SwePub
Sök i SwePub databas

  Utökad sökning

Träfflista för sökning "WFRF:(Svantesson J) ;srt2:(2020-2023)"

Sökning: WFRF:(Svantesson J) > (2020-2023)

  • Resultat 1-16 av 16
Sortera/gruppera träfflistan
   
NumreringReferensOmslagsbildHitta
1.
  • Hyde, K. D., et al. (författare)
  • Global consortium for the classification of fungi and fungus-like taxa
  • 2023
  • Ingår i: MYCOSPHERE. - : Mushroom Research Foundation. - 2077-7000 .- 2077-7019. ; 14:1, s. 1960-2012
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • The Global Consortium for the Classification of Fungi and fungus-like taxa is an international initiative of more than 550 mycologists to develop an electronic structure for the classification of these organisms. The members of the Consortium originate from 55 countries/regions worldwide, from a wide range of disciplines, and include senior, mid-career and early-career mycologists and plant pathologists. The Consortium will publish a biannual update of the Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa, to act as an international scheme for other scientists. Notes on all newly published taxa at or above the level of species will be prepared and published online on the Outline of Fungi website (https://www.outlineoffungi.org/), and these will be finally published in the biannual edition of the Outline of Fungi and fungus-like taxa. Comments on recent important taxonomic opinions on controversial topics will be included in the biannual outline. For example, 'to promote a more stable taxonomy in Fusarium given the divergences over its generic delimitation', or 'are there too many genera in the Boletales?' and even more importantly, 'what should be done with the tremendously diverse 'dark fungal taxa?' There are undeniable differences in mycologists' perceptions and opinions regarding species classification as well as the establishment of new species. Given the pluralistic nature of fungal taxonomy and its implications for species concepts and the nature of species, this consortium aims to provide a platform to better refine and stabilise fungal classification, taking into consideration views from different parties. In the future, a confidential voting system will be set up to gauge the opinions of all mycologists in the Consortium on important topics. The results of such surveys will be presented to the International Commission on the Taxonomy of Fungi (ICTF) and the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi (NCF) with opinions and percentages of votes for and against. Criticisms based on scientific evidence with regards to nomenclature, classifications, and taxonomic concepts will be welcomed, and any recommendations on specific taxonomic issues will also be encouraged; however, we will encourage professionally and ethically responsible criticisms of others' work. This biannual ongoing project will provide an outlet for advances in various topics of fungal classification, nomenclature, and taxonomic concepts and lead to a community-agreed classification scheme for the fungi and fungus-like taxa. Interested parties should contact the lead author if they would like to be involved in future outlines.
  •  
2.
  • Svantesson, Eleonor, et al. (författare)
  • Clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Journal of ISAKOS. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7754. ; 5, s. 281-294
  • Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Purpose: A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect for establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. The aim of this consensus statement was to establish what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. Methods: To establish a standardised assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, in June 2019. The group reached consensus on nine statements by using a modified Delphi method. Results: In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into four robust categories - early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes, ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment following ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained re-injuries, validated knee-specific patient-reported outcomes and Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaires. In the mid-term to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. Conclusion: This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment. Level of Evidence: Level V. © International Society of Arthroscopy, Knee Surgery and Orthopaedic Sports Medicine 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ.
  •  
3.
  • Diermeier, T. A., et al. (författare)
  • Treatment after ACL injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
  • 2021
  • Ingår i: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 55:1, s. 14-22
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Treatment strategies for ACL injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines to manage ACL injury is largely based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened determine consensus regarding best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is to report the consensus statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organising Committee and Session Chairs. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty per cent agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the Symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support, two reached strong consensus, one did not achieve consensus, and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting and pivoting sports, early anatomical ACL reconstruction is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomical ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field may assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury.
  •  
4.
