| 1. |
- Adcox, K, et al.
(författare)
-
PHENIX detector overview
- 2003
-
Ingår i: Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research. Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors, and Associated Equipment. - 0167-5087. ; 499:2-3, s. 469-479
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The PHENIX detector is designed to perform a broad study of A-A, p-A, and p-p collisions to investigate nuclear matter under extreme conditions. A wide variety of probes, sensitive to all timescales, are used to study systematic variations with species and energy as well as to measure the spin structure of the nucleon. Designing for the needs of the heavy-ion and polarized-proton programs has produced a detector with unparalleled capabilities. PHENIX measures electron and muon pairs, photons, and hadrons with excellent energy and momentum resolution. The detector consists of a large number of subsystems that are discussed in other papers in this volume. The overall design parameters of the detector are presented. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Adler, SS, et al.
(författare)
-
PHENIX on-line systems
- 2003
-
Ingår i: Nuclear Instruments & Methods in Physics Research. Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors, and Associated Equipment. - 0167-5087. ; 499:2-3, s. 560-592
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The PHENIX On-Line system takes signals from the Front End Modules (FEM) on each detector subsystem for the purpose of generating events for physics analysis. Processing of event data begins when the Data Collection Modules (DCM) receive data via fiber-optic links from the FEMs. The DCMs format and zero suppress the data and generate data packets. These packets go to the Event Builders (EvB) that assemble the events in final form. The Level-1 trigger (LVL1) generates a decision for each beam crossing and eliminates uninteresting events. The FEMs carry out all detector processing of the data so that it is delivered to the DCMs using a standard format. The FEMs also provide buffering for LVL1 trigger processing and DCM data collection. This is carried out using an architecture that is pipelined and deadtimeless. All of this is controlled by the Master Timing System (MTS) that distributes the RHIC clocks. A Level-2 trigger (LVL2) gives additional discrimination. A description of the components and operation of the PHENIX On-Line system is given and the solution to a number of electronic infrastructure problems are discussed. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
- Korolija, D, et al.
(författare)
-
Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.
- 2004
-
Ingår i: Surgical Endoscopy. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0930-2794 .- 1432-2218. ; 18:6, s. 879-897
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Measuring health-related quality of life (QoL) after surgery is essential for decision making by patients, surgeons, and payers. The aim of this consensus conference was twofold. First, it was to determine for which diseases endoscopic surgery results in better postoperative QoL than open surgery. Second, it was to recommend QoL instruments for clinical research. Methods An expert panel selected 12 conditions in which QoL and endoscopic surgery are important. For each condition, studies comparing endoscopic and open surgery in terms of QoL were identified. The expert panel reached consensus on the relative benefits of endoscopic surgery and recommended generic and disease-specific QoL instruments for use in clinical research. Results Randomized trials indicate that QoL improves earlier after endoscopic than open surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), cholecystolithiasis, colorectal cancer, inguinal hernia, obesity (gastric bypass), and uterine disorders that require hysterectomy. For spleen, prostate, malignant kidney, benign colorectal, and benign non-GERD esophageal diseases, evidence from nonrandomized trials supports the use of laparoscopic surgery. However, many studies failed to collect long-term results, used nonvalidated questionnaires, or measured QoL components only incompletely. The following QoL instruments can be recommended: for benign esophageal and gallbladder disease, the GIQLI or the QOLRAD together with SF-36 or the PGWB; for obesity surgery, the IWQOL-Lite with the SF-36; for colorectal cancer, the FACT-C or the EORTC QLQ-C30/CR38; for inguinal and renal surgery, the VAS for pain with the SF-36 (or the EORTC QLQ-C30 in case of malignancy); and after hysterectomy, the SF-36 together with an evaluation of urinary and sexual function. Conclusions Laparoscopic surgery provides better postoperative QoL in many clinical situations. Researchers would improve the quality of future studies by using validated QoL instruments such as those recommended here.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
