Description
Directions:
A) The final research project presentation is an opportunity to present your finished Project to a supportive peer audience (Classmates) via discussion #2. The power point presentation (PPT) or Poster Board Template presentation should include the primary theory or claim you are defending, the bulk of the research upon which your position is based, and the major arguments that support it. You can utilize the information you have submitted within your assignment submissions for this course to complete your PPT.
There’s no required slide count for this discussion. Make sure you address all criteria/questions below for your initial discussion posting. Be Creative (include, photos, charts graphs, videos, etc). If you are going to use Prezi you must attach the PDF of your Prezi, no links are accepted for prezi presentations only PDF’s.
You are not obligated to follow exactly what’s on the example presentation. I am posting an example so that you can view in general what I am looking for within your submission. Please note that the example does not consist of additional criteria that is required within your submission, therefore, I strongly advise that you double check the criteria below prior to submitting to this discussion board forum.
Presentation Format: Required Criteria
Your submission MUST follow the format below with headings (i.e. abstract, problem statement, etc.).
1. Title = Project title, your name, panther ID, date
2. Abstract= A concise summary of the key points of your research. Your abstract should contain at least your research topic, research questions, participants, methods, results, data analysis, and conclusions. You may also include possible implications of your research and future work you see connected with your findings. Your abstract should be a single paragraph double-spaced. Your abstract should be between 150 and 250 words.
3. Briefly describe the General Problem Statement and Specific Problem Statement proposed in assignment #1.
4. List your research questions proposed in assignment #1.
5. Briefly discuss the Literature Review Three Concepts (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences), proposed in assignment #2.
6. Briefly discuss the Methods (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences), proposed in assignment #3.
7. Briefly discuss the Findings (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences), proposed in assignment #4.
8. Briefly discuss the Limitations (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences), proposed in assignment #4.
9. Conclusion (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences), proposed in assignment #4.
10.Reflection statement: Provide a summary (1 paragraph; 5-6 complete sentences)) statement of your thoughts on the research project (i.e., what are you the most proud of while completing the research, what were the biggest challenges, advantages and disadvantages,are their any disappointments?, what methods will you use to communicate your research results to your chosen audience (i.e. delivery of research to bring awareness; i.e. via social media, email, etc.) ?, what are your hopes for the future with your research project, etc.).
11.List and provide (websites) of Two (2) potential peer review Journals that your abstract/ manuscript may be published in (refer to chapters 34-36 from your course required textbook to get ideas).
12. References (Min. 5 References) APA format.
***ATTACHED FILE IS AN EXAMPLE***
Unformatted Attachment Preview
The Outcomes of Neural Stem Cell Transplantation and Localized Drug
Therapy on Patients Suffering from Traumatic Brain Injury
John Doe
Panther ID: 1212121
ABSTRACT
Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) affects a wide variety of people nationwide. One
constant does remain; the human condition suffers, both internally and externally. The proposed
study will review current literature and collective research models and data based on neural stem
cell transplantation on injured brains and their positive outcomes; as well as, the facilitation of
newly implemented procedures for localized drug therapy on their respective injury sites. Studies
are primarily collected in controlled laboratory setting and modeled on mice for efficacy of
desired treatment protocol as well as the clinical setting being modeled on Projectile Ballistics
Brain Injury (PBBI) patients.
Pertinent research questions include: Is there sufficient clinical evidence to support that
the usage of neural progenitor cells expand neurogenesis activity within TBI structures of the
brain? As well as, What are the effects of neural stem cell transplants on endogenous neurogenesis
and neurobehavioral outcomes of PBBI patients? Data analysis was collected by reviewing TBI
literature under different treatment circumstances such as hypothermic, neurodegenerative,
immuno-compromised, behavioral standards, and lastly by quantifying the rate of neural cell
apoptosis within a 6 week period measured at 95% CI (α < p-value = 0.05). Overall the research
hopes to raise awareness of the achievable goals and positive steps that have been affiliated with
this specific type of research methodology.
