<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: conclusions</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'conclusions'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22conclusions%22&t=%22conclusions%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:55:39 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Bad Research: Popular Sex Search Terms</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4883675&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F05%2F31%2Fbad-research-popular-sex-search-terms%2F</link>
            <description>People like sex. They like sex so much, they spend a lot of time searching for it online. Go figure. (You can tell I&amp;#8217;m about to delve into really highbrow, heady stuff here&amp;#8230;)
Researchers Ogi Ogas and Sai Gaddam recently published a book, A Billion Wicked Thoughts, detailing their analysis of 400 million searches they collected from the Dogpile search engine. Of those 400 million searches, 13 percent (55 million) were for erotic content.
How did those 55 million searches break down? Let&amp;#8217;s find out&amp;#8230; but let&amp;#8217;s also look at the methodology of these researchers to see if their findings are worth the paper that they are printed on. (If you think not, you&amp;#8217;re probably right.)

So here&amp;#8217;s what people on Dogpile search for when it comes to sexual interests. N...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4883675</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 31 May 2011 17:53:38 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4883675</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Understanding Research Methodology 2: Systematic Empiricism</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4676871&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F04%2F04%2Funderstanding-research-methodology-2-systematic-empiricism%2F</link>
            <description>Scientific research relies on the use of empirical data for acquiring knowledge.  Empiricism means making use of observation and experience.  Science goes beyond the use of the empiricism normally used in everyday life, however.  Scientific research employs systematic empiricism.
Observation itself is necessary in acquiring scientific knowledge, but unstructured observation of the natural world will not lead to an increased understanding of the world.
“Write down every observation you make from the time you get up in the morning to the time you go to bed on a given day. When you finish, you will have a great number of facts, but you will not have a greater understanding of the world.” (Stanovich &amp; Stanovich, 2003, p. 12)

Empiricism becomes systematic empiricism when it is stru...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4676871</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 04 Apr 2011 09:54:10 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4676871</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does Interpersonal Psychotherapy Work for Depression?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4560352&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2011%2F03%2F08%2Fdoes-interpersonal-psychotherapy-work-for-depression%2F</link>
            <description>Psychotherapy. You know, I spend a lot of time talking about it here, and it&amp;#8217;s no wonder &amp;#8212; it&amp;#8217;s an effective treatment modality that too many people simply aren&amp;#8217;t even considering. Much less using. 
Psychotherapy research is less likely to be biased than other types of treatment research, too, because researchers tend not to be treatment providers nor have any direct (or even indirect) financial incentives in the outcomes of their research. Sure, there remains the &amp;#8220;publication bias&amp;#8221; that affects all research, but generally speaking, I tend to trust psychotherapy research data more than I do most psychiatric medication research.
So I was interested to read a recent meta-analysis on a specific form of psychotherapy called interpersonal psychotherapy for th...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4560352</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 08 Mar 2011 21:10:08 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4560352</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Does Your Personality Shine Through?</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4172112&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F11%2F16%2Fdoes-your-personality-shine-through%2F</link>
            <description>From time to time we all wonder what other people think of us. Often in a quiet moment, just before going to sleep, while reviewing the day, we try to work out how friends and family might interpret what we&amp;#8217;ve said and done.
How neurotic does my partner think I am? Do my colleagues think of me as a reliable, hard worker? Do my friends think I&amp;#8217;m stuck in a rut or open to new experiences?
Here on the inside we have a model of ourselves that makes sense, but out there, what conclusions are those who know us best drawing about our personalities?
Of course we all differ and you might imagine that the differences between actor and observer would cancel out. For example some people might appear more conscientious than they are, and others less so.

How Do Your Friends See You?
When ps...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4172112</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 16:35:25 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4172112</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bad Research: Texting, Health Risks and Teens</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4151876&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F11%2F09%2Fbad-research-texting-health-risks-and-teens%2F</link>
            <description>I was astounded to read about new survey research from Scott Frank, MD, MS, who &amp;#8212; when commenting about his new findings &amp;#8212; was widely quoted as saying, &amp;#8220;The startling results of this study suggest that when left unchecked texting and other widely popular methods of staying connected can have dangerous health effects on teenagers.&amp;#8221;
Of course it would indeed be startling if his study had demonstrated a clear causative relationship &amp;#8212; you know, like A causes B &amp;#8212; between texting and the unhealthy teen behaviors the researchers studied.
But of course, this is not what they found. They conducted a survey and, like researchers do, found that a bunch of variables are inter-related. What that relationship exactly is, is anybody&amp;#8217;s guess.

