Listen: How brain-machine interfaces could help paralyzed patients

What if your thoughts could allow you to feel the texture of an object, type a message, or move a robotic arm?

How does the brain translate thought into physical movement, and can technology bridge the gap for paralyzed patients, whose pathways are broken?

University of Chicago neuroscientist Nicholas Hatsopoulos is transforming that fundamental neuroscience into life-changing medical technology.

By implanting microelectrode arrays directly into the brain, his team decodes the neural patterns that fire when a person intends to move. This brain-machine interface technology is allowing patients who are paralyzed or have ALS the ability to control robotic limbs, reach for objects, and regain touch sensation through their thoughts.

Listen to Hatsopoulos break down his work on this episode of the Big Brains podcast:

Read the transcript for this episode.

Source: University of Chicago

The post Listen: How brain-machine interfaces could help paralyzed patients appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/awjMpby

Most older adults with dementia don’t report their diagnosis

In a new study, researchers discovered that most older Americans who have a dementia diagnosis in their medical records don’t report having one.

Most research on the diagnosis of dementia focuses on people who are never diagnosed. But in the new study, Yale researchers look at the other side: people who have been diagnosed but do not know it, or do not acknowledge it.

“Diagnosing dementia is only the first step.”

In an analysis of US survey data of older Americans with probable dementia, the researchers found that about two-thirds (67%) of respondents who’d answered questions for themselves reported that no doctor had ever told them they had dementia, even though Medicare claims indicated such a diagnosis. That is far higher than for other conditions among the very same people, such as high blood pressure (23%) or arthritis (17%).

Such levels of underreporting suggest that many of these patients are also likely not pursuing critical medical services related to their diagnosis, the researchers say.

“A diagnosis that sits in a chart but never registers with the patient delivers almost none of the benefits that early detection is supposed to bring,” says Xi Chen, corresponding author of the study and an associate professor of public health and economics at Yale University.

The study appears in the journal JAMA Network Open.

Many people with dementia go undiagnosed. While a few small, cross-sectional studies had previously suggested that even diagnosed patients are often unaware, nobody had tracked it over the course of the disease, compared it to other conditions in the same patients, identified who is most affected, or asked whether it matters for the care people actually receive.

For the new study, researchers wanted to fill in those gaps. They used the Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative survey of older Americans that has followed the same people every two years since the 1990s, and which is linked to their Medicare claims. Using that data, they identified people aged 65 and older with probable dementia based on validated cognitive testing, then found the specific survey wave in which their Medicare records contained a dementia diagnosis.

The researchers checked whether the individuals reported, in that same period, that a doctor had told them they had dementia or a memory-related disease. They investigated the same information for four other conditions (arthritis, hypertension, diabetes, and depression) for comparison, examined which patient and health-system factors predicted underreporting, and looked at whether underreporting was linked to doctor visits, flu shots, and having a will or trust in the year after diagnosis. In all, they analyzed thousands of observations from about 3,300 people.

Through their methods, the researchers found that two-thirds of self-reporting patients with a documented dementia diagnosis did not report it, compared with an average of about 31% for the other conditions. Underreporting was highest (82%) in the earliest years after diagnosis, before measurable cognitive decline, and was more common among people living alone, with less education, or with lower incomes, and among Black older adults. It was less common among patients who saw a dementia specialist, were diagnosed in an outpatient clinic rather than a hospital, or were enrolled in Medicare Advantage, a comprehensive plan offered by some private companies as an alternative to the traditional fee-for-service Medicare plans.

Patients who underreported were also about 30% less likely to visit a doctor for a health problem, 37% less likely to receive a flu shot, and 30% less likely of having a will or trust in the following year. Importantly, the same patients still reported their other conditions at normal rates, the researchers found, indicating that a lack of reporting is not related to memory loss.

Taken together, the findings suggest a mix of stigma, difficulty accepting the diagnosis, and, above all, inadequate communication by the health system, the researchers say.

“Diagnosing dementia is only the first step,” Chen says. A diagnosis is only useful if the patient and family understand it and can act on it. Clinicians need the time, training, and support to deliver this news clearly and compassionately, and patients and families should feel empowered to ask.”

Chen adds: “Reducing the stigma around dementia is a shared responsibility: the more openly we talk about it, the easier it becomes to accept a diagnosis and get the help that is available.”

The study was supported by the National Institute on Aging.

Source: Yale

The post Most older adults with dementia don’t report their diagnosis appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/RCMmsSt

AI interviews affect how job candidates act

Using AI to conduct first-round interviews saves time and money, but it also changes how job candidates act—and not always for the better, according to a new study.

A firm handshake used to be all a job candidate needed to make a good first impression, but today a growing number of firms are relying on artificial intelligence to screen applicants.

