| 1. |
- Abelev, Betty, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-range angular correlations on the near and away side in p-Pb collisions at root S-NN=5.02 TeV
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Physics Letters. Section B: Nuclear, Elementary Particle and High-Energy Physics. - : Elsevier BV. - 0370-2693. ; 719:1-3, s. 29-41
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Angular correlations between charged trigger and associated particles are measured by the ALICE detector in p-Pb collisions at a nucleon-nucleon centre-of-mass energy of 5.02 TeV for transverse momentum ranges within 0.5 < P-T,P-assoc < P-T,P-trig < 4 GeV/c. The correlations are measured over two units of pseudorapidity and full azimuthal angle in different intervals of event multiplicity, and expressed as associated yield per trigger particle. Two long-range ridge-like structures, one on the near side and one on the away side, are observed when the per-trigger yield obtained in low-multiplicity events is subtracted from the one in high-multiplicity events. The excess on the near-side is qualitatively similar to that recently reported by the CMS Collaboration, while the excess on the away-side is reported for the first time. The two-ridge structure projected onto azimuthal angle is quantified with the second and third Fourier coefficients as well as by near-side and away-side yields and widths. The yields on the near side and on the away side are equal within the uncertainties for all studied event multiplicity and p(T) bins, and the widths show no significant evolution with event multiplicity or p(T). These findings suggest that the near-side ridge is accompanied by an essentially identical away-side ridge. (c) 2013 CERN. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Maas, Andrew I R, et al.
(författare)
-
Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) : a prospective longitudinal observational study
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Neurosurgery. - 0148-396X .- 1524-4040. ; 76:1, s. 67-80
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Current classification of traumatic brain injury (TBI) is suboptimal, and management is based on weak evidence, with little attempt to personalize treatment. A need exists for new precision medicine and stratified management approaches that incorporate emerging technologies.OBJECTIVE: To improve characterization and classification of TBI and to identify best clinical care, using comparative effectiveness research approaches.METHODS: This multicenter, longitudinal, prospective, observational study in 22 countries across Europe and Israel will collect detailed data from 5400 consenting patients, presenting within 24 hours of injury, with a clinical diagnosis of TBI and an indication for computed tomography. Broader registry-level data collection in approximately 20,000 patients will assess generalizability. Cross sectional comprehensive outcome assessments, including quality of life and neuropsychological testing, will be performed at 6 months. Longitudinal assessments will continue up to 24 months post TBI in patient subsets. Advanced neuroimaging and genomic and biomarker data will be used to improve characterization, and analyses will include neuroinformatics approaches to address variations in process and clinical care. Results will be integrated with living systematic reviews in a process of knowledge transfer. The study initiation was from October to December 2014, and the recruitment period was for 18 to 24 months.EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in TBI should provide novel multidimensional approaches to TBI characterization and classification, evidence to support treatment recommendations, and benchmarks for quality of care. Data and sample repositories will ensure opportunities for legacy research.DISCUSSION: Comparative effectiveness research provides an alternative to reductionistic clinical trials in restricted patient populations by exploiting differences in biology, care, and outcome to support optimal personalized patient management.
|
|
| 3. |
- Timmers, Marjolein, et al.
(författare)
-
How do 66 European institutional review boards approve one protocol for an international prospective observational study on traumatic brain injury? : Experiences from the CENTER-TBI study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: BMC Medical Ethics. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1472-6939. ; 21:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The European Union (EU) aims to optimize patient protection and efficiency of health-care research by harmonizing procedures across Member States. Nonetheless, further improvements are required to increase multicenter research efficiency. We investigated IRB procedures in a large prospective European multicenter study on traumatic brain injury (TBI), aiming to inform and stimulate initiatives to improve efficiency.Methods: We reviewed relevant documents regarding IRB submission and IRB approval from European neurotrauma centers participating in the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI). Documents included detailed information on IRB procedures and the duration from IRB submission until approval(s). They were translated and analyzed to determine the level of harmonization of IRB procedures within Europe.Results: From 18 countries, 66 centers provided the requested documents. The primary IRB review was conducted centrally (N = 11, 61%) or locally (N = 7, 39%) and primary IRB approval was obtained after one (N = 8, 44%), two (N = 6, 33%) or three (N = 4, 23%) review rounds with a median duration of respectively 50 and 98 days until primary IRB approval. Additional IRB approval was required in 55% of countries and could increase duration to 535 days. Total duration from submission until required IRB approval was obtained was 114 days (IQR 75–224) and appeared to be shorter after submission to local IRBs compared to central IRBs (50 vs. 138 days, p = 0.0074).Conclusion: We found variation in IRB procedures between and within European countries. There were differences in submission and approval requirements, number of review rounds and total duration. Research collaborations could benefit from the implementation of more uniform legislation and regulation while acknowledging local cultural habits and moral values between countries.
|
|
