Royal Holloway Research Online
Validation of the Genital Herpes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (GHERPTSQ) in status and change versions
Get PDFThree months’ withdrawal of growth hormone (GH) therapy from GH-deficient adults does not affect cognitive functioning
Get PDFPsychological effects of withdrawal of growth hormone therapy from adults with growth hormone deficiency.
Get PDFObjective: Growth hormone (GH) is known to be required for physical well-being. Whilst it is also widely believed to be important for quality of life (QoL) and psychological health, there is less supportive evidence. The objective of this study was to investigate the psychological effects of discontinuation of GH replacement from adults with severe GH deficiency (GHD).
Design: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which GH replacement therapy was discontinued for 3 months from 12 of 21 GH-deficient adults, where 9 continued with GH replacement.
Patients: GH-treated adults (10 men, 11 women), all with severe GHD (peak GH
Measurements: Semi-structured interviews were given at baseline and end-point plus questionnaires that included a new hormone-deficiency specific, individualised, QoL questionnaire (HDQoL), the General Well-being Index (GWBI), the Well-being Questionnaire (W-BQ12), Short-Form 36 health status questionnaire (SF-36), the Nottingham Health Profile NHP) and the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ).
Results: Three months after baseline the serum total IGF-I of placebo-treated patients fell from normal, age related levels (mean 26.6 ± 13.2 nmol/ L) to levels indicative of severe GHD (11.6 ± 6.6 nmol/ L) (P
Conclusion: Withdrawal of GH-treatment from adults with severe GHD has detrimental psychological effects
A Citation/Co-citation of Research Policy
Get PDFIn this paper bibliometric (co-citation analysis) and social network analysis techniques are used to investigate the intellectual pillars of the literature in Research Policy. We apply a cross-level type of analysis to provide a comprehensive picture of deeper disciplinary roots, long-term subjects and time-varying discourses. In practice, we map the research concerns at the journal, author and publication level which represent disciplines, subjects and themes. By applying this multi-dimensional view we provide insights into hierarchical and interlinked patterns of the evolving scientific discourse. We position dominant subjects around a shared common core of literature and discuss recent changes in themes in relation to possible future work. Last but not least we significantly find evidence for the discipline-spanning as well as integrating effects of the scientific discourse within research policy which justifies its characterization as a discipline of its own
