This Committee Report provides methodological, interpretive, and reporting guidance for researchers who use measures of heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV) in psychophysiological research. We provide brief summaries of best practices in measuring HR and HRV via electrocardiographic and photoplethysmographic signals in laboratory, field (ambulatory), and brain-imaging contexts to address research questions incorporating measures of HR and HRV. The Report emphasizes evidence for the strengths and weaknesses of different recording and derivation methods for measures of HR and HRV. Along with this guidance, the Report reviews what is known about the origin of the heartbeat and its neural control, including factors that produce and influence HRV metrics. The Report concludes with checklists to guide authors in study design and analysis considerations, as well as guidance on the reporting of key methodological details and characteristics of the samples under study. It is expected that rigorous and transparent recording and reporting of HR and HRV measures will strengthen inferences across the many applications of these metrics in psychophysiology. The prior Committee Reports on HR and HRV are several decades old. Since their appearance, technologies for human cardiac and vascular monitoring in laboratory and daily life (i.e., ambulatory) contexts have greatly expanded. This Committee Report was prepared for the Society for Psychophysiological Research to provide updated methodological and interpretive guidance, as well as to summarize best practices for reporting HR and HRV studies in humans.

Shotgun metagenomics is an increasingly cost-effective approach for profiling environmental and host-associated microbial communities. However, due to the complexity of both microbiomes and the molecular techniques required to analyze them, the reliability and representativeness of the results are contingent upon the field, laboratory, and bioinformatic procedures employed. Here, we consider 15 field and laboratory issues that critically impact downstream bioinformatic and statistical data processing, as well as result interpretation, in bacterial shotgun metagenomic studies. The issues we consider encompass intrinsic properties of samples, study design, and laboratory-processing strategies. We identify the links of field and laboratory steps with downstream analytical procedures, explain the means for detecting potential pitfalls, and propose mitigation measures to overcome or minimize their impact in metagenomic studies. We anticipate that our guidelines will assist data scientists in appropriately processing and interpreting their data, while aiding field and laboratory researchers to implement strategies for improving the quality of the generated results.

The Stroke Treatment Academic Industry Roundtable (STAIR) convened a session and workshop regarding enrollment in acute stroke trials during the STAIR XII meeting on March 22, 2023. This forum brought together stroke physicians and researchers, members of the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, industry representatives, and members of the US Food and Drug Administration to discuss the current status and opportunities for improving enrollment in acute stroke trials. The workshop identified the most relevant issues impacting enrollment in acute stroke trials and addressed potential action items for each. Focus areas included emergency consent in the United States and other countries; careful consideration of eligibility criteria to maximize enrollment and representativeness; investigator, study coordinator, and pharmacist availability outside of business hours; trial enthusiasm/equipoise; site start-up including contractual issues; site champions; incorporation of study procedures into standard workflow as much as possible; centralized enrollment at remote sites by study teams using telemedicine; global trials; and coenrollment in trials when feasible. In conclusion, enrollment of participants is the lifeblood of acute stroke trials and is the rate-limiting step for testing an exciting array of new approaches to improve patient outcomes. In particular, efforts should be undertaken to broaden the medical community\'s understanding and implementation of emergency consent procedures and to adopt designs and processes that are easily incorporated into standard workflow and that improve trials\' efficiencies and execution. Research and actions to improve enrollment in ongoing and future trials will improve stroke outcomes more broadly than any single therapy under consideration.

The general WAAVP (World Association for the Advancement of Veterinary Parasitology) guideline on anthelmintic efficacy were prepared to assist researchers with the planning, conduct and interpretation of studies to assess the efficacy of anthelmintic drugs in food-producing and companion animals. General principles are outlined herein to assist in the preparation and execution of dosage determination, dosage confirmation and field studies, which are applicable to all animal host species. These general guidelines are complemented by revised species-specific guidelines, which provide more specific, updated and detailed guidance for each animal host species.

UNASSIGNED: Healthcare clinical and even policy decisions are progressively made based on research-based evidence. The process by which the appropriate trials are developed and well-written manuscripts by means of evidence-based medicine recommendations has resulted in unprecedented necessity in evidence-based medicine in neuromodulation.
UNASSIGNED: The essential considerations in the planning of neuromodulation research are discussed in the light of available scientific literature as well as the authors\' scientific expertise regarding research study design and scientific manuscript preparation.
UNASSIGNED: This article should enable the reader to understand how to appropriately design a clinical research study and prepare scientific manuscripts. The high-quality and well-designed studies, when performed and reported effectively, support evidence-based medicine and foster improved patient outcomes.

Dose adjustment for drugs eliminated by the kidneys generally assume a linear relationship between renal drug clearance (CLR ) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). This assumption may not hold for drugs that undergo extensive tubular secretion where nonlinearity in drug handling is expected. The aim of this study is to determine if renal drug study designs recommended by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) could distinguish linear from nonlinear renal drug handling.
In this simulation and estimation study, the study designs based on the EMA and FDA guidelines for Phase I renal drug studies were evaluated for their ability to discriminate a linear from a nonlinear relationship between CLR and GFR. The number of subjects for each simulated study ranged from 4 to 960. Power, relative standard error and bias were calculated.
Study designs under the EMA and FDA guidelines required ≥8 and ≥48 subjects, respectively, to achieve ≥80% power to discriminate a linear from nonlinear relationship between CLR and GFR. The relative standard error of estimated parameters were 13-37 and 17-44% for the designs with 24 subjects under the EMA and FDA guidelines, respectively. The bias in parameter estimates under the EMA designs were not evident, however, they were biased (13-21%) under the FDA designs.
The EMA design was found to require fewer subjects (n = 8) compared to the FDA (n = 48) to discriminate linear from nonlinear drug renal handling at ≥80% study power while both the designs perform poorly for the parameter precision.

