Biomedical subjects

Ted A W Splinter

Publications and source records attributed to Ted A W Splinter.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

C-reactive protein levels, variation in the C-reactive protein gene, and cancer risk: the Rotterdam Study.

PURPOSE: It remains unclear if inflammation itself may induce cancer, if inflammation is a result of tumor growth, or a combination of both exists. The aim of this study was to examine whether C-reactive protein (CRP) levels and CRP gene variations were associated with an altered risk of colorectal, lung, breast, or prostate cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 7,017 participants age > or = 55 years from the Rotterdam Study were eligible for analyses. Mean follow-up time was 10.2 years. High-sensitivity CRP measurements were performed to identify additional values of 0.2 to 1.0 mg/L compared with standard procedures. Genotypes of the CRP gene were determined with an allelic discrimination assay. RESULTS: High levels (> 3 mg/L) of CRP were associated with an increased risk of incident cancer (hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.7) compared with persons with low levels (< 1 mg/L), even after a potential latent period of 5 years was introduced. Although CRP seems to affect several cancer sites, the association was strongest for lung cancer (hazard ratio, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.6 to 4.9). A CRP single nucleotide polymorphism associated with decreased CRP levels was associated with an increased lung cancer risk of 2.6 (95% CI, 1.6 to 4.4) in homozygous carriers. CONCLUSION: Baseline CRP levels seem to be a biomarker of chronic inflammation preceding lung cancer, even after subtracting a 5-year latent period. Furthermore, CRP gene variation associated with low CRP blood levels was relatively common in patients with lung cancer. Both chronic inflammation and impaired defense mechanisms resulting in chronic inflammation might explain these results.

Aged↗

PubMed2006

Clinical competence: general ability or case-specific?

BACKGROUND: Before the 1970s, research into the development of clinical competence was mainly focused on general problem-solving abilities. The scope of research changed when Elstein and colleagues discovered that individual ability to solve clinical problems varies considerably across cases. It was concluded that problem solving abilities are highly dependent on domain-specific knowledge rather than on general problem solving skills. Elstein called this phenomenon "case specificity." PURPOSE: The finding of content specificity will be contrasted with the existence of a general clinical problem solving ability, and the relationship between preclinical knowledge and a problem solving ability will be investigated. METHODS: A correlation matrix was calculated with clerkship final scores from 10 disciplines to examine the magnitude of the interrelations. A confirmatory factor analysis was applied to the corresponding covariances using structural equation modeling to investigate whether scores on finals shared any common variance across clerkships. Finally, two additional models were tested to examine the nature of the relationship between preclinical knowledge and problem solving. RESULTS: Low to moderate correlations across clerkship disciplines were found, supporting the original findings of content specificity. Further investigation showed that in addition to specific knowledge, a general, content-independent ability is needed to perform on these examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical competence, as measured in this study, is based on a combination of specific preclinical knowledge and a problem-solving ability. Case specificity fits perfectly well in this interactional perspective on clinical problem solving but does not explain it. The phenomenon "case specificity" is therefore not solely a result of content knowledge, but of level of experience and level of case difficulty.

Clinical Clerkship↗

PubMed2006

Influence of clerkship experiences on clinical competence.

BACKGROUND: Clerkship experiences are considered crucial for the development of clinical competence. Yet whether there is a direct relationship between the nature and volume of patient encounters and learning outcomes is far from clear. Some evidence in the literature points towards the importance of clinical supervision on student learning, but the relationship between clinical supervision, patient encounters and student competence remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed firstly to determine the variation in students' clinical experiences within and across sites; secondly, to identify the causes of this variation, and thirdly, to investigate the consequences of this variation on students' competence. METHODS: Clerkship students at 12 hospital sites recorded their patient encounters in logbooks. Site characteristics that might influence the variation in patient encounters were collected. Student competence was determined by 3 independent indicators: a practical end-of-clerkship examination; a theoretical end-of-clerkship examination, and an evaluation of professional performance. A model was developed to test the available clerkship data using structural equation modelling (SEM) software. RESULTS: Analysis of the logbooks revealed a large variation in the number of patients encountered by students. The average length of patient stay, number of patients admitted, and quality of supervision accounted partly for this variation. An increased number of patient encounters did not directly lead to improved competence. Quality of supervision turned out to be crucially important because it directly impacted student learning and also positively influenced the number of patient encounters. CONCLUSION: Monitoring the effectiveness of clerkship by merely asking students to keep a tally of the problems and diseases they encounter, without paying attention to the quality of supervision, does not contribute towards improving student learning.

Clinical Clerkship↗