Evidence Evaluation in Departmental Proceedings

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. K.S.S. Kanhaiya
Keyword(s):  
Evidence Evaluation

scholarly journals Change point detection with multiple alternatives reveals parallel evaluation of the same stream of evidence along distinct timescales

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexa Booras ◽  
Tanner Stevenson ◽  
Connor N. McCormack ◽  
Marie E. Rhoads ◽  
Timothy D. Hanks
Keyword(s):  
Change Point ◽  
Neural Mechanism ◽  
Detection Task ◽  
Change Point Detection ◽  
Model Free ◽  
Evidence Evaluation ◽  
Parallel Evaluation ◽  
Point Detection ◽  
Improved Accuracy

AbstractIn order to behave appropriately in a rapidly changing world, individuals must be able to detect when changes occur in that environment. However, at any given moment, there are a multitude of potential changes of behavioral significance that could occur. Here we investigate how knowledge about the space of possible changes affects human change point detection. We used a stochastic auditory change point detection task that allowed model-free and model-based characterization of the decision process people employ. We found that subjects can simultaneously apply distinct timescales of evidence evaluation to the same stream of evidence when there are multiple types of changes possible. Informative cues that specified the nature of the change led to improved accuracy for change point detection through mechanisms involving both the timescales of evidence evaluation and adjustments of decision bounds. These results establish three important capacities of information processing for decision making that any proposed neural mechanism of evidence evaluation must be able to support: the ability to simultaneously employ multiple timescales of evidence evaluation, the ability to rapidly adjust those timescales, and the ability to modify the amount of information required to make a decision in the context of flexible timescales.

Efficacy of Alprostadil in Preventing Contrast-Induced Nephropathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Angiology ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 000331972110044
Author(s):  
Hongling Xu ◽  
Hongye Wang ◽  
Chuang Zhang ◽  
Jun Xiao ◽  
Ning Hua ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Meta Analysis ◽  
China National Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Contrast Induced Nephropathy ◽  
Serum Cystatin ◽  
Assessment Development ◽  
Neutrophil Gelatinase Associated Lipocalin ◽  
Knowledge Infrastructure ◽  
Evidence Evaluation ◽  
Biological Medicine ◽  
Neutrophil Gelatinase

This study aimed to determine the efficacy of alprostadil in preventing contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN). Eligible studies were searched using the keywords through the databases of PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, China Biological Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Vanfun. Quality evaluation of the included studies was conducted according to international evidence evaluation and recommended Grades of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation standards. We included 29 studies with 5623 patients. Compared with hydration, 10 µg/d alprostadil or 20 µg/d alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased the incidence of CIN. Compared with hydration, alprostadil plus hydration significantly reduced serum creatinine and blood urea nitrogen at 24, 48, and 72 hours and 7 days after coronary angiography (CAG). Alprostadil (20 µg/d) plus hydration significantly decreased serum cystatin versus hydration at 24, 48, and 72 hours after CAG. Compared with hydration, alprostadil plus hydration significantly increased glomerular filtration rate at 24 and 72 hours after CAG. Alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin levels compared to hydration at 24, 48, and 72 hours after CAG. Alprostadil plus hydration significantly decreased urine macroglobulin versus hydration at 24 and 48 hours after CAG.

Scientific Reasoning in Young Children: Preschoolers’ Ability to Evaluate Covariation Evidence

2005 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 141-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Koerber ◽  
Beate Sodian ◽  
Claudia Thoermer ◽  
Ulrike Nett
Keyword(s):  
Preschool Children ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Causal Relationship ◽  
Scientific Reasoning ◽  
Causal Beliefs ◽  
Prior Belief ◽  
Reasoning Abilities ◽  
Evidence Evaluation ◽  
Basic Understanding

Preschool children’s basic scientific reasoning abilities were investigated in two experiments. Consistent with findings by Ruffman et al. (1993) , Experiment 1 showed that even 4-year-olds can evaluate patterns of covariation evidence. However, even 6-year-olds had difficulties interpreting non-covariation evidence. Experiment 2 showed that 5-year-olds could overcome this difficulty when prompted to expect no causal relationship between two variables. Experiment 2 further showed that preschoolers’ evidence evaluation skills were affected by their pre-existing causal beliefs. However, their performance was above chance even when the evidence contradicted a prior belief they held with some conviction. In sum, our results demonstrate a basic understanding of the hypothesis-evidence relationship in preschool children, thus contributing to a revision of the picture of the scientifically illiterate preschooler.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document