How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia
Antipsychotic drugs are widely used to treat behavioural and psychological disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although only modest evidence from randomized controlled trials supports their efficacy, and increasing evidence from post-marketing surveillance shows serious adver...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Drugs & aging 2012-08, Vol.29 (8), p.607-614 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 614 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | 607 |
container_title | Drugs & aging |
container_volume | 29 |
creator | GALEOTTI, Francesca VANACORE, Nicola GAINOTTI, Sabina IZZICUPO, Fabio MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca PETRINI, Carlo CHIAROTTI, Flavia CHATTAT, Rabih RASCHETTI, Roberto |
description | Antipsychotic drugs are widely used to treat behavioural and psychological disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although only modest evidence from randomized controlled trials supports their efficacy, and increasing evidence from post-marketing surveillance shows serious adverse events associated with their use, including increased mortality. The AdCare study, a non-profit, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, pragmatic trial coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health, aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of three atypical antipsychotic drugs (risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine) and one conventional antipsychotic drug (haloperidol) in treating psychosis, aggression and agitation in outpatients with AD. The study was planned to be carried out in 19 clinical centres and to enrol 1000 outpatients. According to Italian law, in the case where a patient is considered unable to give informed consent, a legal representative designated by the court has to provide it. Because of difficulties in the informed consent procedure, the study had to be prematurely interrupted. From February 2009 to April 2010, 83 patients gave informed consent to participate in the trial. Fifty-six patients (68%) were included with consent given by a legal representative, while 27 patients (32%) were considered to provide personal informed consent on the basis of the results from a specifically built procedure. Patients and caregivers were offered the opportunity to participate in the trial before the occurrence of behavioural disturbances, in order to provide them with enough time to consider their participation in the study. Twenty-three patients experienced behavioural, clinically relevant symptoms and were randomized to the study drug; all randomized patients except one had consent for inclusion in the study given by legal representatives. After trial interruption, all patients taking an active drug continued treatment with the same molecule in clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials are acknowledged as the gold standard source of evidence on drug safety and efficacy. The AdCare study showed that an excessively rigid regulation can become a major obstacle while carrying out therapeutic research with incapacitated persons. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2165/11630810-000000000-00000 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1027375326</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1027375326</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-8374dd376918fdd73b5fbe2c45664f7eab9cf04cdb26878fb63fa5c11006ea2f3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkV9LwzAUxYMoTqdfQQIi-FJtkjZpH8d0ThjqwwTfSprebBldO5vOsW_v3V_BEMgJ_M69yT2EUBY-cCbjR8akCBMWBuFh7dQJuWBMpQFLZXq61WHAefrVIZfezxCQnLNz0uE8VpEU4oKsh_WKjmDifKlbV1cU9xMY51Hrkvb1QhvXrlFU9A0myPxAuaY9a8G0tJ0CHYD2Lnflhqot7Zeucgat48bp0lNX0Q90QdV6unLtFKvP8eL0FTmzCMD1_uySz8HzuD8MRu8vr_3eKDBCiTZIhIqKQiiZssQWhRJ5bHPgJoqljKwCnafGhpEpci4TldhcCqtjwxh-FjS3okvud3UXTf29BN9mc-cNlKWuoF76jIVcCRULLhG9_YfO6mWDc9hSmxfwNEYq2VGmqb1vwGaLxs11s0Yo28STHeLJjvHsFFpv9g2W-RyKo_GQBwJ3e0B7HKJtdIVZ_HGSh0omXPwCvT6Xlg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1026918295</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>GALEOTTI, Francesca ; VANACORE, Nicola ; GAINOTTI, Sabina ; IZZICUPO, Fabio ; MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca ; PETRINI, Carlo ; CHIAROTTI, Flavia ; CHATTAT, Rabih ; RASCHETTI, Roberto</creator><creatorcontrib>GALEOTTI, Francesca ; VANACORE, Nicola ; GAINOTTI, Sabina ; IZZICUPO, Fabio ; MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca ; PETRINI, Carlo ; CHIAROTTI, Flavia ; CHATTAT, Rabih ; RASCHETTI, Roberto ; AdCare Study Group</creatorcontrib><description>Antipsychotic drugs are widely used to treat behavioural and psychological disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although only modest evidence from randomized controlled trials supports their efficacy, and increasing