De Gruijter Research Articles

OA34 Unravelling the role of B cells and interferon dysregulation in juvenile dermatomyositis

Abstract Background/Aims Juvenile dermatomyositis (JDM) is a rare childhood autoimmune disease, characterised by muscle inflammation and skin rash. At present, the exact mechanisms driving JDM pathogenesis remain unclear. Recent investigations have focused on the potential roles of interferon (IFN) dysregulation and B cells. This study aims to explore alterations in B cell populations and their association with disease severity and IFN pathway dysregulation in JDM patients. Methods Transcriptomic, flow cytometry, and clinical data were gathered from a cohort of 61 JDM patients recruited from the UK JDCBS. Clinical demographics and disease variables were extracted from the JDCBS database. Flow cytometry was utilised to examine B cell populations in treatment naïve (‘pre-treatment’ n = 48) and JDM patients on steroids and conventional DMARD treatment, including rituximab (on-treatment n = 24), in parallel with age-matched healthy donors (n = 35). Transcriptomic analysis was performed on the total CD19+ B cells to assess their gene expression profiles in JDM patients. Pathway enrichment analysis was applied to identify the involvement of IFN-related pathways in JDM pathogenesis. Results Flow cytometry analysis revealed a significant expansion of total B cells, (defined as CD19+, p < 0.0001, ANOVA) and immature B cells (defined as CD19+ CD24hi CD38hi, p = 0.0416, Kruskal-Wallis) in pre-treatment JDM patients compared to healthy controls, which returned to levels similar to those in healthy donors in on-treatment JDM patients. An inverse relationship between total B cells and the Childhood Myositis Assessment Scale (CMAS), a measure of muscle strength, was observed in pre-treatment JDM patients, indicating a connection between the expanded B cell population and worse disease. Transcriptomic analysis of B cells illustrated distinctive clustering between pre-treatment JDM patients and healthy controls, based on their type I IFN gene expression profiles. Pathway enrichment analysis confirmed the significant enrichment of IFN-related pathways in B cells of pre-treatment JDM patients. Conclusion This study validates previous observations (Piper et al., 2018) supporting a significant role of B cells in the pathogenesis of JDM and their association with IFN dysregulation. Notably, pre-treatment JDM patients exhibited an expansion of the total B cell population, and of immature B cells, which correlated with disease activity and were restored to normal levels with treatment. Transcriptomic analysis identified distinct IFN-related gene profiles in B cells from pre-treatment JDM patients. These findings offer valuable insights into the complex autoimmune condition of JDM, potentially opening avenues for novel therapeutic strategies. Disclosure A.E.K. Syntakas: None. H.D. Nguyen: None. R. Restuadi: None. B.R. Jebson: None. V. Alexiou: None. L.R. Marshall: None. E. Ralph: None. K. O’Brien: None. D. Cancemi: None. H. Peckham: None. A. Radziszewska: None. N. De Gruijter: None. G.T. Hall: None. S. Castellano: None. C. Ciurtin: None. C.T. Deakin: None. E. Rosser: None. L.R. Wedderburn: None. M. Kartawinata: None. M.G.L. Wilkinson: None.

Editorial for pedometrics 2017 special issue

Editorial for pedometrics 2017 special issue

A Comparison of Music Therapy Students' and Professional Music Therapists' Nonverbal Behavior: A Pilot Study

