| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Abazov, V. M., et al.
(författare)
-
The upgraded DO detector
- 2006
-
Ingår i: Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A. - : Elsevier BV. - 0168-9002 .- 1872-9576. ; 565:2, s. 463-537
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The DO experiment enjoyed a very successful data-collection run at the Fermilab Tevatron collider between 1992 and 1996. Since then, the detector has been upgraded to take advantage of improvements to the Tevatron and to enhance its physics capabilities. We describe the new elements of the detector, including the silicon microstrip tracker, central fiber tracker, solenoidal magnet, preshower detectors, forward muon detector, and forward proton detector. The uranium/liquid -argon calorimeters and central muon detector, remaining from Run 1, are discussed briefly. We also present the associated electronics, triggering, and data acquisition systems, along with the design and implementation of software specific to DO.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
|
|
| 12. |
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
- Jonkman, Nini H., et al.
(författare)
-
Do self-management interventions work in patients with heart failure? An individual patient data meta-analysis
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 133:12, s. 1189-1198
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: -Self-management interventions are widely implemented in care for patients with heart failure (HF). Trials however show inconsistent results and whether specific patient groups respond differently is unknown. This individual patient data meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of self-management interventions in HF patients and whether subgroups of patients respond differently.METHODS AND RESULTS: -Systematic literature search identified randomized trials of self-management interventions. Data of twenty studies, representing 5624 patients, were included and analyzed using mixed effects models and Cox proportional-hazard models including interaction terms. Self-management interventions reduced risk of time to the combined endpoint HF-related hospitalization or all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.89), time to HF-related hospitalization (HR, 0.80; 95%CI, 0.69-0.92), and improved 12-month HF-related quality of life (standardized mean difference 0.15; 95%CI, 0.00-0.30). Subgroup analysis revealed a protective effect of self-management on number of HF-related hospital days in patients <65 years (mean number of days 0.70 days vs. 5.35 days; interaction p=0.03). Patients without depression did not show an effect of self-management on survival (HR for all-cause mortality, 0.86; 95%CI, 0.69-1.06), while in patients with moderate/severe depression self-management reduced survival (HR, 1.39; 95%CI, 1.06-1.83, interaction p=0.01).CONCLUSIONS: -This study shows that self-management interventions had a beneficial effect on time to HF-related hospitalization or all-cause death, HF-related hospitalization alone, and elicited a small increase in HF-related quality of life. The findings do not endorse limiting self-management interventions to subgroups of HF patients, but increased mortality in depressed patients warrants caution in applying self-management strategies in these patients.
|
|
| 19. |
- Jonkman, Nini H., et al.
(författare)
-
What Are Effective Program Characteristics of Self-Management Interventions in Patients With Heart Failure? : An Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Cardiac Failure. - : Elsevier BV. - 1071-9164 .- 1532-8414. ; 22:11, s. 861-871
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background To identify those characteristics of self-management interventions in patients with heart failure (HF) that are effective in influencing health-related quality of life, mortality, and hospitalizations.Methods and Results Randomized trials on self-management interventions conducted between January 1985 and June 2013 were identified and individual patient data were requested for meta-analysis. Generalized mixed effects models and Cox proportional hazard models including frailty terms were used to assess the relation between characteristics of interventions and health-related outcomes. Twenty randomized trials (5624 patients) were included. Longer intervention duration reduced mortality risk (hazard ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97–0.999 per month increase in duration), risk of HF-related hospitalization (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.96–0.99), and HF-related hospitalization at 6 months (risk ratio 0.96, 95% CI 0.92–0.995). Although results were not consistent across outcomes, interventions comprising standardized training of interventionists, peer contact, log keeping, or goal-setting skills appeared less effective than interventions without these characteristics.Conclusion No specific program characteristics were consistently associated with better effects of self-management interventions, but longer duration seemed to improve the effect of self-management interventions on several outcomes. Future research using factorial trial designs and process evaluations is needed to understand the working mechanism of specific program characteristics of self-management interventions in HF patients.
|
|
| 20. |
- Klionsky, Daniel J., et al.
(författare)
-
Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Autophagy. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1554-8635 .- 1554-8627. ; 8:4, s. 445-544
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
|
|
