Thursday, March 31, 2016

Clinical Research Oriented Workshop (CROW) Meeting: March 31, 2016

Present:  Nancy Gell, Juvena Hitt, Kairn Kelley, Ben Littenberg, Gail Rose, Connie van Eeghen

Start Up:  Judy Shaw is seeking PIs…. Let her know if you’re interested!

1.                  Discussion: Ben provided a draft of a poster “Variability in the Implementation of Integrated Behavioral Health” for NAPCRG (North American Primary Care Research Group)
a.       Audience: academic clinicians with an interest in translational science
b.      Feedback:
                                                  i.      Typos corrected – thank you!
                                                ii.      Make the order of lowest scoring items match between bar chart and list.   Consider remapping y axis to a scale of 0-100 and extend the range of the y-axis to its max.
                                              iii.      Reorder the x axis of the box plot graph
                                              iv.      Add QR code for PIP
                                                v.      Acknowledge other team members
                                              vi.      There are no few items that tell the whole story; all 30 items contribute
1.      Factor analyses showed that dropping items reduces discrimination
                                            vii.      There is no consensus on “passing grade” of integration
                                          viii.      Identify the p values for significant differences between subgroups
                                              ix.      Consider reformatting the box plots to compare within domain (rather than within type of practice)
                                                x.      Consider adding color, means, and labels to the handout to match the bar graph.  Consider adding on watermark to the handout to identify the PIP version used.
                                              xi.      Change 2nd aim to focus on variability among items in the PIP; test for significance among items
c.       Ben to revise and update.

2.                  Next Workshop Meeting(s): Thursdays, 1:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m., at Given Courtyard South Level 4.   
a.       April 7, 2016: Nancy Gell on grant proposal
b.      April 14, 2016: Marianne?
c.       April 21, 2016: no Connie, Kairn
d.      April 28, 2016: Marianne?

Recorder: Connie van Eeghen

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Graduate Writing Center supports graduate student through...

The Graduate Writing Center is here to help!

The Graduate Writing Center supports UVM graduate students through

  • Free one-on-one and small group appointments with an experienced graduate writing consultant. Whether you want a sounding board and strategies for getting started on or seek feedback and approaches for revision and editing, visit to make an appointment.

  • Friday Forums for thesis and dissertation writers. Our next Friday Forum, April 8, 3:30-5 pm, in the Fulwiler Room (Writing in the Disciplines offices, Bailey Howe third floor), will focus on managing time, anxiety, and work-life balance through the writing of a dissertation or thesis. To RSVP, send a message to with your name and program. Put “Friday Forum” in the subject heading.

  • NEW: Dissertation and Thesis Jump Start! This four-day “camp,” June 20-23, is for thesis and dissertation writers who have an approved proposal and are getting to work on their first chapters. Each day—9-2 pm required, 2-5 pm optional, in the Writing in the Discipline’s Fulwiler Room—will feature workshops, lunch, and lots of writing time plus writing support from the Graduate Writing Center. Space is limited to 18 participants who can commit to attending all four days. (Each participant will also submit a $50 check payable to UVM that will be returned upon completion of the camp.) For more information or to request a space, send a message to

The Graduate Writing Center welcomes writers at work on a wide range of writing projects—class assignments, articles, applications, proposals, presentations and posters too—for both academic and public audiences. Not a proofreading service, the Graduate Writing Center’s consultants help writers at all stages of the writing process and at all levels of experience further their skill and confidence through
  • analyzing the expectations and options of a writing assignment or task
  • talking through drafts and ideas
  • introducing approaches to getting–and working with–words on the page
  • introducing approaches to anticipating and addressing audience expectations and needs
    Our consultants hail from graduate programs across the campus and are prepared to work with writers from all disciplines. Consultations are free and most often take place in Waterman's Graduate Writing Center (Directions to 113D) or in one of the Bailey/Howe Library’s Writing Center locations (Directions toBailey/Howe 302D and Bailey/Howe 105). Learn more and make an appointment by visiting

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Clinical Research Oriented Workshop (CROW) Meeting: March 24, 2016

Present:  Marianne Burke, Nancy Gell, Kairn Kelley, Ben Littenberg, Adam Sprouse-Blum, Connie van Eeghen

Start Up: Ferroequinologist is a train buff – who knew?

