DOI: 10.5176/2251-1865_CBP14.67
Authors: Dr. Ramanujam Narayanan, MD
Abstract:
Background: A literature search in many research databases, biomedical and scientific alike, yield a rich but infinitely different research articles on the use of mazes and similar instruments in neuropsychological research. But a little less-than-a-thorough literature search for the rationality in the usage of various instruments in pre-clinical and clinical neuro-psychological and psychiatric research shows paucity of its availability, if not scarcity. The same scenario may not hold good for their actual usage in such research evaluations. How can such data be inferred or even used in further research and interpreted for human patient benefit?
Justification: Since rationality of usage is a must-to-fulfill criterion in the interpretation of results of such research evaluations rather than the actual research executions, this meta-analysis focuses on deciphering such rationality and novelty of this usage by using a literature database search for related articles during a short period based purely from the author’s perspective.
Scope: This meta-analysis is of relevance to neuropsychology and cognitive & behavioral psychology in that such systematic reviews would cater to better choose, select, read, appraise, and filter out articles regarding instrument utilization in research, and also additionally extrapolate it to human patients. It will further research in psychology and drug discovery and development process related to behavioral screening.
Objectives: The scope of this meta-analysis will be to evaluate the novelty and rationality in the use and interpretation of such use both in research and patient care. As it is, this would be a subtle but one of the first attempts to this end.
Methodology: The meta-analysis will be done using the cumulative research article search in about the first half of this year (1st January 2013- 31st July 2013) from “pubmed” database using the same keyword “maze” in “pubmed” database. Such articles will be screened for their novelty and appropriateness in patient perspective, which will then be scrutinized and analyzed for their rationality in research and patient care application.
Outcomes: This meta-analysis will be useful in giving recommendation about how to select and critically appraise and interpret such neuropsychological evaluations in research using maze and neurological instrumentation. The study has not considered in-depth the methodologies of each individual research study.
Keywords: maze, cognition, memory, learning, behavioral assessment, exteroceptive cognitive models, procedural memory, research appraisal, behavioral metaanalysis
Updating...