In the new study, researchers found job seekers often overcompensate for nervousness during one-way interviews when they know they’ll be evaluated by AI. And AI candidate rating systems can’t tell when candidates are stretching the truth.

“We spoke to a lot of people who were interviewing with AI recruiters, and it was affecting the way they would behave during the interview,” says Akshat Lakhiwal, corresponding author of the study and an assistant professor in University of Georgia’s Terry College of Business. “So naturally, that affects the outcome of the interview.”

During a “one-way” asynchronous video interview, a job seeker records answers to basic interview questions such as “Why should we hire you?” or “Can you tell us about yourself?” When the practice was first introduced, the tool made it easier to schedule initial interviews, and the sorting process made it easy for recruiters to compare how multiple candidates answered the same question.

Today, many companies save time by allowing AI systems to grade and sort candidates’ responses. The change has left candidates feeling somewhat disoriented and helpless, Lakhiwal says.

“If you’re applying for a job at your dream company and your dream company wants to interview you using AI, you really don’t have a lot of choice,” he says. “You don’t really want to say no to it, but you also don’t know how it works.”

That leads many applicants to change their behavior to fit whatever they imagine the criteria might be.

In a study of hundreds of online job seekers, Lakhiwal found a considerable increase in applicants’ self-reported “exaggerations” or “deceptive embellishments” when candidates knew their videos would be evaluated by an AI agent rather than a human. An analysis of their videos and answers confirmed what they reported.

When participants were asked whether embellishing qualifications was ethical, they says it was necessary to perform well in an unpredictable environment.

“A lot of embellishment was happening,” Lakhiwal says. “They seemed to be throwing the kitchen sink at the situation to try to give the ‘evaluator’ what it was looking for.”

On the hiring end, the industry-favored AI agent Lakhiwal used in the study didn’t penalize job applicants who stretched the truth and scored them as well as those who earnestly described having the same qualifications.

When human evaluators saw the videos, they seemed able to discern this behavior. They generally penalized those candidates and gave their highest ratings to those who seemed to engage in more authentic behaviors.

Lakhiwal’s team found a way to curtail candidates’ tendency to exaggerate for AI evaluators was to explain the interview process.

In an experiment, one group of interviewees was told their videos would be reviewed by AI and then given specific details about what the AI was looking for.

They were told the system would look for facial expressions, verbal sentiment and specific keywords, and that it would rate their videos based on teamwork, job-related abilities, work style and personality.

This group reported and displayed the same amount of authentic behavior as those being told they were being reviewed by a human.

“Traditionally, companies have refrained from transparency in the hiring process,” Lakhiwal says. “They don’t like that word because they feel if participants know how they will be evaluated, the applicants may game the system. And there is research that has showed this. But here we found that telling applicants more about the process allows them to be more authentic.

“We’re advocating transparency in terms of someone’s ability to understand the process. I don’t really need to know which model they are using to analyze my video, but as a candidate, what matters is to be able to make sense of the process the same way I understand what it means to be interviewed by a human.”

Understanding how humans interact with and react to automated systems in the workplace is key to keeping these types of technologies from backfiring on organizations.

The research appears in Information Systems Research.

he study was co-authored by Che-Wei Liu of Arizona State University, Hillol Bala of Indiana University and Hung-Yue Suen of National Taiwan Normal University.

Source: University of Georgia

The post AI interviews affect how job candidates act appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/eWXwGNI

Vitamin D may improve cognition for people at risk of dementia

New research suggests that higher vitamin D supplement intake may be associated with better cognitive function in adults with an elevated risk of dementia.

More than 7 million Americans are living with Alzheimer’s dementia. That’s a number projected to reach nearly 13 million by 2050.

In the study of 54 adults with sleep disturbances and mild cognitive impairments (MCI), two hallmarks of early dementia, participants taking at least 5,000 IU of vitamin D daily showed better cognitive function compared to those who didn’t.

The study in Sleep Medicine found that participants who reported taking 5,000 IU or more of vitamin D daily scored more than 13% higher on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) than those who didn’t, even after accounting for other factors. A screening tool to detect risk of developing dementia, MoCA is widely used to assess memory and thinking skills. In this study, lower daily doses of vitamin D were not associated with higher cognitive scores.

The study also emphasizes the significance of timing. MCI is an intermediate stage between normal cognitive aging and dementia.

“In older adults experiencing both sleep disturbance and mild cognitive impairment, this may represent a critical window for intervention, when cognitive changes are emerging, but opportunities to support brain health may remain,” says Victoria Pak, senior author of the study.

“Identifying accessible and modifiable factors, such as vitamin D supplement intake, during the earlier stages of cognitive decline may become increasingly important, particularly as rates of Alzheimer’s disease continue to rise,” adds Pak, associate professor at Emory University’s Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing.

In addition to the timing of the intervention, the study also found that cognitive performance did not differ based on the form of vitamin D—D2, typically derived from plants or fungi, or D3, produced after sun exposure or consuming animal-based foods.