1.                  Discussion: Adam’s presentation on Gastroparesis in Migraine (when the stomach doesn’t work during a migraine headache) 
a.       Adam is giving a talk to Headache Cooperative New England, in Stowe VT, next Saturday.  Feedback on presentation:
                                                  i.      Were Kaufman and Levine (1934) doctors?
                                                ii.      Historical overview
1.      State the nature of the measure (3rd item in the history slide): venous serum level
a.       Consider a heading “Serum drug levels”
2.      “Measure gastric emptying” – don’t explain “impedance”
a.       Don’t explain scintigraphy either
                                              iii.      Hypothesis: induce gastroparesis in transgenic mice
                                              iv.      Box plot header for 15 minute wait: 45 minutes (how long waited for Nitroglycerin to work) – different than the 15 minute wait for gastric emptying
1.      Distance traveled into small intestine: more likely the mode, rather than the mean
                                                v.      4 hour results – no difference
b.      Questions:
                                                  i.      Why are these results different (limitations)
1.      Mice are not people
2.      Migraine is a symptom; the mouse model of migraine is based on transplanting a human gene in a mouse – we don’t know if the mouse is having migraine
3.      Inadequate nitro dose
4.      Maybe waited too long; too short
5.      Did not test mice for pain reaction
a.       Check to see if the assays done are done in these kinds of mice
6.      Might have gotten migraine-resistant mice, despite gene
                                                ii.      State up front: why did we go into this
                                              iii.      What was learned:
1.      Personal
a.       Learned skills (animals, bench research)
b.      Knowledge base
c.       Connections with labs
d.      Tie in to other studies
2.      Big picture
a.       Publication of negative studies is important
                                                                                                                          i.      It is also an incomplete study:
1.      GastroP was not ruled out
2.      Can’t measure it in 5 mice using this method
                                              iv.      What’s next?
1.      Which is the cause: M to GP or GP to M
2.      Human study with nanotrackers
a.       Trackers anchored in the stomach until the migraine starts (talk to Jim Vecchio)
3.      GastroP just may not be that fruitful in an animal models
                                                v.      What else can be said?
1.      What is the research question? 
a.       What can be done about Migraine symptoms?
b.      What are the possible treatments?
c.       Can an animal model simulate the symptom to allow us to measure it?
2.      What is the logic model that resulted in the hypothesis?
3.      What do you want people to leave with?  From that message, back into the presentation. 
a.       “GP is a big problem in migraine.  They are associated.  (History)  An animal model would be great, we tried to build one, here’s how.  Looking for other ways to build; ideas?  Considering other ways to get to this idea: big data study, human studies with techno-support, GCRC (inpatient or outpatient) study on whether stomach dilation = gastric emptying…”
                                              vi.      Summarize the historical piece down to the basics: this is real phenomenon
1.      What method?
a.       We know that an animal model doesn’t work.
2.      Or, move the historical piece into a consolidated story, not a list of anecdotes
a.       Add pictures of those researchers
b.      Make sure all pictures are connected to the story
3.      Provide statistics, supporting why this is important
4.      Remember that the outcome measure for the animal study is a completely different, and possibly better, measure
                                            vii.      First slide: add investigators, add funder
c.       Tips for platform talks:
                                                  i.      White background is good
                                                ii.      Check out the podium ahead of time: wires, controls, steps
                                              iii.      Use the digital pointer, not the laser

2.                  Next Workshop Meeting(s): Thursdays, 1:30 p.m. – 2:30 p.m., at Given Courtyard South Level 4.   
a.       March 31, 2016: Ben – NAPCRG proposal on variability in PIP
b.      April 7, 2016: Amanda or Nancy Gell on grant proposal (also OK on 14)
c.       April 14, 2016: no Ben
d.      April 21, 2016: no Connie, Kairn
e.       April 28, 2016: Amanda?  Marianne?

Recorder: Connie van Eeghen

Wednesday, March 23, 2016

Prema Menon, MD, PhD

Many congratulations to Prema Menon, MD for successfully defending her thesis  - the final step in earning the Doctor of Philosophy in Clinical and Translational Science degree! Prema's work on communication in the Intensive Care Unit was accepted without revision.

Tuesday, March 22, 2016

Knowledge Translation Conference in Rehabilitation


McGill University’s School of Physical and Occupational Therapy is proudly hosting our 1st National Knowledge Translation Conference in Rehabilitation on May 4 & 5, 2016 at La Plaza Holiday Inn, Montreal, Quebec (420 Sherbrooke Ouest, Montreal QC H3A 1B4). This conference is relevant for researchers, professional and graduate students, health care professionals, clinical managers/administrators, and decision-makers interested in knowledge translation.

Kindly forward this email to those who may be interested in your organization.


Abstract submission deadline:     March 28, 2016
Registration deadline:                      April 15, 2016

Dr. Melanie Barwick
University of Toronto
Dr. Damien Contandriopoulos
Université de Montréal
Mr. Vincent Dumez
Université de Montréal
Dr. Simon French
Queen’s University
Dr. Dahlia Kairy
Université de Montréal
Dr. France Légaré
Université Laval
Dr. Linda Li
University of British Columbia
Dr. Aliki Thomas
McGill University
Dr. Michael Wilson
McMaster University