Project description:The article by Nygaard and others (2016) proposes that applying batch correction approaches to microarray data from studies with unbalanced designs may inadvertently exaggerate the differences observed. In seeking to illustrate their point, Nygaard and others (2016) utilized a dataset (GSE61901) from a study we published (Towfic and others, 2014) and showed that one analysis pipeline utilizing the traditional approach to batch correction (ComBat) yielded over 1000 differentially expressed probesets, while an alternative approach proposed by Nygaard and others (2016). (utilizing batch as a fixed effect and averaging technical replicates) recovered 11 differentially expressed probesets.
Project description:We wish to respond to the commentary of de la Iglesia et al. [1]. Studies comparing sleep in different communities have different goals. One frequent goal has been to determine how sleep is affected by manipulating specific 'modern' conditions. Many studies have investigated the effect of artificial light and electronic entertainment. Such studies have clearly shown that light, particularly blue light, delays sleep onset [2]. Studying the effect of artificial light on sleep was not a goal of our study.
Project description:In October 2015 we published the paper 'Measurement of HbA1c in multicentre diabetes trials - should blood samples be tested locally or sent to a central laboratory: an agreement analysis'. Chatterjee and Pradhan have submitted a letter to the editor asking critical questions regarding the methods we used. We offer this letter in response.Trial registrationEudract No. 2010-023792-25. Registered on 4 November 2010. ISRCTN No. ISRCTN29255275 . Registered on 12 November 2010.
Project description:Reviews by Devoe et al. (2022), Linardon et al. (2022), and Schneider et al. (2022) illustrate the profound impact the COVID-19 pandemic has had on people with eating disorders (EDs) or disordered eating (DE) and their families. However, there is a dearth of research on how the pandemic has affected individuals with marginalized identities, who have been historically underrepresented in ED/DE research. The few studies conducted to date suggest that people with marginalized identities, including people of color, LGBTQ + people, women, and people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, may have had even greater increases in EDs/DE than people without marginalized identities. In this Commentary, I discuss who is missing from research on EDs/DE during the COVID-19 pandemic, strategies for breaking down barriers to participation in research for diverse groups, and the implications of existing research findings for people with marginalized identities. Improved measurement of salient aspects of participants' identities and increased recruitment and retention of participants from diverse backgrounds is necessary to more fully understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on all people affected by EDs and DE. Concurrently, increased access to affordable and culturally sensitive care is urgently required to meet the extensive treatment needs already documented.