make judgments and elicit changes in practice to improve the quality of care. Funding agencies are looking for information to help make reimbursement, capital expenditure, or fee-for-service decisions on cessation of insurance for particular procedures or approaches. These uses of the consensus criteria are potentially major and controversial. Therefore, even if dissemination rarely leads to action, consensus processes should still be done carefully and with valid techniques. The use of their recommendations embedded within other activities may well lead to (forced) changes in behavior. On ethical grounds alone, we should be as sure as possible that the behavior changes being implied and encouraged are indeed advisable. For these reasons, the review describes the decision points in the production process for consensus recommendations as a start on the development of a set of recognized standards. The review offers a critical appraisal of the various methodological choices available at each decision point. The seven decision points are selecting a topic, picking the consensus group, providing background preparation, identifying information inputs, choosing a group judgment process, defining the criteria for recommendations, and choosing a report preparation procedure and format. At least two important points emerged from this review. First, the research is often not well enough developed to give clear indications for many of the choices on what is the "best" alternative.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Canada↗
PubMed2002

Nanotechnology: Emerging Developments and Early Detection of Cancer. A two-day workshop sponsored by the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Standards and Technology, August 30-31 2001, on the National Institute of Standards and Technology Campus, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.

A recent meeting jointly sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) brought together researchers active in nanotechnology and cancer molecular biology to discuss and evaluate the interface between disciplines. Emerging areas where nanotechnologies may impact cancer prevention and early cancer detection were elaborated by key researchers who catalyzed interdisciplinary dialogue aimed at fostering cross-discipline communications and future collaboration.

Biomarkers, Tumor↗
PubMed2006

Pathology of genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic exocrine cancer: consensus report and recommendations.

Several diverse genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic exocrine neoplasia have been developed. These mouse models have a spectrum of pathologic changes; however, until now, there has been no uniform nomenclature to characterize these changes. An international workshop, sponsored by The National Cancer Institute and the University of Pennsylvania, was held from December 1 to 3, 2004 with the goal of establishing an internationally accepted uniform nomenclature for the pathology of genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic exocrine neoplasia. The pancreatic pathology in 12 existing mouse models of pancreatic neoplasia was reviewed at this workshop, and a standardized nomenclature with definitions and associated images was developed. It is our intention that this nomenclature will standardize the reporting of genetically engineered mouse models of pancreatic exocrine neoplasia, that it will facilitate comparisons between genetically engineered mouse models and human pancreatic disease, and that it will be broad enough to accommodate newly emerging mouse models of pancreatic neoplasia.

Animals↗
PubMed2004

Immunologic aspects of chronic fatigue syndrome. Report on a Research Symposium convened by The CFIDS Association of America and co-sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health.

Chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) is a serious health concern affecting over 800,000 Americans of all ages, races, socioeconomic groups and genders. The etiology and pathophysiology of CFS are unknown, yet studies have suggested an involvement of the immune system. A symposium was organized in October 2001 to explore the possibility of an association between immune dysfunction and CFS, with special emphasis on the interactions between immune dysfunction and other abnormalities noted in the neuroendocrine and autonomic nervous systems of individuals with CFS. This paper represents the consensus of the panel of experts who participated in this meeting. Data suggest that persons with CFS manifest changes in immune responses that fall outside normative ranges, but current research does not provide definitive evidence on whether these immune abnormalities are a cause or result of the illness. It has become clear that CFS cannot be understood based on single measurements of immune, endocrine, cardiovascular, or autonomic nervous system dysfunction. This panel encourages a new emphasis on multidisciplinary research into CFS.

Autonomic Nervous System↗
PubMed1994

[Ovarian cancer. Screening, therapy and follow-up].

In April 1994, the National Cancer Institute, together with the Office of Medical Applications of Research of the National Institutes of Health, convened a Consensus Development Conference on Ovarian Cancer: Screening, Treatment and Follow-up. The panel weighted the scientific evidence and drafted answers to the following key questions: (1) What is the current status of screening and prevention of ovarian cancer? (2) What is the appropriate management of early-stage ovarian cancer? (3) What is the appropriate management of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer? (4) What is the appropriate follow-up after primary therapy? (5) What are important directions for future research?

Combined Modality Therapy↗