The omission of outcomes that are of relevance to patients, clinicians, and regulators across trials in autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD) limits shared decision making. The Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology-Polycystic Kidney Disease (SONG-PKD) Initiative convened an international consensus workshop on October 25, 2018, to discuss the identification and implementation of a potential core outcome set for all ADPKD trials. This article summarizes the discussion from the workshops and the SONG-PKD core outcome set. Key stakeholders including 11 patients/caregivers and 47 health professionals (nephrologists, policy makers, industry, and researchers) attended the workshop. Four themes emerged: \"Relevance of trajectory and impact of kidney function\" included concerns about a patient\'s prognosis and uncertainty of when they may need to commence kidney replacement therapy and the lack of an early prognostic marker to inform long-term decisions; \"Discerning and defining pain specific to ADPKD\" highlighted the challenges in determining the origin of pain, adapting to the chronicity and repeated episodes of pain, the need to place emphasis on pain management, and to have a validated measure for pain; \"Highlighting ADPKD consequences\" encompassed cyst-related complications and reflected patient\'s knowledge because of family history and the hereditary nature of ADPKD; and \"Risk for life-threatening but rare consequences\" such as cerebral aneurysm meant considering both frequency and severity of the outcome. Kidney function, mortality, cardiovascular disease, and pain were established as the core outcomes for ADPKD.

BACKGROUND: Consensus methods such as Delphi studies or the group nominal method have long been used in healthcare research to develop services, processes or policies and inform further research. However, concept analysis and meta-synthesis tools are used more frequently to seek a collective understanding of subjective terms.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the use of consensus methods to develop linguistic clarity in healthcare research.
CONCLUSIONS: The authors argue that consensus methods are appropriate for determining linguistic clarity when researching subjective terms. The paper includes a sample research design that incorporates this approach. Consensus methods, supported by interpretive synthesis of the concept and research, can enrich our understanding of subjective terms used in healthcare research.
CONCLUSIONS: Understanding the importance of linguistic clarity is an important step for healthcare researchers. Consensus methods, if managed effectively and conducted in line with the appropriate research guidelines, can bring a richer understanding to concepts.
CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents a research example that incorporates the use of a consensus method and which healthcare researchers can use to reduce the potential ambiguity of subjective terms in their research.

BACKGROUND: We designed and initiated a pilot comparative effectiveness study for juvenile localized scleroderma (jLS), for which there is limited evidence on best therapy. We evaluated the process we used, in relation to the specific protocol and to the general task of identifying strategies for implementing studies in rare pediatric diseases.
METHODS: This was a prospective, multi-center, observational cohort study of 50 jLS patients initiating treatment, designed and conducted by the jLS group of the Childhood Arthritis and Rheumatology Research Alliance (CARRA) from 2012 to 2015. A series of virtual and physical meetings were held to design the study, standardize clinical assessments, generate and refine disease activity and damage measures, and monitor the study. Patients were initiated on one of three standardized methotrexate-based treatment regimens (consensus treatment plans, CTPs) and monitored for 1 year. An optional bio-banking sub-study was included.
RESULTS: The target enrollment of 50 patients was achieved over 26 months at 10 sites, with patients enrolled into all CTPs. Enrolled patients were typical for jLS. Study eligibility criteria were found to perform well, capturing patients thought appropriate for treatment studies. Minor modifications to the eligibility criteria, primarily to facilitate recruitment for future studies, were discussed with consensus agreement reached on them by the jLS group. There were marked differences in site preferences for specific CTPs, with half the sites treating all their patients with the same CTP. Most patients (88%) completed the study, and 68% participated in the bio-banking substudy.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the feasibility of our approach for conducting comparative effectiveness research in a rare pediatric disease. Multi-center collaboration by dedicated investigators who met regularly was a key factor in the success of this project. Other factors that facilitate these studies include having a sufficient number of investigators to enroll in each regimen, and streamlining study approval and management.

Many sample size criteria exist. These include power calculations and methods based on confidence interval widths from a frequentist viewpoint, and Bayesian methods based on credible interval widths or decision theory. Bayesian methods account for the inherent uncertainty of inputs to sample size calculations through the use of prior information rather than the point estimates typically used by frequentist methods. However, the choice of prior density can be problematic because there will almost always be different appreciations of the past evidence. Such differences can be accommodated a priori by robust methods for Bayesian design, for example, using mixtures or ϵ-contaminated priors. This would then ensure that the prior class includes divergent opinions. However, one may prefer to report several posterior densities arising from a \"community of priors,\" which cover the range of plausible prior densities, rather than forming a single class of priors. To date, however, there are no corresponding sample size methods that specifically account for a community of prior densities in the sense of ensuring a large-enough sample size for the data to sufficiently overwhelm the priors to ensure consensus across widely divergent prior views. In this paper, we develop methods that account for the variability in prior opinions by providing the sample size required to induce posterior agreement to a prespecified degree. Prototypic examples to one- and two-sample binomial outcomes are included. We compare sample sizes from criteria that consider a family of priors to those that would result from previous interval-based Bayesian criteria.