Emily Henderson

Dr. Emily Henderson

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
17 January 2019 in International Journal of Obesity
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CVChristina Vogel
Christina Vogel
SZStephen Zwolinsky
Stephen Zwolinsky
CGClaire Griffiths
Claire Griffiths
MHMatthew Hobbs
Matthew Hobbs
EHEmily Henderson
Emily Henderson
EWEmma Wilkins
Emma Wilkins
Background ‘Big data’ has great potential to help address the global health challenge of obesity. However, lack of clarity with regard to the definition of big data and frameworks for effectively using big data in the context of obesity research may be hindering progress. The aim of this study was to establish agreed approaches for the use of big data in obesity-related research. Methods A Delphi method of consensus development was used, comprising three survey rounds. In Round 1, participants were asked to rate agreement/disagreement with 77 statements across seven domains relating to definitions of, and approaches to, using big data in the context of obesity research. Participants were also asked to contribute further ideas in relation to these topics, which were incorporated as new statements (n = 8) in Round 2. In Rounds 2 and 3 participants re-appraised their ratings in view of the group consensus. Results Ninety-six experts active in obesity-related research were invited to participate. Of these, 36/96 completed Round 1 (37.5% response rate), 29/36 completed Round 2 (80.6% response rate) and 26/29 completed Round 3 (89.7% response rate). Consensus (defined as > 70% agreement) was achieved for 90.6% (n = 77) of statements, with 100% consensus achieved for the Definition of Big Data, Data Governance, and Quality and Inference domains. Conclusions Experts agreed that big data was more nuanced than the oft-cited definition of ‘volume, variety and velocity’, and includes quantitative, qualitative, observational or intervention data from a range of sources that have been collected for research or other purposes. Experts repeatedly called for third party action, for example to develop frameworks for reporting and ethics, to clarify data governance requirements, to support training and skill development and to facilitate sharing of big data. Further advocacy will be required to encourage organisations to adopt these roles.

1 March 2016 in The Lancet Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
EHEmily Henderson
Emily Henderson
SLStephen Lord
Stephen Lord
MBMatthew Andrew Brodie
Matthew Andrew Brodie
DGDaisy M Gaunt
Daisy M Gaunt
ALAndrew D Lawrence
Andrew D Lawrence
YBY Ben-Shlomo
Y Ben-Shlomo
Falls are a frequent and serious complication of Parkinson's disease and are related partly to an underlying cholinergic deficit that contributes to gait and cognitive dysfunction in these patients. Gait dysfunction can lead to an increased variability of gait from one step to another, raising the likelihood of falls. In the ReSPonD trial we aimed to assess whether ameliorating this cholinergic deficit with the acetylcholinesterase inhibitor rivastigmine would reduce gait variability. We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial at the North Bristol NHS Trust Hospital, Bristol, UK, in patients with Parkinson's disease recruited from community and hospital settings in the UK. We included patients who had fallen at least once in the year before enrolment, were able to walk 18 m without an aid, had no previous exposure to an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor, and did not have dementia. Our clinical trials unit randomly assigned (1:1) patients to oral rivastigmine or placebo capsules (both taken twice a day) using a computer-generated randomisation sequence and web-based allocation. Rivastigmine was uptitrated from 3 mg per day to the target dose of 12 mg per day over 12 weeks. Both the trial team and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Masking was achieved with matched placebo capsules and a dummy uptitration schedule. The primary endpoint was difference in step time variability between the two groups at 32 weeks, adjusted for baseline age, cognition, step time variability, and number of falls in the previous year. We measured step time variability with a triaxial accelerometer during an 18 m walking task in three conditions: normal walking, simple dual task with phonemic verbal fluency (walking while naming words beginning with a single letter), and complex dual task switching with phonemic verbal fluency (walking while naming words, alternating between two letters of the alphabet). Analysis was by modified intention to treat; we excluded from the primary analysis patients who withdrew, died, or did not attend the 32 week assessment. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 19880883. Between Oct 4, 2012 and March 28, 2013, we enrolled 130 patients and randomly assigned 65 to the rivastigmine group and 65 to the placebo group. At week 32, compared with patients assigned to placebo (59 assessed), those assigned to rivastigmine (55 assessed) had improved step time variability for normal walking (ratio of geometric means 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.88; p=0.002) and the simple dual task (0.79; 0.62-0.99; p=0.045). Improvements in step time variability for the complex dual task did not differ between groups (0.81, 0.60-1.09; p=0.17). Gastrointestinal side-effects were more common in the rivastigmine group than in the placebo group (p<0.0001); 20 (31%) patients in the rivastigmine group versus three (5%) in the placebo group had nausea and 15 (17%) versus three (5%) had vomiting. Rivastigmine can improve gait stability and might reduce the frequency of falls. A phase 3 study is needed to confirm these findings and show cost-effectiveness of rivastigmine treatment. Parkinson's UK.

