Qualitative studies are gaining their credibility after a period of being misinterpreted as "not being quantitative." Qualitative method is a broad umbrella term for research methodologies that describe and explain individuals' experiences, behaviors, interactions, and social contexts. In-depth interview, focus groups, and participant observation are among the qualitative methods of inquiry commonly used in psychiatry. Researchers measure the frequency of occurring events using quantitative methods; however, qualitative methods provide a broader understanding and a more thorough reasoning behind the event. Hence, it is considered to be of special importance in psychiatry. Besides hypothesis generation in earlier phases of the research, qualitative methods can be employed in questionnaire design, diagnostic criteria establishment, feasibility studies, as well as studies of attitude and beliefs. Animal models are another area that qualitative methods can be employed, especially when naturalistic observation of animal behavior is important. However, since qualitative results can be researcher's own view, they need to be statistically confirmed, quantitative methods. The tendency to combine both qualitative and quantitative methods as complementary methods has emerged over recent years. By applying both methods of research, scientists can take advantage of interpretative characteristics of qualitative methods as well as experimental dimensions of quantitative methods.
Exploratory behavior and responsiveness to novelty play an important role in maintaining cognitive function in older adults. Inferences about age- or disease-related differences in neural and behavioral responses to novelty are most often based on results from single experimental testing sessions. There has been very limited research on whether such findings represent stable characteristics of populations studied, which is essential if investigators are to determine the result of interventions aimed at promoting exploratory behaviors or draw appropriate conclusions about differences in the processing of novelty across diverse clinical groups. The goal of the current study was to investigate the short-term test-retest reliability of event-related potential (ERP) and behavioral responses to novel stimuli in cognitively normal older adults. ERPs and viewing durations were recorded in 70 healthy older adults participating in a subject-controlled visual novelty oddball task during two sessions occurring 7 weeks apart. Mean midline P3 amplitude and latency, mean midline amplitude during successive 50 ms intervals, temporospatial factors derived from principal component analysis (PCA), and viewing duration in response to novel stimuli were measured during each session. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed no reliable differences in the value of any measurements between Time 1 and 2. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) between Time 1 and 2 were excellent for mean P3 amplitude (ICC = 0.86), the two temporospatial factors consistent with the P3 components (ICC of 0.88 and 0.76) and viewing duration of novel stimuli (ICC = 0.81). Reliability was only fair for P3 peak latency (ICC = 0.56). Successive 50 ms mean amplitude measures from 100 to 1,000 ms yielded fair to excellent reliabilities, and all but one of the 12 temporospatial factors identified demonstrated ICCs in the good to excellent range. We conclude that older adults demonstrate substantial stability in ERP and behavioral responses to novel visual stimuli over a 7-week period. These results suggest that older adults may have a characteristic way of processing novelty that appears resistant to transient changes in their environment or internal states, which can be indexed during a single testing session. The establishment of reliable measures of novelty processing will allow investigators to determine whether proposed interventions have an impact on this important aspect of behavior.
Patients with psychiatric disorders exhibit several neurobehavioral and neuropsychological alterations compared to healthy controls. However, signature endpoints of these behavioral manifestations have not yet been translated into clinical tests for diagnosis and follow-up measures. Recently, neuroproteomic approaches have been utilized to identify unique signature markers indicative of these disorders. Development of reliable biomarkers has the potential to revolutionize the diagnosis, classification, and monitoring of clinical responses in psychiatric diseases. However, the lack of biological gold standards, the evolving nosology of psychiatric disorders, and the complexity of the nervous system are among the major challenges that have hindered efforts to develop reliable biomarkers in the field of neuropsychiatry and drug abuse. While biomarkers currently have a limited role in the area of neuropsychiatry, several promising biomarkers have been proposed in conditions such as dementia, schizophrenia, depression, suicide, and addiction. One of the primary objectives of this review is to discuss the role of proteomics in the development of biomarkers specific to neuropsychiatry. We discuss and evaluate currently available biomarkers as well as those that are under research for clinical use in the future.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.