| 1. |
- Aad, G, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2015
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Sumaila, U. Rashid, et al.
(författare)
-
WTO must ban harmful fisheries subsidies
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 374:6567, s. 544-544
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Djoussé, L, et al.
(författare)
-
Interaction of normal and expanded CAG repeat sizes influences age at onset of Huntington disease.
- 2003
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Medical Genetics. Part A. - : Wiley. - 1552-4825 .- 1552-4833. ; 119A:3, s. 279-82
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Huntington disease (HD) is a neurodegenerative disorder caused by the abnormal expansion of CAG repeats in the HD gene on chromosome 4p16.3. Past studies have shown that the size of expanded CAG repeat is inversely associated with age at onset (AO) of HD. It is not known whether the normal Huntington allele size influences the relation between the expanded repeat and AO of HD. Data collected from two independent cohorts were used to test the hypothesis that the unexpanded CAG repeat interacts with the expanded CAG repeat to influence AO of HD. In the New England Huntington Disease Center Without Walls (NEHD) cohort of 221 HD affected persons and in the HD-MAPS cohort of 533 HD affected persons, we found evidence supporting an interaction between the expanded and unexpanded CAG repeat sizes which influences AO of HD (P = 0.08 and 0.07, respectively). The association was statistically significant when both cohorts were combined (P = 0.012). The estimated heritability of the AO residual was 0.56 after adjustment for normal and expanded repeats and their interaction. An analysis of tertiles of repeats sizes revealed that the effect of the normal allele is seen among persons with large HD repeat sizes (47-83). These findings suggest that an increase in the size of the normal repeat may mitigate the expression of the disease among HD affected persons with large expanded CAG repeats.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Holmer, H., et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluating the collection, comparability and findings of six global surgery indicators
- 2019
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Surgery. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0007-1323 .- 1365-2168. ; 106:2, s. 138-150
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In 2015, six indicators were proposed to evaluate global progress towards access to safe, affordable and timely surgical and anaesthesia care. Although some have been adopted as core global health indicators, none has been evaluated systematically. The aims of this study were to assess the availability, comparability and utility of the indicators, and to present available data and updated estimates. Methods: Nationally representative data were compiled for all WHO member states from 2010 to 2016 through contacts with official bodies and review of the published and grey literature, and available databases. Availability, comparability and utility were assessed for each indicator: access to timely essential surgery, specialist surgical workforce density, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and protection against impoverishing and catastrophic expenditure. Where feasible, imputation models were developed to generate global estimates. Results: Of all WHO member states, 19 had data on the proportion of the population within 2h of a surgical facility, 154 had data on workforce density, 72 reported number of procedures, and nine had perioperative mortality data, but none could report data on catastrophic or impoverishing expenditure. Comparability and utility were variable, and largely dependent on different definitions used. There were sufficient data to estimate that worldwide, in 2015, there were 2 038 947 (i.q.r. 1 884 916–2 281 776) surgeons, obstetricians and anaesthetists, and 266·1 (95 per cent c.i. 220·1 to 344·4) million operations performed. Conclusion: Surgical and anaesthesia indicators are increasingly being adopted by the global health community, but data availability remains low. Comparability and utility for all indicators require further resolution.
|
|