Vitamin D, an essential nutrient, is not only necessary for muscle and nerve function, but also influences sleep quality and sleep-wake cycles. Additionally, 50% of those with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease report having sleep disturbances, indicating a bidirectional relationship between sleep deprivation and cognitive decline.

While vitamin D deficiencies have been implicated in sleep disorders, such as insomnia and more nighttime awakenings, this preliminary study is the first to assess the relationship between vitamin D supplement intake and cognitive function in a high-risk population with both MCI and sleep disturbances.

This study was funded by the National Institute on Aging of the National Institutes of Health.

Source: Emory University

The post Vitamin D may improve cognition for people at risk of dementia appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/82bowcu

Listen: What people get wrong about volcanoes

On a new podcast, volcanologist Arianna Soldati digs into some of the biggest misconceptions around volcanoes and volcanic eruptions.

She covers whether you can divert a lava flow, what’s really going on at Yellowstone, and what color textbook publishers should use when indicating the Earth’s mantle:

Read the transcript of this podcast.

Source: North Carolina State University

The post Listen: What people get wrong about volcanoes appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/mDz2LC6

How does brain activity change as strangers become friends?

Researchers investigated the brain activity of younger and older people while they interacted—and the results are surprising.

What happens in the brain when two people engage in joint creative activity and build a new relationship with one another in the process? ETH Zurich cognitive scientist, Ryssa Moffat investigated this question. She is a postdoctoral researcher at the Social Brain Sciences Lab within the Chair of Cognitive and Social Neuroscience.

Her study has now been published in the journal PLOS Biology. The setting was as follows: over a period of six weeks, 61 pairs met six times to engage in drawing together. The participants came from a younger age group (18 to 35 years) and an older age group (70 to 85 years) and were divided into 31 cross-generational pairs and 30 pairs of the same age.

When two minds engage

At the outset, the participants did not know each other and first had to become familiar with one another. At each session, the pairs first drew individually on separate sheets of paper, then drew together twice on a single sheet of paper. They were free to decide whether to take turns or draw simultaneously. They were allowed to converse throughout the session but were instructed to remain silent while drawing.

At each session, the researchers recorded participants’ brain activity with the help of wearable brain sensors. This enabled the researchers to investigate how the process of getting to know one another was reflected in the pairs’ brain activity. At the same time, the mobile sensors ensured that participants could move and respond to each other naturally, as in everyday life, without distorting the recorded signals.

The similarity of the brain activity was particularly crucial for the ETH researchers: to what extent do the brains of two people synchronize during an encounter? And how does this synchronization change over the course of repeated sessions? The focus was not on whether a pattern of brain activity corresponds to a specific subjective feeling such as liking or irritation.

Stronger feelings of closeness, more similar brain activity?

Moffat was interested in what researchers call “inter-brain synchrony”: when people perform a shared task such as drawing, each person’s brain reacts continuously to the other person’s actions—and the brains can be says to be “synchronized” when similar changes in brain activity occur simultaneously in both people

Previous studies on inter-brain synchrony suggested that the activity patterns of two brains become increasingly similar as people grow more familiar with one another. Accordingly, the ETH researchers led by Moffat initially expected that synchrony would increase over time, as the pairs adjusted to one another while engaging in drawing.

But the researchers were surprised: although the participants in cross-generational pairs felt closer to one another over the course of weeks, their patterns of brain activity did not become increasingly similar.

An unexpected age difference

“In the cross-generational pairs, brain synchrony was higher at the start—and it decreased from week to week,” as researcher Moffat shares.

“In the same-age pairs, it was the other way round: they started with lower synchrony, which increased over the course of the six weeks.”

Regardless of this trend, however, one thing became clear over the course of the weeks: in both groups, brain synchrony was higher when the couples drew together than when the individuals drew separately.

Consequently, collaboration led to greater synchronization of brain activity—initially in a similar manner for both groups. It was only over the course of the six weeks that the difference became apparent: while the brains of the same-age pairs showed increasingly similar activity, this synchronization tended to decline in among the intergenerational pairs.

Anticipating rather than being in sync

How can this difference be explained? A definitive answer is still pending. Thanks to the portable brain-scanning technology, Moffat can state that when two people come to feel closer, it’s not a given that their brains “tick” alike.

Moffat’s study takes a different approach here from many earlier studies on brain synchrony. These assumed that two people experiencing something together process similar stimuli—and that their brains therefore react in similar ways. Researchers refer to this model as “Common Cognitive Processing.”

By contrast, Moffat’s explanatory approach assumes that two people learn to better anticipate their counterpart’s behavior and adapt to it: What will the other person say next? How will they react to my suggestion? In research, this model is known as “Mutual Prediction.”

