1. |
- Schael, S, et al.
(author)
-
Precision electroweak measurements on the Z resonance
- 2006
-
In: Physics Reports. - : Elsevier BV. - 0370-1573 .- 1873-6270. ; 427:5-6, s. 257-454
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We report on the final electroweak measurements performed with data taken at the Z resonance by the experiments operating at the electron-positron colliders SLC and LEP. The data consist of 17 million Z decays accumulated by the ALEPH, DELPHI, L3 and OPAL experiments at LEP, and 600 thousand Z decays by the SLID experiment using a polarised beam at SLC. The measurements include cross-sections, forward-backward asymmetries and polarised asymmetries. The mass and width of the Z boson, m(Z) and Gamma(Z), and its couplings to fermions, for example the p parameter and the effective electroweak mixing angle for leptons, are precisely measured: m(Z) = 91.1875 +/- 0.0021 GeV, Gamma(Z) = 2.4952 +/- 0.0023 GeV, rho(l) = 1.0050 +/- 0.0010, sin(2)theta(eff)(lept) = 0.23153 +/- 0.00016. The number of light neutrino species is determined to be 2.9840 +/- 0.0082, in agreement with the three observed generations of fundamental fermions. The results are compared to the predictions of the Standard Model (SM). At the Z-pole, electroweak radiative corrections beyond the running of the QED and QCD coupling constants are observed with a significance of five standard deviations, and in agreement with the Standard Model. Of the many Z-pole measurements, the forward-backward asymmetry in b-quark production shows the largest difference with respect to its SM expectation, at the level of 2.8 standard deviations. Through radiative corrections evaluated in the framework of the Standard Model, the Z-pole data are also used to predict the mass of the top quark, m(t) = 173(+10)(+13) GeV, and the mass of the W boson, m(W) = 80.363 +/- 0.032 GeV. These indirect constraints are compared to the direct measurements, providing a stringent test of the SM. Using in addition the direct measurements of m(t) and m(W), the mass of the as yet unobserved SM Higgs boson is predicted with a relative uncertainty of about 50% and found to be less than 285 GeV at 95% confidence level. (c) 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
2. |
- Lunt, Daniel J., et al.
(author)
-
The DeepMIP contribution to PMIP4 : experimental design for model simulations of the EECO, PETM, and pre-PETM (version 1.0)
- 2017
-
In: Geoscientific Model Development. - : Copernicus GmbH. - 1991-959X .- 1991-9603. ; 10:2, s. 889-901
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Past warm periods provide an opportunity to evaluate climate models under extreme forcing scenarios, in particular high (>800 ppmv) atmospheric CO2 concentrations. Although a post hoc intercomparison of Eocene (similar to 50 Ma) climate model simulations and geological data has been carried out previously, models of past high-CO2 periods have never been evaluated in a consistent framework. Here, we present an experimental design for climate model simulations of three warm periods within the early Eocene and the latest Paleocene (the EECO, PETM, and pre-PETM). Together with the CMIP6 pre-industrial control and abrupt 4 x CO2 simulations, and additional sensitivity studies, these form the first phase of DeepMIP - the Deep-time Model Intercomparison Project, itself a group within the wider Paleo-climate Modelling Intercomparison Project (PMIP). The experimental design specifies and provides guidance on boundary conditions associated with palaeogeography, greenhouse gases, astronomical configuration, solar constant, land surface processes, and aerosols. Initial conditions, simulation length, and output variables are also specified. Finally, we explain how the geological data sets, which will be used to evaluate the simulations, will be developed.
|
|
3. |
- Ardern, Clare L, et al.
(author)
-
Implementing the 27 PRISMA 2020 Statement items for systematic reviews in the sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation and sports science fields : The PERSiST (implementing Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science) guidance
- 2022
-
In: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 56:4, s. 175-195
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Poor reporting of medical and healthcare systematic reviews is a problem from which the sports and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science fields are not immune. Transparent, accurate and comprehensive systematic review reporting helps researchers replicate methods, readers understand what was done and why, and clinicians and policy-makers implement results in practice. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and its accompanying Explanation and Elaboration document provide general reporting examples for systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. However, implementation guidance for sport and exercise medicine, musculoskeletal rehabilitation, and sports science does not exist. The Prisma in Exercise, Rehabilitation, Sport medicine and SporTs science (PERSiST) guidance attempts to address this problem. Nineteen content experts collaborated with three methods experts to identify examples of exemplary reporting in systematic reviews in sport and exercise medicine (including physical activity), musculoskeletal rehabilitation (including physiotherapy), and sports science, for each of the PRISMA 2020 Statement items. PERSiST aims to help: (1) systematic reviewers improve the transparency and reporting of systematic reviews and (2) journal editors and peer reviewers make informed decisions about systematic review reporting quality.
|
|
4. |
- Dijkstra, H Paul, et al.
