Showing posts with label so. Show all posts
Showing posts with label so. Show all posts
So nerdy it can desist senility old time
Monday, May 5, 2014
So nerdy it can desist senility old time - Penchant read or write from childhood to adulthood it can provide benefits in old age. Research shows that people who actively use the brain for reading, thinking, and writing has remained brilliant brain when they are older.
This study also shows that activities that stimulate the brain such as reading and writing could prevent a person from dementia or other memory problems when they are older, as reported by CBS News.
"Our research shows that exercising the brain by doing some habits such as reading, writing, and more important to maintain the sharpness and brain health in old age," said study author Robert S. Wilson, of Rush Alzheimers Disease Center at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago.
These results were found after researchers observed 294 older adults who underwent tests of memory for six years. The participants were also asked about the habit of reading, writing journals, or other activities related to brain activity when they were children, teenagers, to adults.
After the participants died, researchers then examined their brains to find a plaque which is a sign of dementia or other brain diseases associated with decreased memory and ability to think.
Researchers found that people who make a habit to make known their brains active memory decline 32 percent more slowly than people who do not have the habit of making their brains active. While people who have never accustom them to the active brain decreased memory and brainpower 48 percent faster.
This study also shows that activities that stimulate the brain such as reading and writing could prevent a person from dementia or other memory problems when they are older, as reported by CBS News.
"Our research shows that exercising the brain by doing some habits such as reading, writing, and more important to maintain the sharpness and brain health in old age," said study author Robert S. Wilson, of Rush Alzheimers Disease Center at Rush University Medical Center, Chicago.
These results were found after researchers observed 294 older adults who underwent tests of memory for six years. The participants were also asked about the habit of reading, writing journals, or other activities related to brain activity when they were children, teenagers, to adults.
After the participants died, researchers then examined their brains to find a plaque which is a sign of dementia or other brain diseases associated with decreased memory and ability to think.
Researchers found that people who make a habit to make known their brains active memory decline 32 percent more slowly than people who do not have the habit of making their brains active. While people who have never accustom them to the active brain decreased memory and brainpower 48 percent faster.
Electronic Health Record Portals So What Is the Evidence That Supports Their Use
Sunday, May 4, 2014
Talk about a compelling story that went ignored.
In the November 19 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, Caroline Lubick Goldzweig and colleagues examined the published science on the purported advantages of electronic health record (EHR) portals.
Recall that portals are web-based entryways that on-line health consumers can reportedly use to access their records, request medications, correspond with their doctors, manage their health conditions, reduce health care costs, increase U.S. life expectancy, reduce our national dependency on jumbo-sized sugary drinks and fix everything else that ails the U.S. health system.
Unfortunately, facts have intruded. After looking at fourteen randomized prospective trials, 21 observational, hypothesis-testing studies, five descriptive studies and six qualitative studies, the authors concluded...
"...evidence that patient portals improve health outcomes, cost, or utilization is insufficient."
Ouch.
In particular, any impact on diabetes care was short-lived or nonexistent, patients with heart failure had no meaningful improvement, blood pressure control did not improve and adherence to prevention recommendations were marginal. One observational study found persons with heart failure were more likely to use the emergency room. The only study that found any benefit involved a single randomized control trial that examined the impact of portals in the co-management of depression.
After looking at this review, depressed advocates of EHR portals may have to personally use their own portals to communicate with theirdocs health care medical neighborhood.
The only good news is that there were some data that suggested that a substantial number of consumers liked using the portals. But the DMCB likes channel surfing too, but that doesnt mean that the spouse agrees that its television-watching quality has improved or that the cost of all those premium channels is moderating.
The authors pointed out that it was difficult to isolate the impact of a portal vs. a portal plus care management. To the DMCB, that means that portals are at best a means-to-an-end of enabling care managers to better communicate with their enrollees.
To the thousands of DMCB readers, that is not a surprise.
In the meantime, the Feds and the NCQA have one more reason to re-examine their many cherished assumptions about health information technology and the stand-alone electronic record. The last time the DMCB looked, the federal government continues to extoll portals stand-alone virtues. The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) still includes two way communication for appointments, errals and prescription errals as a standard for the medical home. Finally, the Feds promotion of the electronic health record (EHR) approves of portals as an option in meeting meaningful use criteria.