  • Diermeier, T., et al. (författare)
  • Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 28, s. 2390-2402
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative vs. non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study is to report the consensus statements on operative vs. non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organizing Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided the initial agreement and comments on the statement via an online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty percent agreement was defined a-priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative v. non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached the consensus during the Symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support, two reached strong consensus, one did not achieve consensus, and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting, and pivoting sports, early anatomic ACL reconstruction is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomic ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatments with patients after an ACL injury. Level of evidence V. © 2020, European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA).
  •  
5.
  • Diermeier, T., et al. (författare)
  • Treatment after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
  • 2021
  • Ingår i: Journal of Isakos Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7754. ; 6:3, s. 129-137
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance towards consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative versus non-operative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study was to report the consensus statements on operative versus non-operative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. Sixty-six international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the Scientific Organising Committee and Session Chairs for the three working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements prior to the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Eighty per cent agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative veresus non-operative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the symposium. Nine statements achieved unanimous support; two reached strong consensus; one did not achieve consensus; and one was removed due to redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting and pivoting sports, early anatomical anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) is recommended due to the high risk of secondary meniscus and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight plane activities, non-operative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomical ACLR is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and non-operative treatment with patients after an ACL injury. Level of evidence: V
  •  
6.
  • Guillory, J, et al. (författare)
  • An SI-traceable multilateration coordinate measurement system with half the uncertainty of a laser tracker
  • 2023
  • Ingår i: Measurement science and technology. - : Institute of Physics. - 0957-0233 .- 1361-6501. ; 34:6
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • We have validated the performance of a prototype coordinate measurement system based on multilateration by comparing it to a laser tracker, i.e. a well-proven instrument widely used in the industry. After establishing the uncertainty budget of the different systems, we performed position measurements with both instruments on common targets. Using the estimated uncertainties associated with the measurements, we found that the multilateration system provided lower position uncertainties than the laser tracker: on average 18 µm versus 33 µm for distances up to 12 m. The uncertainties represented by confidence ellipsoids are compatible between the two systems: for confidence regions of 95% probability, they overlap as expected, i.e. in 94% of the cases. We also measured the length of a 0.8 m long reference scale bar with the multilateration system at an error of only 2 µm. This cross-comparison is a new and key step in the characterization of this SI-traceable multilateration system. © 2023 The Author(s).
  •  
7.
  • Meredith, Sean J., et al. (författare)
  • Return to Sport After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. - : SAGE Publications. - 2325-9671. ; 8:6
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Background: A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sport and their previous activity level. Purpose: The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS after ACL injury and a description of the RTS continuum as well as provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. Study Design: Consensus statement. Methods: An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. Results: Key points include that RTS is characterized by achievement of the preinjury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to RTS and, ultimately, return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along an RTS continuum, with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors, and concomitant injuries. Conclusion: The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing, and methods for the biological assessment of healing and recovery.
  •  
8.
  • Svantesson, Eleonor, et al. (författare)
  • Clinical Outcomes After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Clinical Outcomes Consensus Group.
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. - 2325-9671. ; 8:7
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect of establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. To establish a standardized assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, in June 2019. The aim was to establish a consensus on what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used, and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed. The group reached consensus on 9 statements by using a modified Delphi method. In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into 4 robust categories: early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption, and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment after ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained reinjuries, validated knee-specific PROs, and health-related quality of life questionnaires. In the midterm to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated. This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.
  •  
9.
  • Svantesson, Eleonor, et al. (författare)
  • Clinical outcomes after anterior cruciate ligament injury: panther symposium ACL injuryclinical outcomes consensus group.
