| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Buchwitz, M., et al.
(author)
-
The greenhouse gas project of Esa's climate change initiative (GHG-CCI) : Overview, achievements and future plans
- 2015. - 7W3
-
In: 2015 36th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of Environment. - 1682-1750. ; 40, s. 165-172
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The GHG-CCI project (http://www.esa-ghg-cci.org/) is one of several projects of the European Space Agency's (ESA) Climate Change Initiative (CCI). The goal of the CCI is to generate and deliver data sets of various satellite-derived Essential Climate Variables (ECVs) in line with GCOS (Global Climate Observing System) requirements. The "ECV Greenhouse Gases" (ECV GHG) is the global distribution of important climate relevant gases-namely atmospheric CO2 and CH4-with a quality sufficient to obtain information on regional CO2 and CH4 sources and sinks. The main goal of GHG-CCI is to generate long-term highly accurate and precise time series of global near-surface-sensitive satellite observations of CO2 and CH4, i.e., XCO2 and XCH4, starting with the launch of ESA's ENVISAT satellite. These products are currently retrieved from SCIAMACHY/ENVISAT (2002-2012) and TANSO-FTS/GOSAT (2009-today) nadir mode observations in the near-infrared/shortwave-infrared spectral region. In addition, other sensors (e.g., IASI and MIPAS) and viewing modes (e.g., SCIAMACHY solar occultation) are also considered and in the future also data from other satellites. The GHG-CCI data products and related documentation are freely available via the GHG-CCI website and yearly updates are foreseen. Here we present an overview about the latest data set (Climate Research Data Package No. 2 (CRDP#2)) and summarize key findings from using satellite CO2 and CH4 retrievals to improve our understanding of the natural and anthropogenic sources and sinks of these important atmospheric greenhouse gases. We also shortly mention ongoing activities related to validation and initial user assessment of CRDP#2 and future plans.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Abbott, T. E. F., et al.
(author)
-
The surgical safety checklist and patient outcomes after surgery: a prospective observational cohort study, systematic review and meta-analysis
- 2018
-
In: British Journal of Anaesthesia. - : ELSEVIER SCI LTD. - 0007-0912 .- 1471-6771. ; 120:1, s. 146-155
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The surgical safety checklist is widely used to improve the quality of perioperative care. However, clinicians continue to debate the clinical effectiveness of this tool. Methods: Prospective analysis of data from the International Surgical Outcomes Study (ISOS), an international observational study of elective in-patient surgery, accompanied by a systematic review and meta-analysis of published literature. The exposure was surgical safety checklist use. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. In the ISOS cohort, a multivariable multi-level generalized linear model was used to test associations. To further contextualise these findings, we included the results from the ISOS cohort in a meta-analysis. Results are reported as odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals. Results: We included 44 814 patients from 497 hospitals in 27 countries in the ISOS analysis. There were 40 245 (89.8%) patients exposed to the checklist, whilst 7508 (16.8%) sustained amp;gt;= 1 postoperative complications and 207 (0.5%) died before hospital discharge. Checklist exposure was associated with reduced mortality [odds ratio (OR) 0.49 (0.32-0.77); Pamp;lt;0.01], but no difference in complication rates [OR 1.02 (0.88-1.19); P = 0.75]. In a systematic review, we screened 3732 records and identified 11 eligible studies of 453 292 patients including the ISOS cohort. Checklist exposure was associated with both reduced postoperative mortality [OR 0.75 (0.62-0.92); Pamp;lt;0.01; I-2 = 87%] and reduced complication rates [OR 0.73 (0.61-0.88); Pamp;lt;0.01; I-2 = 89%). Conclusions: Patients exposed to a surgical safety checklist experience better postoperative outcomes, but this could simply reflect wider quality of care in hospitals where checklist use is routine.
|
|