ABSTRACT: Therapists' use of dynamic facial expressions and proximity during interactions with older adults can increase rapport and improve client performance. The purpose of this pilot study was to examine music therapy students' (n = 6) and professional music therapists' (n = 4) use of facial expression and proximity during song leading with older adults. Therapists and students were either videotaped or observed leading interventions, and factors relating to facial expression and proximity were analyzed. Professional music therapists varied their facial expressions during significantly more intervals than students, χ^sup 2^ (1, 44) = 5.81, p Music therapists use nonverbal means of communication with clients in conjunction with musical and verbal ones. Amir (1999) concluded, following her qualitative investigation, that musical and verbal interventions have their own unique meaning and power (p. 173). Other researchers have investigated the amount of time occupied by musical and verbal aspects in music therapy (Darrow, Johnson, Ghetti, & Achey, 2001; Wolfe, O'Connell, & Epps, 1998). Wolfe et al. (1998) found the mean percentage of time in sessions occupied by music and music therapist's verbalizations were nearly equivalent during group sessions. By contrast, student music therapists spent more time engaged in verbal rather than musical behaviors across individual and group sessions with varied clientele (Darrow et al., 2001). There is a paucity of systematic research investigating the use of nonverbal behaviors by music therapists during clinical intervention. Therefore, the current review of literature and pilot study were undertaken. Research has been conducted on nonverbal behavior in areas relevant to music therapy. Research indicated that through nonverbal behaviors, especially facial expression, gestures, and proximity, health care providers influence communication and increase understanding (Ambady, Koo, Rosenthal, & Winograd, 2002; Buller & Street, 1992; Caris-Verhallen, de Gruijter, Kerkstra, & Sensing, 1999; Caris-Verhallen, Kerkstra, & Sensing, 1999). Nonverbal behavior is often used to establish rapport with others and improve or enhance communication in our daily social interactions (Tickle-Degnen & Rosenthal, 1992). Furthermore, a patient's satisfaction with his/ her treatment was a result of the health care worker's nonverbal behaviors (Griffith, Wilson, Langer, & Haist, 2003). Conversely, therapists can decrease a client's treatment outcome by remaining seated or failing to smile at a client (Ambady et al., 2002). Though there is an extensive repertoire of nonverbal behavior, facial expression is recognized as one of the more common forms of nonverbal communication. Facial Expression and the Effects of Aging Researchers have investigated the role of facial expressions in communication and the effects of positive facial expressions (Ambady et al., 2002; Blairy, Herrera, & Hess, 1999; Frank, Ekman, & Friesen, 1993). Frank et al. (1993) found that the physical differences in enjoyment smiles, defined as spontaneous smiles, versus nonenjoyment smiles, defined as those that are forced or posed, were observable and even influenced others' perceptions. Those who evinced enjoyment smiles were seen as more positive and seemed more expressive, natural, outgoing, sociable, relaxed, and pleasant than when they evinced nonenjoyment smiles. Researchers found that smiling positively resulted in trust among strangers; they also found that facial features affected cooperation, regardless of smiles (Scharlemann, Eckel, Kacelnik, & Wilson, 2001). …

Discussion of the paper by D.J. Brus and J.J. de Gruijter

Discussion of the paper by D.J. Brus and J.J. de Gruijter

Information and Reliability for Percentile Ranks and Other Monotonic Transformations of the Number‐Correct Score: Reply to De Gruijter

De Gruijter (1997) has claimed that May and Nicewander (1994) erred on two points that indicated that both reliability and information in the number‐correct score could be reduced considerably by converting to percentile ranks. The points raised by De Gruijter are very well taken, and we are pleased to have an opportunity to respond.

Model-free estimation from spatial samples: a reappraisal of classical sampling theory : de Gruijter, J J; ter Braak, C J F Math GeolV22, N4, May 1990, P407–415

Model-free estimation from spatial samples: a reappraisal of classical sampling theory : de Gruijter, J J; ter Braak, C J F Math GeolV22, N4, May 1990, P407–415

The Use of Item Statistics in the Calibration of an Item Bank

An IRT analysis based on p (proportion correct) and r (item-test correlation) is proposed for a group of tests having items in common. The procedure is a generalization of a procedure proposed by De Gruijter and Mooijaart (1983) which is related to procedures for the factor analysis of dichotomous data. The pro cedure results in IRT item parameters using data from examinee groups with subsets of common items; it is, therefore, particularly appropriate for calibrating items for use in small-scale item banks. Simulated data are used to illustrate the procedure.

Some Thoughts on the Use of Decision Theory to Set Cutoff Scores: Comment on de Gruijter and Hambleton

In response to an article by de Gruijter and Ham bleton (1984), some thoughts on the use of decision theory for setting cutoff scores on mastery tests are presented. This paper argues that decision theory of fers much more than suggested by de Gruijter and Hambleton and that an attempt at evaluating its poten tials for mastery testing should address the full scale of possibilities. As for the problems de Gruijter and Hambleton have raised, some of them disappear if proper choices from decision theory are made, while others are inherent in mastery testing and will be en countered by any method of setting cutoff scores. Fur ther, this paper points at the development of new tech nology to assist the mastery tester in the application of decision theory. From this an optimistic attitude to wards the potentials of decision theory for mastery testing is concluded.

