SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Transfer asymmetry”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

75 records · Page 5Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Patient and hospital factors associated with disparities in acute stroke treatment in community and academic hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Systemic barriers may affect identification, emergency transportation (EMS), and care coordination for people with stroke. We assessed patient- and hospital-level factors for associations with pre-hospital and emergency department care. We compared trends for patients presenting to an academic medical center (AMC) versus community hospitals (CHs). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study at an AMC (Tufts Medical Center) with 542 patients aged ≥18 years hospitalized with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack between 1/1/2018-12/31/2020 who presented directly to AMC or presented to AMC as a transfer from initial contact CHs. Primary outcomes were EMS use, stroke code activation, door-to-CT time, and door-to-needle time. RESULTS: AMC patients identifying as non-Hispanic Asian (odds ratio (OR) = 0.25; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.13-0.47) and Hispanic (OR = 0.19; 95% CI = 0.05-0.72) and CH non-Hispanic Black/African-American patients (OR = 0.17; 95% CI = 0.05-0.62) were less likely to use EMS compared to non-Hispanic white patients. Patients with non-English primary language were less likely to use EMS (OR = 0.38; 95% CI = 0.23-0.63) compared to English-speaking patients in both hospital settings. CH Hispanic patients were less likely to have stroke code activation (OR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.05-0.86) compared to non-Hispanic white patients. CH patients were less likely to have stroke code activation (OR = 0.12; 95% CI = 0.07-0.19), had 31% shorter door-to-CT time (95% CI = 15-43% shorter), and had 29% longer door-to-needle time (95% CI = 5-58% longer). CONCLUSION: Patient-level factors and hospital setting were associated with differences in acute care suggesting opportunities for community outreach on EMS use, interventions to alleviate language barriers, and a need to address systemic biases.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Comparative effectiveness of game-based learning modalities in nursing and medical education: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Game-based learning (GBL) is increasingly used in healthcare education, but educators must choose among diverse modalities (e.g., quiz platforms, apps, serious games and metaverse environments). Comparative evidence on which modalities perform best across learning domains (knowledge, attitudes, and practice) remains limited. AIM: To compare the effects of distinct GBL modalities on knowledge, attitudes, and practice outcomes in nursing and medical education and to explore whether comparative effects differ by learner group (pre-licensure students and in-service professionals). DESIGN: PRISMA-NMA-aligned systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched eight databases and trial registries through September 2, 2024, for randomized controlled trials comparing GBL with traditional teaching (TT). Outcomes were transformed to a 0-100 scale and analysed as change from baseline in Bayesian consistency models; random-effects models were selected using deviance information criterion (DIC). Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2. We report mean differences (MDs) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs) versus TT, ranking probabilities, and subgroup NMAs by learner group. RESULTS: Thirty-one RCTs (n = 3439) were included; 15 contributed complete data to the network. Risk of bias was low in 15 trials and raised some concerns in 16. The network was modest for knowledge (11 trials) and sparse for attitudes (3) and practice (4). Compared with TT, metaverse-based learning showed improved attitudes (MD 15; 95% CrI 12 to 18), based on a single trial. For knowledge and practice, Kahoot-based quizzes (MD 9.1; 95% CrI -8.9 to 27) and app-based learning (MD 4.6; 95% CrI -4.4 to 14) had the highest estimated mean improvements, but credible intervals were wide and included the null for most comparisons. Subgroup rankings differed by learner group, but several comparisons were imprecise and uncertainty was substantial, particularly in sparse networks. CONCLUSIONS: GBL modalities may improve learning outcomes compared with TT, but relative effects appear domain-specific and the certainty of rankings is limited by sparse evidence and imprecision. Future trials should prioritise head-to-head comparisons, robust outcome measurement, and longer-term retention and transfer outcomes in both student and in-service populations.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

Impact of Chewing Behavior Change on Cognition and Cerebral Hemodynamics.

BACKGROUND: Impaired chewing ability is a recognized risk factor for cognitive decline in older adults, potentially due to reduced neural stimulation in cognition-related brain regions. While short-term studies have demonstrated transient increases in neural activity from chewing, the sustained cognitive and neurophysiological effects of encouraging thorough chewing habits in daily life remain unclear. OBJECTIVE: This randomized controlled trial investigated whether promoting thorough chewing during meals could improve cognitive function and cerebral hemodynamics in older adults. METHODS: Fifty participants aged 65 y or older were randomly assigned to either a 1-mo intervention group, which used a wearable device to monitor and increase chewing strokes during meals, or a control group that maintained usual chewing habits. Chewing behavior, cognitive performance (including memory and executive function via the color Stroop test), and cerebral hemodynamics in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) were measured at baseline and after 1 mo. Statistical analyses included t tests, chi-square tests, 2-way analysis of variance with post hoc tests, Pearson correlations, and generalized linear models to evaluate group differences and associations between chewing and cognitive outcomes. RESULTS: Significant time-by-group interactions were observed for memory, F(1, 48) = 6.24, P = 0.043, and hemodynamic responses in the left DLPFC, F(1, 48) = 6.19, P = 0.013. The intervention group showed increased chewing frequency (P = 0.017), improved memory performance, and reduced left DLPFC responses compared with controls. Chewing frequency was positively correlated with Stroop test scores (r = 0.53, P = 0.010) and negatively with hemodynamic changes in the left DLPFC (r = -0.30, P = 0.040). Although improvements in other cognitive outcomes and hemodynamic measures favored the intervention group, these differences did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Promoting intentional chewing habits for 1 mo may enhance memory-related cognitive performance and neural efficiency in the DLPFC during working memory tasks in older adults. This nonpharmacologic, low-burden strategy warrants further research with longer interventions to support cognitive health and dementia prevention. TRIAL REGISTRATION ID: UMIN000044280Knowledge Transfer Statement:This study demonstrates that promoting thorough chewing habits in older adults can improve memory and enhance neural efficiency in the brain. Encouraging intentional mastication is a simple, nonpharmacologic approach that may help maintain cognitive health and prevent dementia, providing a practical strategy for clinicians and policymakers to support healthy aging.

Humans↗