The headlines say it...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4151876</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 01:41:47 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4151876</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>U.S. Mood Measured Through Twitter, 2006-2009</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3784306&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F07%2F23%2Fu-s-mood-measured-through-twitter-2006-2009%2F</link>
            <description>A group of researchers have published a simple word analysis of 300 million tweets (you know, those short, 140 character-maximum status updates from individuals) from Twitter and discovered something amazing &amp;#8212; people are happier on the weekends, and before and after work. Yes, that&amp;#8217;s right &amp;#8212; people are happier when they are not working!
It took three researchers from Northeastern University and two from Harvard Medical School to arrive at these stunning conclusions.
Now, since researchers didn&amp;#8217;t actually look at 300 million tweets individually, the mood of each tweet was inferred using the ANEW word list &amp;#8212; Affective Norms for English Words &amp;#8212; a word-rating system that gives normative emotional ratings for English language words. These kinds of analyses ar...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3784306</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:45:21 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3784306</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Mel Gibson, Bipolar Disorder and Alcohol</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3757922&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F07%2F15%2Fmel-gibson-bipolar-disorder-and-alcohol%2F</link>
            <description>As Mel Gibson&amp;#8217;s voicemails to his ex-girlfriend continue to be leaked to the Internet this week, many media outlets are asking questions about Mel Gibson&amp;#8217;s mental health. That&amp;#8217;s no wonder &amp;#8212; the voicemails are laced with profanity, racial epithets, and threats. In a 2008 documentary, Acting Class of 1977, he first talked about being diagnosed with bipolar disorder.
But are the rants to his ex-girlfriend Oksana Grigorieva related to a possible mental health diagnosis? Alcohol? Or something else?
It&amp;#8217;s not easy to answer this question, because nobody except Mel Gibson, 54, and his doctors know. All we can do is speculate, based upon observations of his reactions, tone and behavior as recorded in the voicemails that are publicly available. So let&amp;#8217;s take a loo...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3757922</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2010 10:30:22 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3757922</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Bad Research: A Comparison of iPad, Kindle and Book Reading Speeds</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3729926&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2010%2F07%2F06%2Fbad-research-a-comparison-of-ipad-kindle-and-book-reading-speeds%2F</link>
            <description>We love a usability study as much as the next person. But we love well-designed, elegant studies that rightfully point out their own limitations and are printed in peer-reviewed journals most of all. We have less love for studies that act as propaganda, or researchers who draw conclusions not supported by their own data.
Bad research can be found anywhere &amp;#8212; even by consultants who make their living from doing research on usability. Well-meaning folks like Jakob Nielsen for one. Recently he released a study on his website on the usability of the Kindle, the iPad, a PC and a book for reading a piece of short fiction.
After noting there was no statistical difference between reading on the Kindle or iPad, and then noting that the data did not reach statistical significance for the iPad v...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3729926</comments>
            <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:45:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3729926</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Advances in Dermatology Still Badly Needed</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3592427&amp;cid=t_230804_160_f&amp;fid=36189&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.skinmdblog.com%2F85%2Fadvances-in-dermatology-still-badly-needed%2F</link>
            <description>Scientists have been working to advance dermatology and make changes.  We need change, because the old “tried and true” approaches are ineffective and probably doing more harm to our skin than good.
Sometimes it seems that for every scientific conclusion, there is a contradictory one.  An example is found in treating and identifying the causes of acne.
Prior to the 1950s, dermatologists agreed that diet played a role in acne.  In particular, they blamed sugary snacks and junk food.
Research conducted in the late 1960s and early 1970s proclaimed that there was no connection between diet and acne.  Within the last couple of years, scientists have again demonstrated that there is a connection between the consumption of carbohydrates and the severity of acne.  They were also able to p...</description>
            <author>Skin MD</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3592427</comments>
            <pubDate>Mon, 24 May 2010 00:12:50 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3592427</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>The Homeless Highway Gentleman</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2943866&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F10%2F29%2Fthe-homeless-highway-gentleman%2F</link>
            <description>The homeless highway gentleman walks as if he&amp;#8217;s on a mission. He walks alongside a busy stretch of highway in southern New Hampshire every day, roughly at the same time, wearing the exact same clothes.
You can tell he&amp;#8217;s a gentleman because he wears a faded, outdated tan sports jacket. It&amp;#8217;s seen better days, but so has the gentleman. He&amp;#8217;s older, balding, and very much on his own. And yet, when you see him, you notice he has a sense of civilized purpose and dignity about him.
It&amp;#8217;s how and where he walks that gets people&amp;#8217;s attention. He doesn&amp;#8217;t walk on the grassy berm next to the four-lane highway, he walks right in the gutter on the road, often in the right-hand most lane. If you were a distracted driver and were fiddling with your cell phone or radi...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2943866</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 20:03:23 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2943866</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Breakthrough for Schizophrenia and Bipolar</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2570607&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F07%2F02%2Fbreakthrough-for-schizophrenia-and-bipolar%2F</link>
            <description>Earlier today, we reported that NIMH-funded researchers at three different genetic research institutes from around the world collaborated and published three new studies yesterday in the journal, Nature, that suggested a true breakthrough in our understanding of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. And to think that just earlier this week, I was dismissing the largely inconclusive findings of genetics research in mental illness.
One of the researchers commented on the findings: &amp;#8220;There was substantial overlap in the genetic risk for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder that was specific to mental disorders. We saw no association between the suspect gene variants and half a dozen common non-psychiatric disorders.&amp;#8221; This is an important discovery &amp;#8212; that some of the roots of schi...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2570607</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:00:34 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2570607</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Friday Flashback for March 13, 2009</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2266685&amp;cid=t_230804_109_f&amp;fid=34750&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fpsychcentral.com%2Fblog%2Farchives%2F2009%2F03%2F13%2Ffriday-flashback-for-march-13-2009%2F</link>
            <description>Well, one day last week it was 60 degrees here in New England, and then a few days later it&amp;#8217;s snowing. It must be March. 
And if it&amp;#8217;s Friday, it must be time for another Friday Flashback while I&amp;#8217;m attending the annual SXSW conference in Austin, Texas. Yes, I&amp;#8217;ll eat some BBQ for you. 
10 Years Ago on Psych Central

