| 1. |
- Vassilaras, S., et al.
(författare)
-
The Algorithmic Aspects of Network Slicing
- 2017
-
Ingår i: IEEE Communications Magazine. - : Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). - 0163-6804 .- 1558-1896. ; 55:8, s. 112-119
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Network slicing is a technique for flexible resource provisioning in future wireless networks. With the powerful SDN and NFV technologies available, network slices can be quickly deployed and centrally managed, leading to simplified management, better resource utilization, and cost efficiency by commoditization of resources. Departing from the one-Type-fits-All design philosophy, future wireless networks will employ the network slicing methodology in order to accommodate applications with widely diverse requirements over the same physical network. On the other hand, deciding how to efficiently allocate, manage, and control the slice resources in real time is very challenging. This article focuses on the algorithmic challenges that emerge in efficient network slicing, necessitating novel techniques from the communities of operation research, networking, and computer science.
|
|
| 2. |
- Wagner, W, et al.
(författare)
-
Europe ambivalent on biotechnology
- 1997
-
Ingår i: Nature. - London : Nature Publishing Group. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 387, s. 845-847
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The Eurobarometer on Biotechnology (46.1) was conducted during October and November 1996. The survey conducted in each EU (European Union) country used a multi-stage random sampling procedure and provided a statistically representative sample of national residents aged 15 and over. The total sample within the EU was 16,246 respondents (about 1,000 per EU country). The survey questionnaire was designed by the authors as part of a larger study involving the comparative analysis of public perceptions, media coverage and public policy in relation to biotechnology from 1973 to the present.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kalantar-Zadeh, Kamyar, et al.
(författare)
-
Nomenclature in nephrology : preserving renal and nephro in the glossary of kidney health and disease
- 2021
-
Ingår i: JN. Journal of Nephrology. - : SPRINGER HEIDELBERG. - 1121-8428 .- 1724-6059. ; 34:3, s. 639-648
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A recently published nomenclature by a "Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes" (KDIGO) Consensus Conference suggested that the word "kidney" should be used in medical writings instead of "renal" or "nephro" when referring to kidney disease and kidney health. Whereas the decade-old move to use "kidney" more frequently should be supported when communicating with the public-at-large, such as the World Kidney Day, or in English speaking countries in communications with patients, care-partners, and non-medical persons, our point of view is that "renal" or "nephro" should not be removed from scientific and technical writings. Instead, the terms can coexist and be used in their relevant contexts. Cardiologists use "heart" and "cardio" as appropriate such as "heart failure" and "cardiac care units" and have not replaced "cardiovascular" with "heartvessel", for instance. Likewise, in nephrology, we consider that "chronic kidney disease" and "continuous renal replacement therapy" should coexist. We suggest that in scientific writings and technical communications, the words "renal" and "nephro" and their derivatives are more appropriate and should be freely used without any pressure by medical journals to compel patients, care-partners, healthcare providers, researchers and other stakeholders to change their selected words and terminologies. We call to embrace the terms "kidney", "renal" and "nephro" as they are used in different contexts and ask that scientific and medical journals not impose terminology restrictions for kidney disease and kidney health. The choice should be at the discretion of the authors, in the different contexts including in scientific journals.
|
|
| 4. |
- Liakopoulos, Vasileios, et al.
(författare)
-
Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes After Weight Loss From Gastric Bypass Surgery in Type 2 Diabetes: Cardiorenal Risk Reductions Exceed Atherosclerotic Benefits
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Diabetes care. - : American Diabetes Association. - 0149-5992 .- 1935-5548. ; 43:6, s. 1276-1284
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE We examined detailed renal and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes after gastric bypass (GBP) surgery in people with obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), across several renal function categories, in a nationwide cohort study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We linked data from the National Diabetes Register and the Scandinavian Obesity Surgery Register with four national databases holding information on socioeconomic variables, medications, hospitalizations, and causes of death and matched 5,321 individuals with T2DM who had undergone GBP with 5,321 who had not (age 18-65 years, mean BMI >40 kg/m(2), mean follow-up >4.5 years). The risks of postoperative outcomes were assessed with Cox regression models. RESULTS During the first years postsurgery, there were small reductions in creatinine and albuminuria and stable estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in the GBP group. The incidence rates of most outcomes relating to renal function, CV disease, and mortality were lower after GBP, being particularly marked for heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33 [95% CI 0.24, 0.46]) and CV mortality (HR 0.36 [(95% CI 0.22, 0.58]). The risk of a composite of severe renal disease or halved eGFR was 0.56 (95% CI 0.44, 0.71), whereas nonfatal CV risk was lowered less (HR 0.82 [95% CI 0.70, 0.97]) after GBP. Risks for key outcomes were generally lower after GBP in all eGFR strata, including in individuals with eGFR CONCLUSIONS Our data suggest robust benefits for renal outcomes, heart failure, and CV mortality after GBP in individuals with obesity and T2DM. These results suggest that marked weight loss yields important benefits, particularly on the cardiorenal axis (including slowing progression to end-stage renal disease), whatever the baseline renal function status.
|
|