evidence from post-marketing surveillance shows serious adverse events associated with their use, including increased mortality. The AdCare study, a non-profit, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, pragmatic trial coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health, aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of three atypical antipsychotic drugs (risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine) and one conventional antipsychotic drug (haloperidol) in treating psychosis, aggression and agitation in outpatients with AD. The study was planned to be carried out in 19 clinical centres and to enrol 1000 outpatients. According to Italian law, in the case where a patient is considered unable to give informed consent, a legal representative designated by the court has to provide it. Because of difficulties in the informed consent procedure, the study had to be prematurely interrupted. From February 2009 to April 2010, 83 patients gave informed consent to participate in the trial. Fifty-six patients (68%) were included with consent given by a legal representative, while 27 patients (32%) were considered to provide personal informed consent on the basis of the results from a specifically built procedure. Patients and caregivers were offered the opportunity to participate in the trial before the occurrence of behavioural disturbances, in order to provide them with enough time to consider their participation in the study. Twenty-three patients experienced behavioural, clinically relevant symptoms and were randomized to the study drug; all randomized patients except one had consent for inclusion in the study given by legal representatives. After trial interruption, all patients taking an active drug continued treatment with the same molecule in clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials are acknowledged as the gold standard source of evidence on drug safety and efficacy. The AdCare study showed that an excessively rigid regulation can become a major obstacle while carrying out therapeutic research with incapacitated persons.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1170-229X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1179-1969</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2165/11630810-000000000-00000</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22574633</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Auckland: Adis International</publisher><subject>Biological and medical sciences ; Clinical Trials as Topic - ethics ; Clinical Trials as Topic - legislation & jurisprudence ; Decision Making - ethics ; Dementia ; Dementia - drug therapy ; Feasibility Studies ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Mental Competency - legislation & jurisprudence ; Patient Selection - ethics ; Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><ispartof>Drugs & aging, 2012-08, Vol.29 (8), p.607-614</ispartof><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright Wolters Kluwer Health Adis International Aug 2012</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-8374dd376918fdd73b5fbe2c45664f7eab9cf04cdb26878fb63fa5c11006ea2f3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-8374dd376918fdd73b5fbe2c45664f7eab9cf04cdb26878fb63fa5c11006ea2f3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=26207682$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22574633$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>GALEOTTI, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANACORE, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GAINOTTI, Sabina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IZZICUPO, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PETRINI, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHIAROTTI, Flavia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHATTAT, Rabih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RASCHETTI, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AdCare Study Group</creatorcontrib><title>How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia</title><title>Drugs & aging</title><addtitle>Drugs Aging</addtitle><description>Antipsychotic drugs are widely used to treat behavioural and psychological disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although only modest evidence from randomized controlled trials supports their efficacy, and increasing evidence from post-marketing surveillance shows serious adverse events associated with their use, including increased mortality. The AdCare study, a non-profit, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, pragmatic trial coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health, aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of three atypical antipsychotic drugs (risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine) and one conventional antipsychotic drug (haloperidol) in