Detecting Deception
A decade ago, I wrote about the research to-date that demonstrated how lousy human beings are in detecting deception in others &amp;#8212; to catch another person in a lie. &amp;#8220;The conclusions from this research are obvious &amp;#8212; trained professionals and untrained laypeople, in general, cannot tell when a person is lying.&amp;#8221; 
A decade later, our ability to detect deception has increased slightly and 4 years ago, we noted Paul Ekma...</description>
            <author>World of Psychology</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2266685</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 13 Mar 2009 16:50:09 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2266685</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Suck on that you Rich Vandal!</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=651216&amp;cid=t_230804_133_f&amp;fid=35129&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwhitterer-autism.blogspot.com%2F2007%2F05%2Fsuck-on-that-you-rich-vandal.html</link>
            <description>We continue our conversation regarding my &quot;unfortunate purchase,&quot; of a sound machine as a sleep aid. [translation = extravagant whim]“I still don’t really understand why you bought it in the first place?”“I had only the very best of intentions.”“Maybe, but these impulse buys are always a mistake.” [translation = the road to Hell]“I was under extreme duress at the time.”“Oh you had them all with you then.”“Yup, in Target.”“Well that was your first mistake.”“Target or taking the children?”“Both really now I come to think of it.”“I only went there for two things, milk, a birthday card and the sound machine.” “That’s three!” [translation = clocks the mathematically challenged person]“Well I was only going to look at the sound machines not actua...</description>
            <author>Whitterer on Autism</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=651216</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2007 03:35:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">651216</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