Image from Wikipedia
In the November 19 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, Caroline Lubick Goldzweig and colleagues examined the published science on the purported advantages of electronic health record (EHR) portals.
Recall that portals are web-based entryways that on-line health consumers can reportedly use to access their records, request medications, correspond with their doctors, manage their health conditions, reduce health care costs, increase U.S. life expectancy, reduce our national dependency on jumbo-sized sugary drinks and fix everything else that ails the U.S. health system.
Unfortunately, facts have intruded. After looking at fourteen randomized prospective trials, 21 observational, hypothesis-testing studies, five descriptive studies and six qualitative studies, the authors concluded...
"...evidence that patient portals improve health outcomes, cost, or utilization is insufficient."
Ouch.
In particular, any impact on diabetes care was short-lived or nonexistent, patients with heart failure had no meaningful improvement, blood pressure control did not improve and adherence to prevention recommendations were marginal. One observational study found persons with heart failure were more likely to use the emergency room. The only study that found any benefit involved a single randomized control trial that examined the impact of portals in the co-management of depression.
After looking at this review, depressed advocates of EHR portals may have to personally use their own portals to communicate with their
The only good news is that there were some data that suggested that a substantial number of consumers liked using the portals. But the DMCB likes channel surfing too, but that doesnt mean that the spouse agrees that its television-watching quality has improved or that the cost of all those premium channels is moderating.
The authors pointed out that it was difficult to isolate the impact of a portal vs. a portal plus care management. To the DMCB, that means that portals are at best a means-to-an-end of enabling care managers to better communicate with their enrollees.
To the thousands of DMCB readers, that is not a surprise.
In the meantime, the Feds and the NCQA have one more reason to re-examine their many cherished assumptions about health information technology and the stand-alone electronic record. The last time the DMCB looked, the federal government continues to extoll portals stand-alone virtues. The National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) still includes two way communication for appointments, errals and prescription errals as a standard for the medical home. Finally, the Feds promotion of the electronic health record (EHR) approves of portals as an option in meeting meaningful use criteria.
Image from Wikipedia
Mers deadly virus has not been feasible so a global threat
Saturday, April 19, 2014
Mers deadly virus has not been feasible so a global threat? - One victim Mers infections in the UK are reported to have died last June. With this, the death toll due to increase to 41 mers, and the number of overall infections were 77 people in the entire world. But according to scientists, Mers deadly viral infection is not dangerous enough to be considered a global threat.
The study, conducted by scientists of the 55 cases mers that exist in the Middle East indicate that the virus is difficult to spread between humans. However, it is likely the virus will mutate and cause a greater threat.
Scientists from the Pasteur Institute in Paris found that this virus is spread only on a limited number. Figures possibility of transmission between humans is 0.69. This means that three patients affected mers will only transmit the virus to one or two others.
"To date virus Mers not dangerous enough to be a plague to the world. Yet this is no reason for everyone to underestimate him. This is a good time to stop," said Professor Arnaud Fortanet, as reported by the BBC.
Dr. Benjamin Neuman of the University of Reading argues that scientists have done a great job with identifying possible mers become a global threat that is quite small. However, research also shows that the Mers can change and mutate. For that, there is no reason to assume this virus underestimated, although for now the spread of the virus is still slow.
The study, conducted by scientists of the 55 cases mers that exist in the Middle East indicate that the virus is difficult to spread between humans. However, it is likely the virus will mutate and cause a greater threat.
Scientists from the Pasteur Institute in Paris found that this virus is spread only on a limited number. Figures possibility of transmission between humans is 0.69. This means that three patients affected mers will only transmit the virus to one or two others.
"To date virus Mers not dangerous enough to be a plague to the world. Yet this is no reason for everyone to underestimate him. This is a good time to stop," said Professor Arnaud Fortanet, as reported by the BBC.
Dr. Benjamin Neuman of the University of Reading argues that scientists have done a great job with identifying possible mers become a global threat that is quite small. However, research also shows that the Mers can change and mutate. For that, there is no reason to assume this virus underestimated, although for now the spread of the virus is still slow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