This model may explain the age differences that emerged in the study. This is because, as Moffat explains, the participants’ life experiences also play a role in mutual prediction: “The participants of the same age were mostly students with similar daily routines and quickly found topics they had in common. Younger and older people, on the other hand, first had to work out what they could actually talk about.”

For Moffat, this means: “Greater brain synchrony can also mean that two people are making a particularly strong effort to understand one another.”

Who leads, who follows?

These efforts are particularly called for at the outset of a relationship: when younger and older people meet for the first time, they initially find it harder to predict their counterpart’s behavior, explains Moffat.

“Peers often find common ground more quickly or already have it. Over time, however, they become more playful, surprising each other in their conversations and thereby making it harder for their counterpart to predict their behavior.”

In a second study published in the journal Acta Psychologica the researchers provide insights into why brain synchrony differs between younger and older people.

In this study, they examined the same encounters and measurement data from a different perspective: they investigated which recurring patterns of shared brain activity emerged during the encounters. The researchers identified seven so-called “two-brain states” that remained remarkably stable throughout the entire six-week study period.

One state was particularly noteworthy and lasted significantly longer in the intergenerational pairs than in the same-age pairs. In this state, the synchronization between the two brains was comparatively low. What stood out instead was a particularly strong connection within a single person’s brain—an internal synchronization between two areas in their own frontal lobe.

The researchers cautiously interpret this as an indication of a division of roles: the person with the stronger internal synchronization was more likely to adapt their behavior to that of the other. In most cases, this was the younger person—while the older person tended to take a leadership role. The researchers also found that same-age pairs were more likely to draw at the same time, whereas intergenerational pairs took turns more often.

New ground for social brain research

“Our study is the first to show, over a period of several weeks, how brain activity develops in younger and older people,” concludes Moffat.

Previous studies have focused on parent-child, teacher-pupil, doctor-patient, and romantic relationships. Older people have so far been largely overlooked in social brain research.

Over the long term, Moffat’s research could also reveal “how strangers become acquaintances and perhaps even friends”.

Source: ETH Zurich

The post How does brain activity change as strangers become friends? appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/G1KxfQn

Team finds new layer of the human genome

A new study has uncovered an unexpected feature of human DNA linked to gene activity and the physical organization of DNA.

The findings, published in Cell, could change how scientists think about DNA organization, transcription, and genome function.

DNA and RNA are usually separate molecules inside cells, each with a different job. But small RNA building blocks, called ribonucleotides, sometimes become embedded in DNA during normal cellular activities. Scientists knew these RNA building blocks existed, but until now they did not know where they were located across the human genome or whether they served a purpose.

Storici’s team, working with collaborators at multiple institutions, created their detailed map of these RNA building blocks throughout human DNA. The researchers found that they are not randomly scattered. Instead, they are distributed in distinct patterns across the genome. The researchers call this genome-wide landscape of DNA-embedded ribonucleotides the human nuclear “ribome.”

“Ribonucleotides embedded in DNA have traditionally been viewed mainly as mistakes that need to be removed,” says Francesca Storici, a professor in the School of Biological Sciences and faculty member of the Parker H. Petit Institute for Bioengineering and Bioscience at Georgia Tech.

“Our findings suggest a different perspective: they can influence the physical properties of DNA and may have biological functions that we are only beginning to understand.”

The team discovered that these embedded RNA building blocks are especially common near the starting points of active genes, where cells begin reading genetic instructions to make RNA. Their abundance also increases with gene activity. These regions experience physical stress as DNA is repeatedly accessed and used. The researchers found evidence that the embedded RNA building blocks influence how tightly the DNA twists and coils in these areas. This DNA twisting, known as supercoiling, is closely associated with transcription.

The findings suggest that these RNA building blocks are more than accidental leftovers from normal cellular processes. Instead, they can modulate DNA supercoiling, revealing a previously unrecognized connection between embedded ribonucleotides, DNA topology, and transcription.

“One of the most exciting findings is that processing ribonucleotides embedded in DNA can change DNA supercoiling,” Storici says.

“This provides a new connection between the chemical composition of DNA, its physical organization, and transcription.”

The work also may help scientists better understand diseases linked to problems removing embedded RNA from DNA, including rare autoimmune disorders. More broadly, the discovery could open a new area of investigation into the roles of embedded ribonucleotides in human genome biology.

By providing the first comprehensive map of these RNA marks in human nuclear DNA, the study shows that what once appeared to be simple molecular mistakes may actually contribute to how the genome is organized and functions. The discovery opens new opportunities to explore how embedded ribonucleotides influence DNA topology, transcription, and genome maintenance.

Additional collaborators across multiple institutions contributed expertise, resources, and scientific insights that greatly expanded the scope and comprehensiveness of the study.

Source: Georgia Tech

The post Team finds new layer of the human genome appeared first on Futurity.

from Futurity https://ift.tt/KGCFnoE