25 May 2020 in The Lancet Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
BBBas R. Bloem
Bas R. Bloem
EHEmily Henderson
Emily Henderson
EDE Ray Dorsey
E Ray Dorsey
MOMichael S Okun
Michael S Okun
NONjideka Okubadejo
Njideka Okubadejo
MMMarten Munneke
Marten Munneke

6 May 2020 in Age and Ageing
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
FLFiona Lithander
Fiona Lithander
SNSandra Neumann
Sandra Neumann
ETEmma Tenison
Emma Tenison
KLKatherine Lloyd
Katherine Lloyd
TWTomas J Welsh
Tomas J Welsh
EHEmily Henderson
Emily Henderson
Introduction: the COVID-19 pandemic poses a high risk to older people. The aim of this article is to provide a rapid overview of the COVID-19 literature, with a specific focus on older adults. We frame our findings within an overview of the disease and have also evaluated the inclusion of older people within forthcoming clinical trials. Methods: we searched PubMed and bioRxiv/medRxiv to identify English language papers describing the testing, treatment and prognosis of COVID-19. PubMed and bioRxiv/medRxiv searches took place on 20 and 24 March 2020, respectively. Results: screening of over 1,100 peer-reviewed and pre-print papers yielded n = 22 on COVID-19 testing, n = 15 on treatment and n = 13 on prognosis. Viral polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and serology are the mainstays of testing, but a positive diagnosis may be increasingly supported by radiological findings. The current evidence for the effectiveness of antiviral, corticosteroid and immunotherapies is inconclusive, although trial data are largely based on younger people. In addition to age, male gender and comorbidities, specific laboratory and radiology findings are important prognostic factors. Evidence suggests that social distancing policies could have important negative consequences, particularly if in place for an extended period. Conclusion: given the established association between increasing age and poor prognosis in COVID-19, we anticipate that this rapid review of the current and emergent evidence might form a basis on which future work can be established. Exclusion of older people, particularly those with comorbidities, from clinical trials is well recognised and is potentially being perpetuated in the field of current COVID-19 research.

7 January 2019 in Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DRDanique L. M. Radder
Danique L. M. Radder
NVNienke M. de Vries
Nienke M. de Vries
NRNiels P. Riksen
Niels P. Riksen
SDSarah J. Diamond
Sarah J. Diamond
DGDitza Gross
Ditza Gross
BBBas R. Bloem
Bas R. Bloem
Introduction: Parkinson’s disease (PD) is a chronic multisystem disorder that causes a wide variety of motor and non-motor symptoms. Over time, the progressive nature of the disease increases the risk of complications such as falls and loss of independence, having a profound impact on quality of life. The complexity and heterogeneity of symptoms therefore warrant a holistic, multidisciplinary approach. Specific healthcare professionals, e.g. the movement disorders neurologist and the PD nurse specialist, are considered essential members of this multidisciplinary team. However, with our increasing knowledge about different aspects of the disease, other disciplines are also being recognized as important contributors to the healthcare team. Areas covered: The authors describe a selection of these relatively newly-recognized disciplines, including the specialist in vascular medicine, gastroenterologist, pulmonologist, neuro-ophthalmologist, urologist, geriatrician/elderly care physician, palliative care specialist and the dentist. Furthermore, they share the view of a person with PD on how patients and caregivers should be involved in the multidisciplinary team. Finally, they have included a perspective on the new role of the movement disorder neurologist, with care delivery via “tele-neurology”. Expert commentary: Increased awareness about the potential role of these ‘new’ professionals will further improve disease management and quality of life of PD patients.

27 April 2022 in Sensors
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ACAnisha Cullen
Anisha Cullen
MMMd Khadimul Anam Mazhar
Md Khadimul Anam Mazhar
MSMatthew D. Smith
Matthew D. Smith
FLFiona Lithander
Fiona Lithander
MBMícheál Ó Breasail
Mícheál Ó Breasail
EHEmily Henderson
Emily Henderson
Dementia is the most common neurodegenerative disorder globally. Disease progression is marked by declining cognitive function accompanied by changes in mobility. Increased sedentary behaviour and, conversely, wandering and becoming lost are common. Global positioning system (GPS) solutions are increasingly used by caregivers to locate missing people with dementia (PwD) but also offer a non-invasive means of monitoring mobility patterns in PwD. We performed a systematic search across five databases to identify papers published since 2000, where wearable or portable GPS was used to monitor mobility in patients with common dementias or mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Disease and GPS-specific vocabulary were searched singly, and then in combination, identifying 3004 papers. Following deduplication, we screened 1972 papers and retained 17 studies after a full-text review. Only 1/17 studies used a wrist-worn GPS solution, while all others were variously located on the patient. We characterised the studies using a conceptual framework, finding marked heterogeneity in the number and complexity of reported GPS-derived mobility outcomes. Duration was the most frequently reported category of mobility reported (15/17), followed by out of home (14/17), and stop and trajectory (both 10/17). Future research would benefit from greater standardisation and harmonisation of reporting which would enable GPS-derived measures of mobility to be incorporated more robustly into clinical trials.