(author)
-
Primary cam morphology; bump, burden or bog-standard? : A concept analysis
- 2021
-
In: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 55:21, s. 1212-1221
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Cam morphology, a distinct bony morphology of the hip, is prevalent in many athletes, and a risk factor for hip-related pain and osteoarthritis. Secondary cam morphology, due to existing or previous hip disease (eg, Legg-Calve-Perthes disease), is well-described. Cam morphology not clearly associated with a disease is a challenging concept for clinicians, scientists and patients. We propose this morphology, which likely develops during skeletal maturation as a physiological response to load, should be referred to as primary cam morphology. The aim of this study was to introduce and clarify the concept of primary cam morphology.DESIGN: We conducted a concept analysis of primary cam morphology using articles that reported risk factors associated with primary cam morphology; we excluded articles on secondary cam morphology. The concept analysis method is a rigorous eight-step process designed to clarify complex 'concepts'; the end product is a precise definition that supports the theoretical basis of the chosen concept.RESULTS: We propose five defining attributes of primary cam morphology-tissue type, size, site, shape and ownership-in a new conceptual and operational definition. Primary cam morphology is a cartilage or bony prominence (bump) of varying size at the femoral head-neck junction, which changes the shape of the femoral head from spherical to aspherical. It often occurs in asymptomatic male athletes in both hips. The cartilage or bone alpha angle (calculated from radiographs, CT or MRI) is the most common method to measure cam morphology. We found inconsistent reporting of primary cam morphology taxonomy, terminology, and how the morphology is operationalised.CONCLUSION: We introduce and clarify primary cam morphology, and propose a new conceptual and operational definition. Several elements of the concept of primary cam morphology remain unclear and contested. Experts need to agree on the new taxonomy, terminology and definition that better reflect the primary cam morphology landscape-a bog-standard bump in most athletic hips, and a possible hip disease burden in a selected few.
|
|
5. |
- Humphries, David, et al.
(author)
-
Delphi developed syllabus for the medical specialty of sport and exercise medicine: part 2.
- 2021
-
In: British journal of sports medicine. - : BMJ. - 1473-0480 .- 0306-3674. ; 55, s. 81-83
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Training in the medical specialty of sport and exercise medicine (SEM) is available in many, but not all countries. In 2015, an independent Delphi group, the International Syllabus in Sport and Exercise Medicine Group (ISSEMG), was formed to create a basic syllabus for this medical specialty. The group provided the first part of this syllabus, by identifying 11 domains and a total of 80 general learning areas for the specialty, in December 2017. The next step in this process, and the aim of this paper was to determine the specific learning areas for each of the 80 general learning areas. A group of 26 physicians with a range of primary medical specialty qualifications including, Sport and Exercise Medicine, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, Cardiology, Rheumatology and Anaesthetics were invited to participate in a multiple round online Delphi study to develop specific learning areas for each of the previously published general learning areas. All invitees have extensive clinical experience in the broader sports medicine field, and in one or more components of sports medicine governance at national and/or international level. SEM, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, Cardiology, Rheumatology and Anaesthetics were invited to participate in a multiple round online Delphi study to develop specific learning areas for each of the previously published general learning areas. All invitees have extensive clinical experience in the broader sports medicine field, and in one or more components of sports medicine governance at national and/or international level. The hierarchical syllabus developed by the ISSEMG provides a useful resource in the planning, development and delivery of specialist training programmes in the medical specialty of SEM.
|
|
6. |
|
|
7. |
- Schwellnus, Martin, et al.
(author)
-
How much is too much? (Part 2) International Olympic Committee consensus statement on load in sport and risk of illness
- 2016
-
In: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 50:17, s. 1043-1052
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The modern-day athlete participating in elite sports is exposed to high training loads and increasingly saturated competition calendar. Emerging evidence indicates that inappropriate load management is a significant risk factor for acute illness and the overtraining syndrome. The IOC convened an expert group to review the scientific evidence for the relationship of loadincluding rapid changes in training and competition load, competition calendar congestion, psychological load and traveland health outcomes in sport. This paper summarises the results linking load to risk of illness and overtraining in athletes, and provides athletes, coaches and support staff with practical guidelines for appropriate load management to reduce the risk of illness and overtraining in sport. These include guidelines for prescription of training and competition load, as well as for monitoring of training, competition and psychological load, athlete well-being and illness. In the process, urgent research priorities were identified.
|
|
8. |
- Soligard, Torbjorn, et al.
(author)
-
How much is too much? (Part 1) International Olympic Committee consensus statement on load in sport and risk of injury
- 2016
-
In: British Journal of Sports Medicine. - : BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP. - 0306-3674 .- 1473-0480. ; 50:17, s. 1030-1041
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Athletes participating in elite sports are exposed to high training loads and increasingly saturated competition calendars. Emerging evidence indicates that poor load management is a major risk factor for injury. The International Olympic Committee convened an expert group to review the scientific evidence for the relationship of load (defined broadly to include rapid changes in training and competition load, competition calendar congestion, psychological load and travel) and health outcomes in sport. We summarise the results linking load to risk of injury in athletes, and provide athletes, coaches and support staff with practical guidelines to manage load in sport. This consensus statement includes guidelines for (1) prescription of training and competition load, as well as for (2) monitoring of training, competition and psychological load, athlete well-being and injury. In the process, we identified research priorities.
|
|