JOURNAL READING

BNDF-TRKB SIGNALLING AND NEUROPROTECTION IN SCHIZOPHRENIA

Chirayu D.pandya Ammar kutiynawalla Anikulmar pillai

SUPERVISOR : DR SABAR P. SIREGAR, SPKJ

Medical Faculty Christian University of Indonesia

AIM

To knowing that the role of BNDF-TrkB signalling in pathofisiology of schizophrenia and antipsychotic drugs effect to level of BNDF in peripheal

HYPOTHESIS
Atypicall antipsychotics exhibit less deleterious effects on BNDF levels compare to typicall antipsychotics

SAMPLE

There is no explanation about sample and method are used

DATA SOURCES

Writers used data and compare it from many related journals between 1996-2010 to complete this journal.

DATA ANALYSIS
BNDF levels were calculated by using the complete other journal findings
Comparisons of rates between pre clinical and clinical findings in BNDF levels

RESULTS

BNDF & SCHIZOFRENIA

BDNF protein levels were significantly lower in prefrontal cortex samples from schizophrenia subjects BDNF levels were found lower in CSF samples from schizophrenia subjects compare to control

DNA METHYLATION OF BNDF GENE AND ITS ASSOCIATION WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA

A number of studies have also shed light on the potential role of DNA methylation in the dynamic regulation of the BDNF gene in adults, and have highlighted the fact that altered BDNF regulation could contribute to schizophrenia

POLYMORPHISMS OF BNDF GENE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA

A number of studies have investigated the relationship between BDNFMet polymorphism and schizophrenia, but the results are mostly inconsistent Val66met related to hippocampal volume.

NEUROPROTECTIVE ROLES OF BNDF/TRKB SIGNALLING

BDNF induced activation of TrkB is essential to synaptic plasticity The protective effect of BDNF against apoptosis requires the activation of the PI-3K/Akt and ERK pathways

CONCLUSION
There is growing intersest in understanding of BNDF-TrkB signalling in pathofisiology of schizophrenia Atypicall antipsychotics exhibit less deleterious effects on BNDF levels compare to typicall antipsychotics Neuroprotective/neurotrophic compounds might be used to be adjunctive therapeutic strategy

CRITICAL APPRAISAL

Describe
Title Content Consists less than12 words. Describe enough the content of the study, interesting enough, with abbreviasion
The author are psychiatrists from the department of health care. Medical college of georgia,georgia heallth science university, USA

Opinion
The title is enough Informatively enough

Author

Avowed

Publisher

Asian Journals Psychiatry. The publisher is one of well-known publisher among Asia. (-) : words total >260 the content is appropriate according to journal. (+): easy to understand the methode of study and the result

Avowed

Abstract

Not Informatively enough

PICO
patients

No data Typical and atypical antipsychoticss BNDF levels in peripheal Both antipsychotics are changing BNDF levels

intervention

comparison

outcome

result

describes in detail the findings DESCRIBES ON THE FIGURE AND TABLES No data No data No data

methods

Sampling

Sampling technique

CRITICAL APPRAISAL
Form a critical assessment of evidence-based medicine -Therapeutic aspect-

Whether the evidence about therapeutic aspect is valid? 1. whether the allocation of patients to treatment in this study was done randomly? Therapeutic aspect Or whether the study, explanation random sampling are described in detail and complete? 2. whether the observation of the patient is done long enough and complete? 3. whether all the patients in the randomized groups analyzed (when drop out is too large more than 20% done with the intention to treat analysis taking the worst case scenario) No This study is not explaining the method and the sampling

Yes, This study are collecting data from 1996 journals. No, This study is not explaining the method and the sampling

Whether the evidence about therapeutic aspect is valid?

4. Do patients and physicians remain blind to the therapy given (because not all therapies do blind)? 5. Whether all groups are treated equally apart from therapy? 6. Whether the treatment and control groups the same or similar at baseline (typically shown in the data display base)?

unknown.