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1433-7347. ; 28:8, s. 2415-2434
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • A stringent outcome assessment is a key aspect for establishing evidence-based clinical guidelines for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury treatment. The aim of this consensus statement was to establish what data should be reported when conducting an ACL outcome study, what specific outcome measurements should be used and at what follow-up time those outcomes should be assessed.To establish a standardized approach to assessment of clinical outcome after ACL treatment, a consensus meeting including a multidisciplinary group of ACL experts was held at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium, Pittsburgh, PA; USA, in June 2019. The group reached consensus on nine statements by using a modified Delphi method.In general, outcomes after ACL treatment can be divided into four robust categories-early adverse events, patient-reported outcomes, ACL graft failure/recurrent ligament disruption and clinical measures of knee function and structure. A comprehensive assessment following ACL treatment should aim to provide a complete overview of the treatment result, optimally including the various aspects of outcome categories. For most research questions, a minimum follow-up of 2 years with an optimal follow-up rate of 80% is necessary to achieve a comprehensive assessment. This should include clinical examination, any sustained re-injuries, validated knee-specific PROs and Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaires. In the mid- to long-term follow-up, the presence of osteoarthritis should be evaluated.This consensus paper provides practical guidelines for how the aforementioned entities of outcomes should be reported and suggests the preferred tools for a reliable and valid assessment of outcome after ACL treatment.V.
  •  
10.
  • de Snoo-Trimp, J. C., et al. (författare)
  • Field-Testing the Euro-MCD Instrument : Important Outcomes According to Participants Before and After Moral Case Deliberation
  • 2022
  • Ingår i: HEC Forum. - : Springer Netherlands. - 0956-2737 .- 1572-8498. ; 34:1, s. 1-24
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Ethics support services like Moral Case Deliberation (MCD) intend to support healthcare professionals in ethically difficult situations. To assess outcomes of MCD, the Euro-MCD Instrument has been developed. Field studies to test this instrument are needed and have been conducted, examining important outcomes before MCD participation and experienced outcomes. The current study aimed to (1) describe how participants' perceive the importance of MCD outcomes after MCD; (2) compare these perceptions with those before MCD participation; and (3) test the factor structure of these outcomes. Swedish, Norwegian and Dutch healthcare professionals rated the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument after four and eight MCDs. Ratings were compared with those before MCD participation using paired and independent samples t-tests. The factor structure was tested using exploratory factor analyses. After 4 and 8 MCDs, 443 respectively 247 respondents completed the instrument. More than 69% rated all MCD outcomes as 'quite' or 'very' important, especially outcomes from Enhanced Collaboration, Improved Moral Reflexivity and Improved Moral Attitude. Significant differences for 16 outcomes regarding ratings before and after MCD participation were not considered meaningful. Factor analyses suggested three categories, which seemingly resemble the domains Improved Moral Reflexivity, Enhanced Collaboration and a combination of Improved Moral Attitude and Enhanced Emotional Support. After participation in MCDs, respondents confirmed the importance of outcomes in the Euro-MCD Instrument. The question on perceived importance and the categorization of outcomes need reconsideration. The revised instrument will be presented elsewhere, based on all field studies and theoretical reflections.
  •  
11.
  • de Snoo-Trimp, J. C., et al. (författare)
  • Moral competence, moral teamwork and moral action : the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes (Euro-MCD) Instrument 2.0 and its revision process
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: BMC Medical Ethics. - : BioMed Central. - 1472-6939. ; 21:1
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • BACKGROUND: Clinical Ethics Support (CES) services are offered to support healthcare professionals in dealing with ethically difficult situations. Evaluation of CES is important to understand if it is indeed a supportive service in order to inform and improve future implementation of CES. Yet, methods to measure outcomes of CES are scarce. In 2014, the European Moral Case Deliberation Outcomes Instrument (Euro-MCD) was developed to measure outcomes of Moral Case Deliberation (MCD). To further validate the instrument, we tested it in field studies and revised it. This paper presents the Euro-MCD 2.0 and describes the revision process.METHODS: The revision process comprised an iterative dialogue among the authors as Euro-MCD-project team, including empirical findings from six Euro-MCD field-studies and input from European experts in CES and theory. Empirical findings contained perceptions and experiences of MCD outcomes among healthcare professionals who participated in MCDs in various settings in Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands. Theoretical viewpoints on CES, literature on goals of CES and MCD and ethics theory guided the interpretation of the empirical findings and final selection of MCD outcomes.RESULTS: The Euro-MCD 2.0 Instrument includes three domains: Moral Competence, Moral Teamwork and Moral Action. Moral Competence consists of items about moral sensitivity, analytical skills and virtuous attitude. Moral Teamwork includes open dialogue and supportive relationships and Moral Action refers to moral decision-making and responsible care. During the revision process, we made decisions about adding and reformulating items as well as decreasing the number from 26 to 15 items. We also altered the sentence structure of items to assess the current status of outcomes (e.g. 'now') instead of an assumed improvement over time (e.g. 'better') and we omitted the question about perceived importance.CONCLUSIONS: The Euro-MCD 2.0 is shorter, less complex and more strongly substantiated by an integration of empirical findings, theoretical reflections and dialogues with participants and experts. Use of the Euro-MCD 2.0 will facilitate evaluation of MCD and can thereby monitor and foster implementation and quality of MCD. The Euro-MCD 2.0 will strengthen future research on evaluation of outcomes of MCD.