treating psychosis, aggression and agitation in outpatients with AD. The study was planned to be carried out in 19 clinical centres and to enrol 1000 outpatients. According to Italian law, in the case where a patient is considered unable to give informed consent, a legal representative designated by the court has to provide it. Because of difficulties in the informed consent procedure, the study had to be prematurely interrupted. From February 2009 to April 2010, 83 patients gave informed consent to participate in the trial. Fifty-six patients (68%) were included with consent given by a legal representative, while 27 patients (32%) were considered to provide personal informed consent on the basis of the results from a specifically built procedure. Patients and caregivers were offered the opportunity to participate in the trial before the occurrence of behavioural disturbances, in order to provide them with enough time to consider their participation in the study. Twenty-three patients experienced behavioural, clinically relevant symptoms and were randomized to the study drug; all randomized patients except one had consent for inclusion in the study given by legal representatives. After trial interruption, all patients taking an active drug continued treatment with the same molecule in clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials are acknowledged as the gold standard source of evidence on drug safety and efficacy. The AdCare study showed that an excessively rigid regulation can become a major obstacle while carrying out therapeutic research with incapacitated persons.</description><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic - ethics</subject><subject>Clinical Trials as Topic - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Decision Making - ethics</subject><subject>Dementia</subject><subject>Dementia - drug therapy</subject><subject>Feasibility Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Mental Competency - legislation & jurisprudence</subject><subject>Patient Selection - ethics</subject><subject>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</subject><issn>1170-229X</issn><issn>1179-1969</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkV9LwzAUxYMoTqdfQQIi-FJtkjZpH8d0ThjqwwTfSprebBldO5vOsW_v3V_BEMgJ_M69yT2EUBY-cCbjR8akCBMWBuFh7dQJuWBMpQFLZXq61WHAefrVIZfezxCQnLNz0uE8VpEU4oKsh_WKjmDifKlbV1cU9xMY51Hrkvb1QhvXrlFU9A0myPxAuaY9a8G0tJ0CHYD2Lnflhqot7Zeucgat48bp0lNX0Q90QdV6unLtFKvP8eL0FTmzCMD1_uySz8HzuD8MRu8vr_3eKDBCiTZIhIqKQiiZssQWhRJ5bHPgJoqljKwCnafGhpEpci4TldhcCqtjwxh-FjS3okvud3UXTf29BN9mc-cNlKWuoF76jIVcCRULLhG9_YfO6mWDc9hSmxfwNEYq2VGmqb1vwGaLxs11s0Yo28STHeLJjvHsFFpv9g2W-RyKo_GQBwJ3e0B7HKJtdIVZ_HGSh0omXPwCvT6Xlg</recordid><startdate>20120801</startdate><enddate>20120801</enddate><creator>GALEOTTI, Francesca</creator><creator>VANACORE, Nicola</creator><creator>GAINOTTI, Sabina</creator><creator>IZZICUPO, Fabio</creator><creator>MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca</creator><creator>PETRINI, Carlo</creator><creator>CHIAROTTI, Flavia</creator><creator>CHATTAT, Rabih</creator><creator>RASCHETTI, Roberto</creator><general>Adis International</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PHGZM</scope><scope>PHGZT</scope><scope>PJZUB</scope><scope>PKEHL</scope><scope>PPXIY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120801</creationdate><title>How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia</title><author>GALEOTTI, Francesca ; VANACORE, Nicola ; GAINOTTI, Sabina ; IZZICUPO, Fabio ; MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca ; PETRINI, Carlo ; CHIAROTTI, Flavia ; CHATTAT, Rabih ; RASCHETTI, Roberto</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c373t-8374dd376918fdd73b5fbe2c45664f7eab9cf04cdb26878fb63fa5c11006ea2f3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic - ethics</topic><topic>Clinical Trials as Topic - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Decision Making - ethics</topic><topic>Dementia</topic><topic>Dementia - drug therapy</topic><topic>Feasibility Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Mental Competency - legislation & jurisprudence</topic><topic>Patient Selection - ethics</topic><topic>Pharmacology. Drug treatments</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>GALEOTTI, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>VANACORE, Nicola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GAINOTTI, Sabina</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>IZZICUPO, Fabio</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PETRINI, Carlo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHIAROTTI, Flavia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHATTAT, Rabih</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>RASCHETTI, Roberto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>AdCare Study