从神经学到肿瘤学:自闭症和癌症有什么共同之处?致癌基因,免疫系统和微生物群的作用

M. Ruggiero, S. Pacini
{"title":"从神经学到肿瘤学:自闭症和癌症有什么共同之处?致癌基因,免疫系统和微生物群的作用","authors":"M. Ruggiero, S. Pacini","doi":"10.15406/jnsk.2018.08.00303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Comparison between the criteria for autism and cancer diagnosis evidences that autism is defined by a set of non-objective symptoms, whereas cancer is defined by a number of objective criteria ranging from histology to molecular biology. In addition, if the criteria for the diagnosis of cancer are relatively straightforward and there is national and international consensus on the assessment of severity and progression of the disease through staging and grading, the diagnosis of autism is still subjected to periodical revisions and, in the United States, there is not even uniformity in the criteria for diagnosis between the different States of the Union.3 Also, the interest for the two diseases appears to be very different and such a difference is present both in the general public and specialized researchers. Thus, the search engine Google Trends evidences that the interest over time for searches for “autism” is, on average, 8, whereas the interest for cancer is 72, and this trend appears to be rather constant since the inception of the system in the year 2004 (according to Google, “the numbers for ‘interest over time’ represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart for the given region and time. A value of 100 is the peak popularity for the term. A value of 50 means that the term is half as popular. Likewise, a score of zero means the term was less than 1% as popular as the peak”). In the area of peer-reviewed papers retrievable from the database PubMed, such a difference is even more evident. A search for “autism” performed at the end of 2017 yielded about 40,000 papers with an exponential rise in the past 17 years. A search for “cancer” performed the same day, yielded about 3.5 million papers with a steady growth for the past 40 years. These simple observation may be interpreted in a number of ways that are not necessarily mutually exclusive.","PeriodicalId":106839,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Neurology and Stroke","volume":"31 16","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From neurology to oncology: what have in common autism and cancer? the role of oncogenes, immune system and microbiota\",\"authors\":\"M. Ruggiero, S. Pacini\",\"doi\":\"10.15406/jnsk.2018.08.00303\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Comparison between the criteria for autism and cancer diagnosis evidences that autism is defined by a set of non-objective symptoms, whereas cancer is defined by a number of objective criteria ranging from histology to molecular biology. In addition, if the criteria for the diagnosis of cancer are relatively straightforward and there is national and international consensus on the assessment of severity and progression of the disease through staging and grading, the diagnosis of autism is still subjected to periodical revisions and, in the United States, there is not even uniformity in the criteria for diagnosis between the different States of the Union.3 Also, the interest for the two diseases appears to be very different and such a difference is present both in the general public and specialized researchers. Thus, the search engine Google Trends evidences that the interest over time for searches for “autism” is, on average, 8, whereas the interest for cancer is 72, and this trend appears to be rather constant since the inception of the system in the year 2004 (according to Google, “the numbers for ‘interest over time’ represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart for the given region and time. A value of 100 is the peak popularity for the term. A value of 50 means that the term is half as popular. Likewise, a score of zero means the term was less than 1% as popular as the peak”). In the area of peer-reviewed papers retrievable from the database PubMed, such a difference is even more evident. A search for “autism” performed at the end of 2017 yielded about 40,000 papers with an exponential rise in the past 17 years. A search for “cancer” performed the same day, yielded about 3.5 million papers with a steady growth for the past 40 years. These simple observation may be interpreted in a number of ways that are not necessarily mutually exclusive.\",\"PeriodicalId\":106839,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Neurology and Stroke\",\"volume\":\"31 16\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Neurology and Stroke\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15406/jnsk.2018.08.00303\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Neurology and Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15406/jnsk.2018.08.00303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

自闭症和癌症诊断标准的比较表明,自闭症是由一组非客观症状来定义的,而癌症是由一些从组织学到分子生物学的客观标准来定义的。此外,如果癌症的诊断标准相对简单,并且在通过分期和分级评估疾病的严重程度和进展方面有国内和国际共识,那么自闭症的诊断仍然需要定期修订,在美国,美国不同州之间的诊断标准甚至没有统一。对这两种疾病的兴趣似乎非常不同,这种差异在普通公众和专业研究人员中都存在。因此,搜索引擎Google Trends证明,搜索“自闭症”的兴趣平均为8,而对癌症的兴趣为72,自2004年该系统成立以来,这一趋势似乎相当稳定(根据Google的说法,“‘兴趣随时间变化’的数字代表了与给定地区和时间图表上最高点相关的搜索兴趣。”值为100是该术语的最高流行度。数值为50表示该术语的受欢迎程度降低了一半。同样,0分意味着该术语的受欢迎程度不及峰值的1%。”在PubMed数据库中可检索的同行评议论文领域,这种差异甚至更为明显。2017年底对“自闭症”进行的搜索产生了大约4万篇论文,在过去的17年里呈指数级增长。在同一天对“癌症”进行搜索,可以得到大约350万篇论文,并且在过去40年里稳步增长。这些简单的观察结果可以用多种方式来解释,而这些方式不一定是相互排斥的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
From neurology to oncology: what have in common autism and cancer? the role of oncogenes, immune system and microbiota
Comparison between the criteria for autism and cancer diagnosis evidences that autism is defined by a set of non-objective symptoms, whereas cancer is defined by a number of objective criteria ranging from histology to molecular biology. In addition, if the criteria for the diagnosis of cancer are relatively straightforward and there is national and international consensus on the assessment of severity and progression of the disease through staging and grading, the diagnosis of autism is still subjected to periodical revisions and, in the United States, there is not even uniformity in the criteria for diagnosis between the different States of the Union.3 Also, the interest for the two diseases appears to be very different and such a difference is present both in the general public and specialized researchers. Thus, the search engine Google Trends evidences that the interest over time for searches for “autism” is, on average, 8, whereas the interest for cancer is 72, and this trend appears to be rather constant since the inception of the system in the year 2004 (according to Google, “the numbers for ‘interest over time’ represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart for the given region and time. A value of 100 is the peak popularity for the term. A value of 50 means that the term is half as popular. Likewise, a score of zero means the term was less than 1% as popular as the peak”). In the area of peer-reviewed papers retrievable from the database PubMed, such a difference is even more evident. A search for “autism” performed at the end of 2017 yielded about 40,000 papers with an exponential rise in the past 17 years. A search for “cancer” performed the same day, yielded about 3.5 million papers with a steady growth for the past 40 years. These simple observation may be interpreted in a number of ways that are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Neuromeningeal cryptococcosis in HIV-infected patients in Lubumbashi, Democratic Republic of the Congo Beware of cryptococcomas when treating Cryptococcal meningitis Commitment to activities and quality of life and associated factors in patients with chronic pain Thrombolysis and thrombectomy to treat acute ischemic stroke in Vietnam Intramedullary stabbing spinal cord injury: Perioperative optimized management for a successful surgical outcome
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1