| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Lamy, L., et al.
(författare)
-
The low-frequency source of Saturn's kilometric radiation
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Science. - : AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE. - 0036-8075 .- 1095-9203. ; 362:6410
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Understanding how auroral radio emissions are produced by magnetized bodies requires in situ measurements within their source region. Saturn's kilometric radiation (SKR) has been widely used as a remote proxy of Saturn's magnetosphere. We present wave and plasma measurements from the Cassini spacecraft during its ring-grazing high-inclination orbits, which passed three times through the high-altitude SKR emission region. Northern dawn-side, narrow-banded radio sources were encountered at frequencies of 10 to 20 kilohertz, within regions of upward currents mapping to the ultraviolet auroral oval. The kilometric waves were produced on the extraordinary mode by the cyclotron maser instability from 6- to 12-kiloelectron volt electron beams and radiated quasi-perpendicularly to the auroral magnetic field lines. The SKR low-frequency sources appear to be strongly controlled by time-variable magnetospheric electron densities.
|
|
| 3. |
- Burridge, J., et al.
(författare)
-
A systematic review of international clinical guidelines for rehabilitation of people with neurological conditions: What recommendations are made for upperlimb assessment?
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Frontiers in Neurology. - : Frontiers Media SA. - 1664-2295. ; 10
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Upper limb impairment is a common problem for people with neurological disabilities, affecting activity, performance, quality of life, and independence. Accurate, timely assessments are required for effective rehabilitation, and development of novel interventions. International consensus on upper limb assessment is needed to make research findings more meaningful, provide a benchmark for quality in clinical practice, more cost-effective neurorehabilitation and improved outcomes for neurological patients undergoing rehabilitation. Aim: To conduct a systematic review, as part of the output of a European COST Action, to identify what recommendations are made for upper limb assessment. Methods: We systematically reviewed published guidance on measures and protocols for assessment of upper limb function in neurological rehabilitation via electronic databases from January 2007-December 2017. Additional records were then identified through other sources. Records were selected for inclusion based on scanning of titles, abstracts and full text by two authors working independently, and a third author if there was disagreement. Records were included if they referred to "rehabilitation" and "assessment" or "measurement". Reasons for exclusion were documented. Results: From the initial 552 records identified (after duplicates were removed), 34 satisfied our criteria for inclusion, and only six recommended specific outcome measures and /or protocols. Records were divided into National Guidelines and other practice guidelines published in peer reviewed Journals. There was agreement that assessment is critical, should be conducted early and at regular intervals and that there is a need for standardized measures. Assessments should be conducted by a healthcare professional trained in using the measure and should encompass body function and structure, activity and participation. Conclusions: We present a comprehensive, critical, and original summary of current recommendations. Defining a core set of measures and agreed protocols requires international consensus between experts representing the diverse and multi-disciplinary field of neurorehabilitation including clinical researchers and practitioners, rehabilitation technology researchers, and commercial developers. Current lack of guidance may hold-back progress in understanding function and recovery. Together with a Delphi consensus study and an overview of systematic reviews of outcome measures it will contribute to the development of international guidelines for upper limb assessment in neurological conditions. © 2019 Burridge, Alt Murphy, Buurke, Feys, Keller, Klamroth-Marganska, Lamers, McNicholas, Prange, Tarkka, Timmermans and Hughes.
|
|
| 4. |
- Hughes, A. M., et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of upper extremity neurorehabilitation using technology: a European Delphi consensus study within the EU COST Action Network on Robotics for Neurorehabilitation
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Journal of Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1743-0003. ; 13
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The need for cost-effective neurorehabilitation is driving investment into technologies for patient assessment and treatment. Translation of these technologies into clinical practice is limited by a paucity of evidence for cost-effectiveness. Methodological issues, including lack of agreement on assessment methods, limit the value of meta-analyses of trials. In this paper we report the consensus reached on assessment protocols and outcome measures for evaluation of the upper extremity in neurorehabilitation using technology. The outcomes of this research will be part of the development of European guidelines. Methods: A rigorous, systematic and comprehensive modified Delphi study incorporated questions and statements generation, design and piloting of consensus questionnaire and five consensus experts groups consisting of clinicians, clinical researchers, non-clinical researchers, and engineers, all with working experience of neurological assessments or technologies. For data analysis, two major groups were created: i) clinicians (e.g., practicing therapists and medical doctors) and ii) researchers (clinical and non-clinical researchers (e.g. movement scientists, technology developers and engineers). Results: Fifteen questions or statements were identified during an initial ideas generation round, following which the questionnaire was designed and piloted. Subsequently, questions and statements went through five consensus rounds over 20 months in four European countries. Two hundred eight participants: 60 clinicians (29 %), 35 clinical researchers (17 %), 77 non-clinical researchers (37 %) and 35 engineers (17 %) contributed. At each round questions and statements were added and others removed. Consensus (>= 69 %) was obtained for 22 statements on i) the perceived importance of recommendations; ii) the purpose of measurement; iii) use of a minimum set of measures; iv) minimum number, timing and duration of assessments; v) use of technology-generated assessments and the restriction of clinical assessments to validated outcome measures except in certain circumstances for research. Conclusions: Consensus was reached by a large international multidisciplinary expert panel on measures and protocols for assessment of the upper limb in research and clinical practice. Our results will inform the development of best practice for upper extremity assessment using technologies, and the formulation of evidence-based guidelines for the evaluation of upper extremity neurorehabilitation.
|
|