Group</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Psychology</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Research Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Middle East (New)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Health & Nursing</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Drugs & aging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>GALEOTTI, Francesca</au><au>VANACORE, Nicola</au><au>GAINOTTI, Sabina</au><au>IZZICUPO, Fabio</au><au>MENNITI-IPPOLITO, Francesca</au><au>PETRINI, Carlo</au><au>CHIAROTTI, Flavia</au><au>CHATTAT, Rabih</au><au>RASCHETTI, Roberto</au><aucorp>AdCare Study Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia</atitle><jtitle>Drugs & aging</jtitle><addtitle>Drugs Aging</addtitle><date>2012-08-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>29</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>607</spage><epage>614</epage><pages>607-614</pages><issn>1170-229X</issn><eissn>1179-1969</eissn><abstract>Antipsychotic drugs are widely used to treat behavioural and psychological disturbances associated with Alzheimer's disease (AD), although only modest evidence from randomized controlled trials supports their efficacy, and increasing evidence from post-marketing surveillance shows serious adverse events associated with their use, including increased mortality. The AdCare study, a non-profit, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicentre, pragmatic trial coordinated by the Italian National Institute of Health, aimed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy profiles of three atypical antipsychotic drugs (risperidone, olanzapine and quetiapine) and one conventional antipsychotic drug (haloperidol) in treating psychosis, aggression and agitation in outpatients with AD. The study was planned to be carried out in 19 clinical centres and to enrol 1000 outpatients. According to Italian law, in the case where a patient is considered unable to give informed consent, a legal representative designated by the court has to provide it. Because of difficulties in the informed consent procedure, the study had to be prematurely interrupted. From February 2009 to April 2010, 83 patients gave informed consent to participate in the trial. Fifty-six patients (68%) were included with consent given by a legal representative, while 27 patients (32%) were considered to provide personal informed consent on the basis of the results from a specifically built procedure. Patients and caregivers were offered the opportunity to participate in the trial before the occurrence of behavioural disturbances, in order to provide them with enough time to consider their participation in the study. Twenty-three patients experienced behavioural, clinically relevant symptoms and were randomized to the study drug; all randomized patients except one had consent for inclusion in the study given by legal representatives. After trial interruption, all patients taking an active drug continued treatment with the same molecule in clinical practice. Randomized controlled trials are acknowledged as the gold standard source of evidence on drug safety and efficacy. The AdCare study showed that an excessively rigid regulation can become a major obstacle while carrying out therapeutic research with incapacitated persons.</abstract><cop>Auckland</cop><pub>Adis International</pub><pmid>22574633</pmid><doi>10.2165/11630810-000000000-00000</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1170-229X |
ispartof | Drugs & aging, 2012-08, Vol.29 (8), p.607-614 |
issn | 1170-229X 1179-1969 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1027375326 |
source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
subjects | Biological and medical sciences Clinical Trials as Topic - ethics Clinical Trials as Topic - legislation & jurisprudence Decision Making - ethics Dementia Dementia - drug therapy Feasibility Studies Humans Medical sciences Mental Competency - legislation & jurisprudence Patient Selection - ethics Pharmacology. Drug treatments |
title | How Legislation on Decisional Capacity Can Negatively Affect the Feasibility of Clinical Trials in Patients with Dementia |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-21T07%3A26%3A57IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20Legislation%20on%20Decisional%20Capacity%20Can%20Negatively%20Affect%20the%20Feasibility%20of%20Clinical%20Trials%20in%20Patients%20with%20Dementia&rft.jtitle=Drugs%20&%20aging&rft.au=GALEOTTI,%20Francesca&rft.aucorp=AdCare%20Study%20Group&rft.date=2012-08-01&rft.volume=29&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=607&rft.epage=614&rft.pages=607-614&rft.issn=1170-229X&rft.eissn=1179-1969&rft_id=info:doi/10.2165/11630810-000000000-00000&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1027375326%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1026918295&rft_id=info:pmid/22574633&rfr_iscdi=true |