| 1. |
- Schael, S., et al.
(author)
-
Electroweak measurements in electron positron collisions at W-boson-pair energies at LEP
- 2013
-
In: Physics Reports. - : Elsevier BV. - 0370-1573 .- 1873-6270. ; 532:4, s. 119-244
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Electroweak measurements performed with data taken at the electron positron collider LEP at CERN from 1995 to 2000 are reported. The combined data set considered in this report corresponds to a total luminosity of about 3 fb(-1) collected by the four LEP experiments ALEPH, DELPHI, 13 and OPAL, at centre-of-mass energies ranging from 130 GeV to 209 GeV. Combining the published results of the four LEP experiments, the measurements include total and differential cross-sections in photon-pair, fermion-pair and four-fermion production, the latter resulting from both double-resonant WW and ZZ production as well as singly resonant production. Total and differential cross-sections are measured precisely, providing a stringent test of the Standard Model at centre-of-mass energies never explored before in electron positron collisions. Final-state interaction effects in four-fermion production, such as those arising from colour reconnection and Bose Einstein correlations between the two W decay systems arising in WW production, are searched for and upper limits on the strength of possible effects are obtained. The data are used to determine fundamental properties of the W boson and the electroweak theory. Among others, the mass and width of the W boson, m(w) and Gamma(w), the branching fraction of W decays to hadrons, B(W -> had), and the trilinear gauge-boson self-couplings g(1)(Z), K-gamma and lambda(gamma), are determined to be: m(w) = 80.376 +/- 0.033 GeV Gamma(w) = 2.195 +/- 0.083 GeV B(W -> had) = 67.41 +/- 0.27% g(1)(Z) = 0.984(-0.020)(+0.018) K-gamma - 0.982 +/- 0.042 lambda(gamma) = 0.022 +/- 0.019. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- McNamara, R. L., et al.
(author)
-
International comparisons of the management of patients with non-ST segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the United Kingdom, Sweden, and the United States: The MINAP/NICOR, SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA, and ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR registries
- 2014
-
In: International Journal of Cardiology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0167-5273 .- 1874-1754. ; 175:2, s. 240-247
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objectives: To compare management of patients with acute non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in three developed countries with national ongoing registries. Background: Results from clinical trials suggest significant variation in care across the world. However, international comparisons in "real world" registries are limited. Methods: We compared the use of in-hospital procedures and discharge medications for patients admitted with NSTEMI from 2007 to 2010 using the unselective MINAP/NICOR [England and Wales (UK); n = 137,009], the unselective SWEDEHEART/RIKS-HIA (Sweden; n = 45,069), and the selective ACTION Registry-GWTG/NCDR [United States (US); n = 147,438] clinical registries. Results: Patients enrolled among the three registries were generally similar except those in the US who were younger but had higher rates of smoking, diabetes, hypertension, prior heart failure, and prior MI than in Sweden or in UK. Angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were performed more often in the US (76% and 44%) and Sweden (65% and 42%) relative to the UK (32% and 22%). Discharge betablockers were also prescribed more often in the US (89%) and Sweden (89%) than in the UK (76%). In contrast, discharge statins, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACEI/ARB), and dual antiplatelet agents (among those not receiving PCI) were higher in the UK (92%, 79%, and 71%) than in the US (85%, 65%, 41%) and Sweden (81%, 69%, and 49%). Conclusions: The care for patients with NSTEMI differed substantially among the three countries. These differences in care among countries provide an opportunity for future comparative effectiveness research as well as identify opportunities for global quality improvement. (C) 2014 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
|
|
