| 1. |
- Thomas, HS, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2019
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 2. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(författare)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Kattge, Jens, et al.
(författare)
-
TRY plant trait database - enhanced coverage and open access
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Global Change Biology. - : Wiley-Blackwell. - 1354-1013 .- 1365-2486. ; 26:1, s. 119-188
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Plant traits-the morphological, anatomical, physiological, biochemical and phenological characteristics of plants-determine how plants respond to environmental factors, affect other trophic levels, and influence ecosystem properties and their benefits and detriments to people. Plant trait data thus represent the basis for a vast area of research spanning from evolutionary biology, community and functional ecology, to biodiversity conservation, ecosystem and landscape management, restoration, biogeography and earth system modelling. Since its foundation in 2007, the TRY database of plant traits has grown continuously. It now provides unprecedented data coverage under an open access data policy and is the main plant trait database used by the research community worldwide. Increasingly, the TRY database also supports new frontiers of trait-based plant research, including the identification of data gaps and the subsequent mobilization or measurement of new data. To support this development, in this article we evaluate the extent of the trait data compiled in TRY and analyse emerging patterns of data coverage and representativeness. Best species coverage is achieved for categorical traits-almost complete coverage for 'plant growth form'. However, most traits relevant for ecology and vegetation modelling are characterized by continuous intraspecific variation and trait-environmental relationships. These traits have to be measured on individual plants in their respective environment. Despite unprecedented data coverage, we observe a humbling lack of completeness and representativeness of these continuous traits in many aspects. We, therefore, conclude that reducing data gaps and biases in the TRY database remains a key challenge and requires a coordinated approach to data mobilization and trait measurements. This can only be achieved in collaboration with other initiatives.
|
|
| 7. |
- Chesnut, Randall, et al.
(författare)
-
A management algorithm for adult patients with both brain oxygen and intracranial pressure monitoring : the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC)
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 46:5, s. 919-929
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Current guidelines for the treatment of adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) consist of high-quality evidence reports, but they are no longer accompanied by management protocols, as these require expert opinion to bridge the gap between published evidence and patient care. We aimed to establish a modern sTBI protocol for adult patients with both intracranial pressure (ICP) and brain oxygen monitors in place.Methods: Our consensus working group consisted of 42 experienced and actively practicing sTBI opinion leaders from six continents. Having previously established a protocol for the treatment of patients with ICP monitoring alone, we addressed patients who have a brain oxygen monitor in addition to an ICP monitor. The management protocols were developed through a Delphi-method-based consensus approach and were finalized at an in-person meeting.Results: We established three distinct treatment protocols, each with three tiers whereby higher tiers involve therapies with higher risk. One protocol addresses the management of ICP elevation when brain oxygenation is normal. A second addresses management of brain hypoxia with normal ICP. The third protocol addresses the situation when both intracranial hypertension and brain hypoxia are present. The panel considered issues pertaining to blood transfusion and ventilator management when designing the different algorithms.Conclusions: These protocols are intended to assist clinicians in the management of patients with both ICP and brain oxygen monitors but they do not reflect either a standard-of-care or a substitute for thoughtful individualized management. These protocols should be used in conjunction with recommendations for basic care, management of critical neuroworsening and weaning treatment recently published in conjunction with the Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference.
|
|
| 8. |
- Chesnut, Randall M., et al.
(författare)
-
Perceived Utility of Intracranial Pressure Monitoring in Traumatic Brain Injury : A Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference Consensus-Based Analysis and Recommendations
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Neurosurgery. - : Oxford University Press. - 0148-396X .- 1524-4040. ; 93:2, s. 399-408
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring is widely practiced, but the indications are incompletely developed, and guidelines are poorly followed. OBJECTIVE: To study the monitoring practices of an established expert panel (the clinical working group from the Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference effort) to examine the match between monitoring guidelines and their clinical decision-making and offer guidance for clinicians considering monitor insertion.METHODS: We polled the 42 Seattle International Brain Injury Consensus Conference panel members' ICP monitoring decisions for virtual patients, using matrices of presenting signs (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] total or GCS motor, pupillary examination, and computed tomography diagnosis). Monitor insertion decisions were yes, no, or unsure (traffic light approach). We analyzed their responses for weighting of the presenting signs in decision-making using univariate regression.RESULTS: Heatmaps constructed from the choices of 41 panel members revealed wider ICP monitor use than predicted by guidelines. Clinical examination (GCS) was by far the most important characteristic and differed from guidelines in being nonlinear. The modified Marshall computed tomography classification was second and pupils third. We constructed a heatmap and listed the main clinical determinants representing 80% ICP monitor insertion consensus for our recommendations.CONCLUSION: Candidacy for ICP monitoring exceeds published indicators for monitor insertion, suggesting the clinical perception that the value of ICP data is greater than simply detecting and monitoring severe intracranial hypertension. Monitor insertion heatmaps are offered as potential guidance for ICP monitor insertion and to stimulate research into what actually drives monitor insertion in unconstrained, real-world conditions.
|
|
| 9. |
- Hamann, Joerg, et al.