No Depending on where group the patient is. Unknown

whether evidence of a valid therapeutic aspects of this important? 1. How much influence the therapy? (significant amount indicated by counting the number needed to treat)? unknown

2. How exactly estimate of the treatment effect (the amount of 95% RC)

unknown

SAMPLE CALCULATIONS
Relative risk reduction (RRR) Absolute risk reduction (ARR) The number of required treatment (NRT) 1/ARR

Control Event Rate (CER)

No data

Experimental Event Rate (EER)

No data

CER-EER IRE

CER-EER

No data

No data

No data

Application
whether we can apply the proof of a valid therapeutic aspects of this important and our patients? Are there any differences in our patients compared with this study so that the findings cannot be applied to our patients? unknown

Was the therapy applicable to our Yes patients? This study can be applied for our psychotic patients
Were the patients have beneficial Yes or harmful potention if the therapy being applied?
Whether the values and expectations Unknown of our patients, if the end result we are trying to prevent and treat, we offer?

CRITICAL APPRAISAL GUIDELINES

Element Way of Thinking Evaluation Criteria 1. Is a credible argument given for why a case study is appropriate? 2. Are the philosophical stance and perspective of the authors stated? 3. Is there evidence that any bias is taken into account when performing data analysis? Yes Yes No No Unknown Unknown

Yes

No

Unknown

Element Way of Controlling

Evaluation Criteria 4. Have the criteria for analysis been confirmed by an independent researcher? 5. Have any opportunities for various forms of triangulation been exploited? 6. Is the research process auditable? 7. Has relevant literature been used to support the selection of an appropriate theoretical framework to guide the research? 8. Does the study use appropriate theory to support the findings? 9. Does the study describe how the conclusions were arrived at and how they are justified by the results? 10.Are assertions / conclusions made well grounded in the data? Yes No Unknown

Yes
Yes Yes

No
No No

Unknown
Unknown Unknown

Yes Yes

No No

Unknown Unknown

Yes

No

Unknown

Element Way of Working

Evaluation Criteria 11.Are the criteria used to select the appropriate case and participants clearly described? 12.Does the study provide a clearly formulated question describing an important IS issue? 13.Are the approaches and techniques for data collection and analysis described in detail? 14.Is the conceptual framework for the research explicitly described? Yes No Unknown

Yes

No

Unknown

Yes

No

Unknown

Yes

No

Unknown

Element

Evaluation Criteria Yes No Unknown

Way of 15.Does the study describe an Supporting orderly process for the collection of data? 16.Does the study describe and employ a systematic way to analyse the data? 17.Is the history and context of the research clearly described?

Yes
Yes

No
No

Unknown
Unknown

Element

Evaluation Criteria Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown

Way of 18.Are the aims and objectives of Communithe study clearly stated? cating (1) 19.Are limitations to the study acknowledged and described? 20.Does the study suggest if and how the findings might be transferable to other settings? 21.Is sufficient detail given to allow readers to evaluate the potential transferability of the research to other contexts? 22.Does the report identify questions or issues for future research? 23.Is the presentation of the research appropriate to the intended audience?

Yes
Yes

No
No

Unknown
Unknown

Element

Evaluation Criteria Yes No Unknown

Way of 24. *Could this research potentially Communimake a contribution to the cating (2) work of IS practitioners? 25. *Does the research provide new insights into some aspect of IS work? 26. *Is the research presented in such a way that there is evidence of logical rigour throughout the study? 27. *Does the study place the findings in the context of IS practice? 28. *Does the study place the findings in the context of IS research? 29. *Is the research process open to scrutiny?

Yes
Yes

No
No

Unknown
Unknown

Yes Yes Yes

No No No

Unknown Unknown Unknown

CONCLUSION
- This study is not valid
- The research of this study maybe can applied in the future and the further research could be better that this.