  •  
12.
  • Diermeier, Theresa, et al. (författare)
  • Treatment After Anterior Cruciate Ligament Injury: Panther Symposium ACL Treatment Consensus Group
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. - 2325-9671. ; 8
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Treatment strategies for anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries continue to evolve. Evidence supporting best-practice guidelines for the management of ACL injury is to a large extent based on studies with low-level evidence. An international consensus group of experts was convened to collaboratively advance toward consensus opinions regarding the best available evidence on operative versus nonoperative treatment for ACL injury. The purpose of this study was to report the consensus statements on operative versus nonoperative treatment of ACL injuries developed at the ACL Consensus Meeting Panther Symposium 2019. There were 66 international experts on the management of ACL injuries, representing 18 countries, who were convened and participated in a process based on the Delphi method of achieving consensus. Proposed consensus statements were drafted by the scientific organizing committee and session chairs for the 3 working groups. Panel participants reviewed preliminary statements before the meeting and provided initial agreement and comments on the statement via online survey. During the meeting, discussion and debate occurred for each statement, after which a final vote was then held. Ultimately, 80% agreement was defined a priori as consensus. A total of 11 of 13 statements on operative versus nonoperative treatment of ACL injury reached consensus during the symposium. Overall, 9 statements achieved unanimous support, 2 reached strong consensus, 1 did not achieve consensus, and 1 was removed because of redundancy in the information provided. In highly active patients engaged in jumping, cutting, and pivoting sports, early anatomic ACL reconstruction is recommended because of the high risk of secondary meniscal and cartilage injuries with delayed surgery, although a period of progressive rehabilitation to resolve impairments and improve neuromuscular function is recommended. For patients who seek to return to straight-plane activities, nonoperative treatment with structured, progressive rehabilitation is an acceptable treatment option. However, with persistent functional instability, or when episodes of giving way occur, anatomic ACL reconstruction is indicated. The consensus statements derived from international leaders in the field will assist clinicians in deciding between operative and nonoperative treatment with patients after an ACL injury.
  •  
13.
  • Griffiths, F., et al. (författare)
  • Decision-making around admission to intensive care in the UK pre-COVID-19 : a multicentre ethnographic study
  • 2021
  • Ingår i: Anaesthesia. - : Blackwell Publishing. - 0003-2409 .- 1365-2044. ; 76:4, s. 489-499
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Predicting who will benefit from admission to an intensive care unit is not straightforward and admission processes vary. Our aim was to understand how decisions to admit or not are made. We observed 55 decision-making events in six NHS hospitals. We interviewed 30 referring and 43 intensive care doctors about these events. We describe the nature and context of the decision-making and analysed how doctors make intensive care admission decisions. Such decisions are complex with intrinsic uncertainty, often urgent and made with incomplete information. While doctors aspire to make patient-centred decisions, key challenges include: being overworked with lack of time; limited support from senior staff; and a lack of adequate staffing in other parts of the hospital that may be compromising patient safety. To reduce decision complexity, heuristic rules based on experience are often used to help think through the problem; for example, the patient's functional status or clinical gestalt. The intensive care doctors actively managed relationships with referring doctors; acted as the hospital generalist for acutely ill patients; and brought calm to crisis situations. However, they frequently failed to elicit values and preferences from patients or family members. They were rarely explicit in balancing burdens and benefits of intensive care for patients, so consistency and equity cannot be judged. The use of a framework for intensive care admission decisions that reminds doctors to seek patient or family views and encourages explicit balancing of burdens and benefits could improve decision-making. However, a supportive, adequately resourced context is also needed.