PROBLEM STATEMENT
The general problem is represented with the figures provided by the CDCP in 2010;
about 2.5 million Emergency Department (ED) cases were associated with TBI; either presented
singly or in combination with another injury here in the United States (CDCP, 2014). TBI was a
diagnosis in more than 280,000 hospitals and of those cases 50,000 ended in death before and
while at the ED (CDCP, 2014). TBI’s rooted issues are based on scientific evidence that out of the
73 institutions currently focused on TBI research, only three are using neural stem cells to
promote neurogenesis in the brain and out of those three institutions, only two have a drug
approved by the FDA that increases glucose activity in injured bregma regions of the brain
(National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke [NINDS], 2016). TBI is a major source
of death and disability here in the US; not only does it account for a large portion of ED care and
attention, treatment procedures and positive outcomes in today’s world of modern day medicine
are very sporadic in nature and thus can be emotionally devastating on the family of the afflicted
patient.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
•
Is there a correlation between increasing brain glucose utilization on affected TBI mice
that have been injected with Chronic A20?
•
Is there sufficient clinical evidence to support that the usage of neural progenitor cells
expand neurogenesis activity within TBI structures of the brain?
•
Does surgical intervention create better treatment outcomes than injected NPC’s and
Schwann cells within the brain stem on TBI patients over an extended period of time?
•
What are the effects of neural stem cell transplants on endogenous neurogenesis and
neurobehavioral outcomes of PBBI patients (type of TBI)?
•
In regards to PBBI patients, how does delivery of optimal site and cell concentration to
produce maximal engraftment of neural stem cells increase motor and cognitive behavior in rat
model (brain function similar to humans)?
LITERATURE REVIEW
I hope to express to potential readers the efficacy of neural stem cell engraftment
treatment on patients who suffer from Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI) and by leaning on this form of
treatment the likely outcomes it can play on society as a whole. With respect to the cumulative
objective of this research, the literature indicates that work is being conducted on transgenic NSC
mice that have shown consistently to improve performance in multiple levels of cognitive
domains. This gradual recovery process in mice is associated with NSC expression of brain
derived neurotrophic factors , restores depleted levels and modulates glutamatergic [modulates
protein construction and synthesis] systems in the brain (Atkins, Gajavelli, Herdeen, 2016). Also,
research has shown that without a doubt in more than 3,200 laboratory controlled mice NSC
injection and engraftment has led the way in increasing neurogenesis productivity at later stages in
the development cycle. By assessing optimal site, time, and cell concentration to produce maximal
engraftment of NSC’s in a wide variety of TBI procedures, physicians can verify the best possible
treatment options and in turn medical errors due to TBI procedures can be reduced respectively.
METHODS
OVERALL METHODOLOGY
The overall efficacy of treatment will be
compared to many control groups that serve as a basis
to see if NSC outcomes lessen or diminish possible
injuries, as a disclaimer, findings within TBI based
research do not support nor condone that there is a
cure to secondary injuries such as comas, neuronal
cell death, loss of motor or cognitive function,
paralysis, or even death due to TBI. Simply put, this
research report will look at collaborative efforts that a
controlled laboratory setting has made in regards to
ameliorating TBI conditions in either acute or severe
injuries and review the success of treatment in the
hopes that it can serve patients and their respective
loved ones in finding more adequate treatment
platforms that can efficiently save lives in the long
run. Most of the data collected by lead investigators
in the fields of Neuroscience, Emergency Medicine,
Neurosurgery and Neuro-trauma are obtained through
quantifiable means, therefore, I will be surveying and
scrutinizing quantifiable numerical data that
demonstrates a positive progression for affected TBI
patients within the lab setting.
FINDINGS
BREAKTHROUGHS
There are a myriad of findings and collected
works that represent NSC engraftment treatment as a
substantial and credible source of attenuating TBI
portions of the brain. By helping to facilitate localized
drug therapy at specific origin sites, NSC therapies will
undoubtedly be the epicenter for TBI treatment
effectiveness within the next decade. The most distinct
pathologies associated with PBI were the presence of
ICH, a hallmark of PBBI, and extensive zones of cell
death radiating into mechanically intact brain regions.
