The Experts below are selected from a list of 24972 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Steve Hyman - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving and accelerating drug development for nervous system disorders
Neuron, 2014Co-Authors: Diana E Pankevich, Bruce M Altevogt, John Dunlop, Fred H Gage, Steve HymanAbstract:Advances in the Neurosciences have placed the field in the position where it is poised to significantly reduce the burden of nervous system disorders. However, drug discovery, development, and translation for nervous system disorders still pose many unique challenges. The key scientific challenges can be summarized as follows: mechanisms of disease, target identification and validation, predictive models, biomarkers for patient stratification and as endpoints for clinical trials, clear regulatory pathways, reliability and reproducibility of published data, and data sharing and collaboration. To accelerate nervous system drug development, the Institute of Medicine's Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders has hosted a series of public workshops that brought together representatives of industry, government (including both research funding and regulatory agencies), academia, and patient groups to discuss these challenges and offer potential strategies to improve the translational neuroscience.
Diana E Pankevich - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving and accelerating drug development for nervous system disorders
Neuron, 2014Co-Authors: Diana E Pankevich, Bruce M Altevogt, John Dunlop, Fred H Gage, Steve HymanAbstract:Advances in the Neurosciences have placed the field in the position where it is poised to significantly reduce the burden of nervous system disorders. However, drug discovery, development, and translation for nervous system disorders still pose many unique challenges. The key scientific challenges can be summarized as follows: mechanisms of disease, target identification and validation, predictive models, biomarkers for patient stratification and as endpoints for clinical trials, clear regulatory pathways, reliability and reproducibility of published data, and data sharing and collaboration. To accelerate nervous system drug development, the Institute of Medicine's Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders has hosted a series of public workshops that brought together representatives of industry, government (including both research funding and regulatory agencies), academia, and patient groups to discuss these challenges and offer potential strategies to improve the translational neuroscience.
John T. Cacioppo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
foundations in social neuroscience
2002Co-Authors: John T. CacioppoAbstract:A full understanding of the biology and behavior of humans cannot be complete without the collective contributions of the social sciences, cognitive sciences, and Neurosciences. This book collects eighty-two of the foundational articles in the emerging discipline of social neuroscience. The book addresses five main areas of research: multilevel integrative analyses of social behavior, using the tools of neuroscience, cognitive science, and social science to examine specific cases of social interaction; the relationships between social cognition and the brain, using noninvasive brain imaging to document brain function in various social situations; rudimentary biological mechanisms for motivation, emotion, and attitudes, and the shaping of these mechanisms by social factors; the biology of social relationships and interpersonal processes; and social influences on biology and health.
-
brain imaging and cognitive neuroscience toward strong inference in attributing function to structure
American Psychologist, 1996Co-Authors: Martin Sarter, Gary G Berntson, John T. CacioppoAbstract:Cognitive neuroscience has emerged from the Neurosciences and cognitive psychology as a scientific discipline that aims at the determination of "how brain function gives rise to mental activity" (S. M. Kosslyn & L. M. Shin, 1992, p. 146). While research in cognitive neuroscience combines many levels of neuroscientific and psychological analyses, modern imaging techniques that monitor brain activity during behavioral or cognitive operations have significantly contributed to the emergence of this discipline. The conclusions deduced from these studies are inherently localizationistic in nature; in other words, they describe cognitive functions as being localized in focal brain regions (brain activity in a defined brain region, phi, is involved in specific cognitive function, psi). A broad discussion about the virtues and limitations of such conclusions may help avoid the emergence of a mentalistic localizationism (i.e., the attribution of mentalistic concepts such as happiness, morality, or consciousness to brain structure) and illustrates the importance of a convergence with information generated by different research strategies (such as, for example, evidence generated by studies in which the effects of experimental manipulations of local neuronal processes on cognitive functions are assessed). Progress in capitalizing on brain-imaging studies to investigate questions of the form "brain structure or event phi is associated with cognitive function psi" may be impeded because of the way in which inferences are typically formulated in the brain imaging literature. A conceptual framework to advance the interpretation of data describing the relationships between cognitive phenomena and brain structure activity is provided.
Marcus Robert Munafo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Power failure: Why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience
Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2013Co-Authors: Katherine S. Button, Claire Mokrysz, Emma S J Robinson, Brian A Nosek, Jonathan Flint, Marcus Robert MunafoAbstract:A study with low statistical power has a reduced chance of detecting a true effect, but it is less well appreciated that low power also reduces the likelihood that a statistically significant result reflects a true effect. Here, we show that the average statistical power of studies in the Neurosciences is very low. The consequences of this include overestimates of effect size and low reproducibility of results. There are also ethical dimensions to this problem, as unreliable research is inefficient and wasteful. Improving reproducibility in neuroscience is a key priority and requires attention to well-established but often ignored methodological principles.
Bruce M Altevogt - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
improving and accelerating drug development for nervous system disorders
Neuron, 2014Co-Authors: Diana E Pankevich, Bruce M Altevogt, John Dunlop, Fred H Gage, Steve HymanAbstract:Advances in the Neurosciences have placed the field in the position where it is poised to significantly reduce the burden of nervous system disorders. However, drug discovery, development, and translation for nervous system disorders still pose many unique challenges. The key scientific challenges can be summarized as follows: mechanisms of disease, target identification and validation, predictive models, biomarkers for patient stratification and as endpoints for clinical trials, clear regulatory pathways, reliability and reproducibility of published data, and data sharing and collaboration. To accelerate nervous system drug development, the Institute of Medicine's Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous System Disorders has hosted a series of public workshops that brought together representatives of industry, government (including both research funding and regulatory agencies), academia, and patient groups to discuss these challenges and offer potential strategies to improve the translational neuroscience.
