Historical and other poor-quality samples are often necessary for population genetics, conservation, and forensics studies. Although there is a long history of using mtDNA from such samples, obtaining and genotyping nuclear loci have been considered difficult and error-prone at best, and impossible at worst. The primary issues are the amount of nuclear DNA available for genotyping, and the degradation of the DNA into small fragments. Single nucleotide polymorphisms offer potential advantages for assaying nuclear variation in historical and poor-quality samples, because the amplified fragments can be very small, varying little or not at all in size between alleles, and can be amplified efficiently by polymerase chain reaction (PCR). We present a method for highly multiplexed PCR of SNP loci, followed by dual-fluorescence genotyping that is very effective for genotyping poorquality samples, and can potentially use very little template DNA, regardless of the number of loci to be genotyped. We genotyped 19 SNP loci from DNA extracted from modern and historical bowhead whale tissue, bone and baleen samples. The PCR failure rate was < 1.5%, and the genotyping error rate was 0.1% when DNA samples contained > 10 copies/µ µ µ µ L of a 51-bp nuclear sequence. Among samples with ≤ ≤ ≤ ≤ 10 copies/µ µ µ µ L DNA, samples could still be genotyped confidently with appropriate levels of replication from independent multiplex PCRs.

In contrast to normal subjects and patients with moderate CHF, patients with severe CHF do not exhaust their cardiopulmonary reserve during symptom-limited maximal LL exercise on a bicycle.

Advancements in videoconferencing equipment and Internet-based tools for sharing information have resulted in widespread use of telemedicine for providing health care to people who live in remote areas. Given the limited supply of people trained to provide early-intervention services to infants and young children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, and the fact that many families who need such services live significant distances from each other and from metropolitan areas, such "teleintervention" strategies hold promise for providing early-intervention services to children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Unfortunately, little is known about the cost-effectiveness of such teleintervention services. In this article we outline the rationale for using teleintervention services for children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing, describe a teleintervention program that has been serving relatively large numbers of children in Australia since 2002, and summarize what we know about the cost-effectiveness of such an approach. We conclude by summarizing the type of research needed to decide whether teleintervention should be used more frequently with children who are deaf or hard-of-hearing and the potential relevance of the teleintervention approach for the development of intervention systems in the United States. Pediatrics 2010;126:S52-S58

Introduction The use of telepractice, a method of delivering services through telecommunications technologies that provides two-way, synchronous audio and video signals in real-time, is becoming increasingly commonplace in early childhood education and intervention for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. Although the use of telepractice has been validated in the health sector as a viable and effective alternative to in-person service provision, evidence to support its use in the delivery of family-centred early intervention is still emerging. The purpose of this scoping review was to describe the current use of telepractice in the delivery of family-centred early childhood intervention for children who are deaf or hard of hearing, and their families. Method The review followed the framework outlined by the Joanna Briggs Institute (2015), including an iterative three-step search strategy. Specific inclusion criteria and data extraction fields were outlined in advance. Results A total of 23 peer-reviewed publications were included in the review. Most publications (70%) provided anecdotal evidence of the challenges and benefits associated with telepractice. The remaining publications (30%) reported on research studies evaluating the effectiveness of early intervention delivered through telepractice. Of the 23 included papers, 18 viewed the use of telepractice positively while the remaining 5 reported mixed conclusions and the need for more data. Discussion Current evidence in the literature indicates that telepractice can be an effective model for delivering family-centred early intervention for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. However, more research is needed to substantiate the use of telepractice as a viable alternative to traditional in-person services, rather than being seen as supplemental to such services.