| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Adam, A, et al.
(författare)
-
Abstracts from Hydrocephalus 2016.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Fluids and Barriers of the CNS. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 2045-8118. ; 14:Suppl 1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)
|
|
| 5. |
- Delios, A., et al.
(författare)
-
Examining the generalizability of research findings from archival data
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. - : Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. - 0027-8424 .- 1091-6490. ; 119:30
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This initiative examined systematically the extent to which a large set of archival research findings generalizes across contexts. We repeated the key analyses for 29 original strategic management effects in the same context (direct reproduction) as well as in 52 novel time periods and geographies; 45% of the reproductions returned results matching the original reports together with 55% of tests in different spans of years and 40% of tests in novel geographies. Some original findings were associated with multiple new tests. Reproducibility was the best predictor of generalizability-for the findings that proved directly reproducible, 84% emerged in other available time periods and 57% emerged in other geographies. Overall, only limited empirical evidence emerged for context sensitivity. In a forecasting survey, independent scientists were able to anticipate which effects would find support in tests in new samples.
|
|
| 6. |
- Bernal, Ximena E., et al.
(författare)
-
Empowering Latina scientists
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Science. - : American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 363:6429, s. 825-826
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Sanabria, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Remote Patient Monitoring Program in Automated Peritoneal Dialysis: Impact on Hospitalizations
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Peritoneal dialysis international : journal of the International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis. - : SAGE Publications. - 1718-4304 .- 0896-8608. ; 39:5, s. 472-478
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is a growing PD modality but as with other home dialysis methods, the lack of monitoring of patients’ adherence to prescriptions is a limitation with potential negative impact on clinical outcome parameters. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) allowing the clinical team to have access to dialysis data and adjust the treatment may overcome this limitation. The present study sought to determine clinical outcomes associated with RPM use in incident patients on APD therapy. Methods A retrospective cohort study included 360 patients with a mean age of 57 years (diabetes 42.5%) initiating APD between 1 October 2016 and 30 June 2017 in 28 Baxter Renal Care Services (BRCS) units in Colombia. An RPM program was used in 65 (18%) of the patients (APD-RPM cohort), and 295 (82%) were treated with APD without RPM. Hospitalizations and hospital days were recorded over 1 year. Propensity score matching 1:1, yielding 63 individuals in each group, was used to evaluate the association of RPM exposure with numbers of hospitalizations and hospital days. Results After propensity score matching, APD therapy with RPM ( n = 63) compared with APD-without RPM ( n = 63) was associated with significant reductions in hospitalization rate (0.36 fewer hospitalizations per patient-year; incidence rate ratio [IRR] of 0.61 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 – 0.95]; p = 0.029) and hospitalization days (6.57 fewer days per patient-year; IRR 0.46 [95% CI 0.23 – 0.92]; p = 0.028). Conclusions The use of RPM in APD patients is associated with lower hospitalization rates and fewer hospitalization days; RPM could constitute a tool for improvement of APD therapy.
|
|
| 9. |
- Buitrago-Garcia, Diana, et al.
(författare)
-
Occurrence and transmission potential of asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections : Update of a living systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: PLoS Medicine. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1549-1277 .- 1549-1676. ; 19:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Debate about the level of asymptomatic Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection continues. The amount of evidence is increasing and study designs have changed over time. We updated a living systematic review to address 3 questions: (1) Among people who become infected with SARS-CoV-2, what proportion does not experience symptoms at all during their infection? (2) What is the infectiousness of asymptomatic and presymptomatic, compared with symptomatic, SARS-CoV-2 infection? (3) What proportion of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in a population is accounted for by people who are asymptomatic or presymptomatic?Methods and findings: The protocol was first published on 1 April 2020 and last updated on 18 June 2021. We searched PubMed, Embase, bioRxiv, and medRxiv, aggregated in a database of SARS-CoV-2 literature, most recently on 6 July 2021. Studies of people with PCR-diagnosed SARS-CoV-2, which documented symptom status at the beginning and end of follow-up, or mathematical modelling studies were included. Studies restricted to people already diagnosed, of single individuals or families, or without sufficient follow-up were excluded. One reviewer extracted data and a second verified the extraction, with disagreement resolved by discussion or a third reviewer. Risk of bias in empirical studies was assessed with a bespoke checklist and modelling studies with a published checklist. All data syntheses were done using random effects models. Review question (1): We included 130 studies. Heterogeneity was high so we did not estimate a mean proportion of asymptomatic infections overall (interquartile range (IQR) 14% to 50%, prediction interval 2% to 90%), or in 84 studies based on screening of defined populations (IQR 20% to 65%, prediction interval 4% to 94%). In 46 studies based on contact or outbreak investigations, the summary proportion asymptomatic was 19% (95% confidence interval (CI) 15% to 25%, prediction interval 2% to 70%). (2) The secondary attack rate in contacts of people with asymptomatic infection compared with symptomatic infection was 0.32 (95% CI 0.16 to 0.64, prediction interval 0.11 to 0.95, 8 studies). (3) In 13 modelling studies fit to data, the proportion of all SARS-CoV-2 transmission from presymptomatic individuals was higher than from asymptomatic individuals. Limitations of the evidence include high heterogeneity and high risks of selection and information bias in studies that were not designed to measure persistently asymptomatic infection, and limited information about variants of concern or in people who have been vaccinated.Conclusions: Based on studies published up to July 2021, most SARS-CoV-2 infections were not persistently asymptomatic, and asymptomatic infections were less infectious than symptomatic infections. Summary estimates from meta-analysis may be misleading when variability between studies is extreme and prediction intervals should be presented. Future studies should determine the asymptomatic proportion of SARS-CoV-2 infections caused by variants of concern and in people with immunity following vaccination or previous infection. Without prospective longitudinal studies with methods that minimise selection and measurement biases, further updates with the study types included in this living systematic review are unlikely to be able to provide a reliable summary estimate of the proportion of asymptomatic infections caused by SARS-CoV-2.
|
|
| 10. |
- Buitrago-Téllez, C. H., et al.
(författare)
-
A comprehensive classification of mandibular fractures : a preliminary agreement validation study
- 2008
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery. - : Elsevier BV. - 0901-5027 .- 1399-0020. ; 37:12, s. 1080-8
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study evaluates a comprehensive classification system for mandibular fractures based on imaging analysis. The AO/ASIF scheme, defining three fracture types (A, B, C), three groups within each type (e.g. A1, A2, A3) and three subgroups within each group (e.g. A1.1, A1.2, A1.3) with increasing severity from A1.1 (lowest) to C3.3 (highest) was used. The mandible is divided into two vertical units (I and V), two lateral horizontal units (II and IV) and one central unit (III) comprising the symphyseal and parasymphyseal region. Type A fractures are non-displaced, type B are displaced and type C are multifragmentary/defect injuries. Groups and subgroups are further defined in the classification system. Two classification sessions using semi-automatic software with 7 and 9 surgeons were performed to evaluate 100 fracture cases in the first session and 50 in the second. Inter-observer reliability and individual rater's accuracy were evaluated by kappa coefficient and latent class analysis, respectively. The analysis of inter-observer agreement for the detailed coding showed kappa coefficients around 0.50 with higher agreement among raters in the vertical units. This system allows standardization of documentation of mandibular fractures, although improvement in the definition of categories and their application is required.
|
|