(författare)
-
International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. XCIV. Adhesion G Protein-Coupled Receptors
- 2015
-
Ingår i: Pharmacological Reviews. - : American Society for Pharmacology & Experimental Therapeutics (ASPET). - 0031-6997 .- 1521-0081. ; 67:2, s. 338-367
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Adhesion family forms a large branch of the pharmacologically important superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). As Adhesion GPCRs increasingly receive attention from a wide spectrum of biomedical fields, the Adhesion GPCR Consortium, together with the International Union of Basic and Clinical Pharmacology Committee on Receptor Nomenclature and Drug Classification, proposes a unified nomenclature for Adhesion GPCRs. The new names have ADGR as common dominator followed by a letter and a number to denote each subfamily and subtype, respectively. The new names, with old and alternative names within parentheses, are: ADGRA1 (GPR123), ADGRA2 (GPR124), ADGRA3 (GPR125), ADGRB1 (BAI1), ADGRB2 (BAI2), ADGRB3 (BAI3), ADGRC1 (CELSR1), ADGRC2 (CELSR2), ADGRC3 (CELSR3), ADGRD1 (GPR133), ADGRD2 (GPR144), ADGRE1 (EMR1, F4/80), ADGRE2 (EMR2), ADGRE3 (EMR3), ADGRE4 (EMR4), ADGRE5 (CD97), ADGRF1 (GPR110), ADGRF2 (GPR111), ADGRF3 (GPR113), ADGRF4 (GPR115), ADGRF5 (GPR116, Ig-Hepta), ADGRG1 (GPR56), ADGRG2 (GPR64, HE6), ADGRG3 (GPR97), ADGRG4 (GPR112), ADGRG5 (GPR114), ADGRG6 (GPR126), ADGRG7 (GPR128), ADGRL1 (latrophilin-1, CIRL-1, CL1), ADGRL2 (latrophilin-2, CIRL-2, CL2), ADGRL3 (latrophilin-3, CIRL-3, CL3), ADGRL4 (ELTD1, ETL), and ADGRV1 (VLGR1, GPR98). This review covers all major biologic aspects of Adhesion GPCRs, including evolutionary origins, interaction partners, signaling, expression, physiologic functions, and therapeutic potential.
|
|
| 10. |
- Hawryluk, Gregory W. J., et al.
(författare)
-
A management algorithm for patients with intracranial pressure monitoring : the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference (SIBICC)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Intensive Care Medicine. - : Springer. - 0342-4642 .- 1432-1238. ; 45:12, s. 1783-1794
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Management algorithms for adult severe traumatic brain injury (sTBI) were omitted in later editions of the Brain Trauma Foundation's sTBI Management Guidelines, as they were not evidence-based.Methods: We used a Delphi-method-based consensus approach to address management of sTBI patients undergoing intracranial pressure (ICP) monitoring. Forty-two experienced, clinically active sTBI specialists from six continents comprised the panel. Eight surveys iterated queries and comments. An in-person meeting included whole- and small-group discussions and blinded voting. Consensus required 80% agreement. We developed heatmaps based on a traffic-light model where panelists' decision tendencies were the focus of recommendations.Results: We provide comprehensive algorithms for ICP-monitor-based adult sTBI management. Consensus established 18 interventions as fundamental and ten treatments not to be used. We provide a three-tier algorithm for treating elevated ICP. Treatments within a tier are considered empirically equivalent. Higher tiers involve higher risk therapies. Tiers 1, 2, and 3 include 10, 4, and 3 interventions, respectively. We include inter-tier considerations, and recommendations for critical neuroworsening to assist the recognition and treatment of declining patients. Novel elements include guidance for autoregulation-based ICP treatment based on MAP Challenge results, and two heatmaps to guide (1) ICP-monitor removal and (2) consideration of sedation holidays for neurological examination.Conclusions: Our modern and comprehensive sTBI-management protocol is designed to assist clinicians managing sTBI patients monitored with ICP-monitors alone. Consensus-based (class III evidence), it provides management recommendations based on combined expert opinion. It reflects neither a standard-of-care nor a substitute for thoughtful individualized management.
|
|