  •  
14.
  • Meredith, S. J., et al. (författare)
  • Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group
  • 2020
  • Ingår i: Knee Surgery Sports Traumatology Arthroscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0942-2056 .- 1433-7347. ; 28, s. 2403-2414
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Purpose A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sports and their previous activity level. The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury RTS Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS and description of the RTS continuum, as well as to provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. Methods An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. Results Key points include that RTS is characterized by achievement of the pre-injury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to return to sport, and ultimately return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along a RTS continuum with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors and concomitant injuries. Conclusion The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing and methods for the biologic assessment of healing and recovery.
  •  
15.
  • Meredith, S. J., et al. (författare)
  • Return to sport after anterior cruciate ligament injury: Panther Symposium ACL Injury Return to Sport Consensus Group
  • 2021
  • Ingår i: Journal of Isakos Joint Disorders & Orthopaedic Sports Medicine. - : Elsevier BV. - 2059-7754. ; 6:3, s. 138-146
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Objectives A precise and consistent definition of return to sport (RTS) after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injury is lacking, and there is controversy surrounding the process of returning patients to sports and their previous activity level. The aim of the Panther Symposium ACL Injury RTS Consensus Group was to provide a clear definition of RTS after ACL injury and description of the RTS continuum, as well as provide clinical guidance on RTS testing and decision-making. Methods An international, multidisciplinary group of ACL experts convened as part of a consensus meeting. Consensus statements were developed using a modified Delphi method. Literature review was performed to report the supporting evidence. Results Key points include that RTS is characterised by achievement of the preinjury level of sport and involves a criteria-based progression from return to participation to RTS, and ultimately return to performance. Purely time-based RTS decision-making should be abandoned. Progression occurs along an RTS continuum with decision-making by a multidisciplinary group that incorporates objective physical examination data and validated and peer-reviewed RTS tests, which should involve functional assessment as well as psychological readiness. Consideration should be given to biological healing, contextual factors and concomitant injuries. Conclusion The resultant consensus statements and scientific rationale aim to inform the reader of the complex process of RTS after ACL injury that occurs along a dynamic continuum. Research is needed to determine the ideal RTS test battery, the best implementation of psychological readiness testing and methods for the biological assessment of healing and recovery.
  •  
16.
  • Svantesson, Sten, et al. (författare)
  • "The Mouldy Marshmallow" Amaurodon caeruleocaseus (Thelephorales, Basidiomycota) - the first stipitate species in the genus Amaurodon
  • 2022
  • Ingår i: Sydowia. - 0082-0598. ; 74, s. 181-192
  • Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
    • Amaurodon (Thelephorales, Basidiomycota) constitutes a small but globally distributed genus in the order Thelephorales that is thought to be saprotrophic. Previously described species are soft and corticioid, with a smooth or hydnoid, blue to green hymenitun which turns green after drying and have spores that turn purple in KOH. Based on sequences from the nuclear rDNA regions ITS1-5.8S-ITS2 (ITS) and 28S Amaurodon caeruleocaseus is described from Western Australia a species that has all the morphological features common to the genus, with the interesting exception of forming a stipitate basidiome with a marshmallow-like consistency. Its closest relative is shown to be A. mustialaensis. The two species are unique within Thelephorales in having spores that appear smooth rather than ornamented illider a light microscope. A key to the genus Amaumdon is a Iso provided.
  •  
Skapa referenser, mejla, bekava och länka
  • Resultat 1-16 av 16

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Stäng

Kopiera och spara länken för att återkomma till aktuell vy