Overall, a significant and reproducible brain injury was
observed in the form of both gray and white matter tissue
damage and related neurological impairments, sensitive to
the degree/type of injury. The prognosis of survivability is
relatively high, reaching 81 percent of total mice
population, and the condition of neurogenesis was more
evident in mice with higher levels of damaged brain that
could not heal on its own (Bramlett et. al, 2015). Overall,
the efficacy of treatment is rather positive, and I can
expect within the following years to come, to see NSC
engraftment therapy as the tip of the sword in TBI
research and the best clinical solution for all-inclusive
effective treatment.
LIMITATIONS
The scope and overall advances of this treatment do come with a hefty price tag as well
as a very tedious and time consuming treatment pattern. According to Dr. Ross Bullock (2016), his
four year research study will cost his department more than 4.2 million dollars and more than 25
clinical staff at The University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. Additionally, Neural Stem
Cell engraftment techniques only work under strict conditions. If these conditions were not met
during the treatment process, than exacerbation of the condition would ensue and more harm
would be done then actual good (Bullock, Dietrich & Gajavelli, 2016). Optimal location site,
maximum amount of tissue engraftment, secondary injuries, blood type, clotting factors, time
window, and highest cellular concentration count must all be met prior to making neural stem
cells or neural progenitor cell therapy a viable treatment option.
Potential Peer Review Journals For
Publication
- Journal of Neurotrauma
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
CONCLUSION
All impactful models appeared to possess significant clinical relevance as related
to the histopathological presence of a region of NSC surrounding the lesion during
engraftment procedures. The efficacy of NSC engraftment treatment was available due to the
injection of CA20, an FDA approved drug that helps facilitate anti-inflammatory responses
within the brain, thus positioning the brain to receive NSC treatment at its most efficient
peak during the latent moments of cell recuperation. This proves that following TBI, repair
mechanisms do exist when cognitive function in damaged brain is apparent, especially when
the brain is induced with a steady rate of NSC and CA20 compound in order to proliferate
the existence of neurons even when such high injury sites are localized (Bramlett et. al,
2015). Within my research I was able to visually quantify the appearance of neural cell death
of a PBBI induced rat brain, one was parifinated sample (control group) was compared to a 6
week infused NSC tissue sample (experimental group). After my experimental analysis was
conducted, I could with a 95 percent confidence say that NSC engraftment treatment did in
fact halt the secondary effects of PBBI, most notably, that of neural cell apoptosis. When
injecting NSC on unhealthy tissue in live rat samples, areas where glucose metabolism was
at its lowest meant higher portions of neurogenesis which correlated to the higher areas of
NSC around the surrounding tissue.
REFERENCES
Atkins, C., Gajavelli, S., Herdeen, B. (2016). Review of collected works for Veteran Affairs: Transplantation of Neural Stem Cells to Modulate
and Aid in the Effects of Cognitive Impairments in Military Personnel. Miami Project to Cure Paralysis. Department of
Veterans Affairs Medical Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. Published on January 2016.
Bramlett, H., Bullock, R., Diaz, J., Gajavelli, S., Jackson, C., Spurlock, M., et al. (2015). Penetrating Ballistic Brain Injury Systems and
Methodology: A hippocampal regenerative effect study in a rat model. Miami Project to Cure Paralysis, Department of
Neurosurgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. Published on June 2015.
Bullock, R., Dietrich, WD., Gajavelli, S. (2016). Penetrating Ballistic Brain Injury Systems and
Methodology: Optimal maximal engraftment
of human NSC’s via surgical intervention or localized therapy injection. Miami Project to Cure Paralysis, Department
of Neurosurgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine. Published on February 2016.
Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Traumatic Brain Injury.
Retrieved January 29, 2016, from http://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/get_the_facts.html
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke. (2016). Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain
Injury. Published on January 2015. Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/tbi/detailtbi.htm
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