APPLICATION OF ITEM RESPONSE MODELS TO CRITERION‐REFERENCED TEST ITEM SELECTION

Journal of Educational MeasurementVolume 20, Issue 4 p. 355-367 APPLICATION OF ITEM RESPONSE MODELS TO CRITERION-REFERENCED TEST ITEM SELECTION RONALD K. HAMBLETON, Corresponding Author RONALD K. HAMBLETON University o f Massachusetts RONALD K. HAMBLETON. Address: University of Massachusetts, Hills South, Rm. 152, Amherst, MA 01003. Title: Professor of Education and Psychology. Degrees: B.A., University of Waterloo; M.A., Ph.D., University of Toronto. Specialization: Psychometric methods. DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER. Address: University of Leyden, Educational Research Center, Boerhaavelaan 2, 2334 EN Leyden, The Netherlands. Title: Senior Research Fellow. Degrees: Ph.D., University of Leyden. Specializations: Test theory, generalizability theory.Search for more papers by this authorDATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER, Corresponding Author DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER University of Leyden RONALD K. HAMBLETON. Address: University of Massachusetts, Hills South, Rm. 152, Amherst, MA 01003. Title: Professor of Education and Psychology. Degrees: B.A., University of Waterloo; M.A., Ph.D., University of Toronto. Specialization: Psychometric methods. DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER. Address: University of Leyden, Educational Research Center, Boerhaavelaan 2, 2334 EN Leyden, The Netherlands. Title: Senior Research Fellow. Degrees: Ph.D., University of Leyden. Specializations: Test theory, generalizability theory.Search for more papers by this author RONALD K. HAMBLETON, Corresponding Author RONALD K. HAMBLETON University o f Massachusetts RONALD K. HAMBLETON. Address: University of Massachusetts, Hills South, Rm. 152, Amherst, MA 01003. Title: Professor of Education and Psychology. Degrees: B.A., University of Waterloo; M.A., Ph.D., University of Toronto. Specialization: Psychometric methods. DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER. Address: University of Leyden, Educational Research Center, Boerhaavelaan 2, 2334 EN Leyden, The Netherlands. Title: Senior Research Fellow. Degrees: Ph.D., University of Leyden. Specializations: Test theory, generalizability theory.Search for more papers by this authorDATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER, Corresponding Author DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER University of Leyden RONALD K. HAMBLETON. Address: University of Massachusetts, Hills South, Rm. 152, Amherst, MA 01003. Title: Professor of Education and Psychology. Degrees: B.A., University of Waterloo; M.A., Ph.D., University of Toronto. Specialization: Psychometric methods. DATO N. M. DE GRUIJTER. Address: University of Leyden, Educational Research Center, Boerhaavelaan 2, 2334 EN Leyden, The Netherlands. Title: Senior Research Fellow. Degrees: Ph.D., University of Leyden. Specializations: Test theory, generalizability theory.Search for more papers by this author First published: December 1983 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1983.tb00213.xCitations: 18 Laboratory of Psychometric and Evaluative Research Report No. 123. Amherst, MA: School of Education, University of Massachusetts, 1982. This paper was prepared while the first author was on sabbatical leave at the University of Leyden. The authors are grateful to Ross E Traub, and three anonymous JEM reviewers for constructive criticisms on earlier drafts of this paper. AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat Citing Literature Volume20, Issue4December 1983Pages 355-367 RelatedInformation

BOOK REVIEWS

Book reviewed in this article:Brown, G., and Desforges, C. (1979). Piaget's Theory: A Psychological Critique.Clift, P., Cleave, S., and Griffin, M. (1980). The Aims, Role and Deployment of Staff in the Nursery.Cohen, L., and Mannion, L. (1980), Research Methods In Education.Harbison, J., and Harbison, J. (1980). A Society Under Stress—Children and Young People in Northern Ireland.Van der Kamp, L. J. T., Langerak, W. F., and DE Gruijter, D. N. M. (Eds.) (1980). Psychometrics for Educational Debates.