Odin Teatret’s The Tree: performing in the interstices

Abstract: This article aims to critically engage with Odin Teatret’s most recent addition to the repertoire, The Tree (2016), in order to investigate the ways in which Barba’s dramaturgical decision-making processes create a performance field that metaphorically comments on the status of the group today whilst critiquing contemporary geo-politics. Importantly, we argue that notions of interculturalism - which have often been employed by scholars to critique the Odin’s work - do not address the full complexity of the embodied concatenation of the group’s practice, and we employ the term interstitial to more effectively articulate the complex space produced by the group’s training and performances.</jats:p

Design Features of Explicit Values Clarification Methods: A Systematic Review

Background. Values clarification is a recommended element of patient decision aids. Many different values clarification methods exist, but there is little evidence synthesis available to guide design decisions. Purpose. To describe practices in the field of explicit values clarification methods according to a taxonomy of design features. Data Sources. MEDLINE, all EBM Reviews, CINAHL, EMBASE, Google Scholar, manual search of reference lists, and expert contacts. Study Selection. Articles were included if they described 1 or more explicit values clarification methods. Data Extraction. We extracted data about decisions addressed; use of theories, frameworks, and guidelines; and 12 design features. Data Synthesis. We identified 110 articles describing 98 explicit values clarification methods. Most of these addressed decisions in cancer or reproductive health, and half addressed a decision between just 2 options. Most used neither theory nor guidelines to structure their design. "Pros and cons" was the most common type of values clarification method. Most methods did not allow users to add their own concerns. Few methods explicitly presented tradeoffs inherent in the decision, supported an iterative process of values exploration, or showed how different options aligned with users' values. Limitations. Study selection criteria and choice of elements for the taxonomy may have excluded values clarification methods or design features. Conclusions. Explicit values clarification methods have diverse designs but can be systematically cataloged within the structure of a taxonomy. Developers of values clarification methods should carefully consider each of the design features in this taxonomy and publish adequate descriptions of their designs. More research is needed to study the effects of different design features

Type 1 diabetes genetic risk contributes to phenotypic presentation in monogenic autoimmune diabetes

Disease-causing variants in key immune homeostasis genes can lead to monogenic autoimmune diabetes. Some individuals carrying disease-causing variants do not develop autoimmune diabetes, even though they develop other autoimmune disease. We aimed to determine whether type 1 diabetes polygenic risk contributes to phenotypic presentation in monogenic autoimmune diabetes. We used a 67 SNP type 1 diabetes genetic risk score (T1D-GRS) to determine polygenic risk in 62 individuals with monogenic autoimmune diabetes and 180 non-autoimmune neonatal diabetes (NDM) controls. We used population-based controls (n=10,405) and individuals with type 1 diabetes (n=285) as a comparator. Individuals with monogenic autoimmune diabetes had higher T1D-GRSs compared to non-autoimmune NDM (mean 11.3 vs. 9.8; P=1.7×10-5) and controls (mean 10.3; P=7.5×10-6) but were markedly lower than type 1 diabetes (14.9; P= 3.3 × 10-21). These differences were explained by monogenic autoimmune diabetes cases having higher Class II HLA genetic risk, specifically from the DRB1*03:01-DQA1*05:01-DQB1*02:01 haplotype (DR3-DQ2) (P<0.01). In the presence of monogenic autoimmunity, the polygenic class II HLA susceptibility contributes to development of autoimmune diabetes. This suggests a role of class II HLA in targeting the dysregulated immune response towards the beta-cell.Journal content freely available via Open Access. Some content may be unavailable due to publisher embargo. Click on the 'Additional link' above to access the full-text

Effects of design features of explicit values clarification methods: A systematic review

Background. Diverse values clarification methods exist. It is important to understand which, if any, of their design features help people clarify values relevant to a health decision. Purpose. To explore the effects of design features of explicit values clarification methods on outcomes including decisional conflict, values congruence, and decisional regret. Data Sources. MEDLINE, all EBM Reviews, CINAHL, EMBASE, Google Scholar, manual search of reference lists, and expert contacts. Study Selection. Articles were included if they described the evaluation of 1 or more explicit values clarification methods. Data Extraction. We extracted details about the evaluation, whether it was conducted in the context of actual or hypothetical decisions, and the results of the evaluation. We combined these data with data from a previous review about each values clarification method's design features. Data Synthesis. We identified 20 evaluations of values clarification methods within 19 articles. Reported outcomes were heterogeneous. Few studies reported values congruence or postdecision outcomes. The most promising design feature identified was explicitly showing people the implications of their values, for example, by displaying the extent to which each of their decision options aligns with what matters to them. Limitations. Because of the heterogeneity of outcomes, we were unable to perform a meta-analysis. Results should be interpreted with caution. Conclusions. Few values clarification methods have been evaluated experimentally. More research is needed to determine effects of different design features of values clarification methods and to establish best practices in values clarification. When feasible, evaluations should assess values congruence and postdecision measures of longer-term outcomes

Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research Consortium: Accelerating Evidence-Based Practice of Genomic Medicine

Despite rapid technical progress and demonstrable effectiveness for some types of diagnosis and therapy, much remains to be learned about clinical genome and exome sequencing (CGES) and its role within the practice of medicine. The Clinical Sequencing Exploratory Research (CSER) consortium includes 18 extramural research projects, one National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) intramural project, and a coordinating center funded by the NHGRI and National Cancer Institute. The consortium is exploring analytic and clinical validity and utility, as well as the ethical, legal, and social implications of sequencing via multidisciplinary approaches; it has thus far recruited 5,577 participants across a spectrum of symptomatic and healthy children and adults by utilizing both germline and cancer sequencing. The CSER consortium is analyzing data and creating publically available procedures and tools related to participant preferences and consent, variant classification, disclosure and management of primary and secondary findings, health outcomes, and integration with electronic health records. Future research directions will refine measures of clinical utility of CGES in both germline and somatic testing, evaluate the use of CGES for screening in healthy individuals, explore the penetrance of pathogenic variants through extensive phenotyping, reduce discordances in public databases of genes and variants, examine social and ethnic disparities in the provision of genomics services, explore regulatory issues, and estimate the value and downstream costs of sequencing. The CSER consortium has established a shared community of research sites by using diverse approaches to pursue the evidence-based development of best practices in genomic medicine