| 1. |
- Buhr, Katarina, et al.
(author)
-
End users’ challenges, needs and requirements for assessing resilience
- 2018
-
Reports (other academic/artistic)abstract
- This report summarizes the results from the work in Task 1.3 of the SmartResilience project. Within the Work Package “Establishing the project baseline and the common framework”, Task 1.3 contributes to a better understanding of the indicators for resilience assessment by examining the actual needs from the ones responsible for such an assessment.This deliverable establishes, at an early stage in the project, a baseline for understanding end users’ current and projected challenges, needs and requirements for assessing resilience of critical infrastructures and using resilience indicators (RIs) for doing so. This is a necessary step to ensure that the resilience assessment methodology and smart RIs will be designed in ways that are useful and therefore adopted, thus delivering increased resilience for critical infrastructures, beyond the project.The identification of end users’ challenges, needs and requirements in assessing resilience within Task 1.3 has been guided by an actor analysis approach and is predominantly based on qualitative methods, consisting of semi-structured individual or group interviews with key end users connected to critical infrastructures, desktop studies and literature reviews. The task has covered eight critical infrastructures in the SmartResilience case studies (ALPHA-HOTEL) as well as an additional case study covering interconnected critical infrastructures (DSB). Furthermore, in order to take into account end users beyond these nine case studies, a literature review has been carried out as well as a survey among the Members of the Community of Users of Safe, Secure and Resilient Societies (CoU).The key findings from Task 1.3 are summarized below:Designing useful indicators requires extensive end user involvement in order to be able to integrate the indicators into existing organizational processes. There is a need to define the “work” that the indicators are supposed to do and make sure they meet the challenges of interconnected infrastructures.End users in the case studies confirmed and provided further insight into the following key challenges, which are illustrated by examples: the concept of resilience; external threats (climate change, cyber-attacks, terrorist attacks, flooding); the complexity of critical infrastructures; and data management.End users in the case studies expressed specific needs and requirements, which has been analyzed in terms of five dimensions of resilience and illustrated by examples: system/physical; information/data; organizational/business: societal/political and cognitive/decision-making.The survey to the CoU indicated that some actors do not see a need to develop RIs because they think current practices are sufficient. Although the low response rate calls for caution in interpreting the results, the responses suggests a number of challenges for the SmartResilience project. First, the need for the project to create assessments and RIs that are clearly regarded as providing added value in relation to end users’ current and projected needs. Second, the challenge to design assessments and RIs that can be widely disseminated, while at the same time taking different contexts into account.Three implications for indicator development are suggested. Firstly, indicators should be developed with an appropriate end user in mind. This means posing questions such as: What organization, and what function or user group, will use it? What is their interest in using indicators? What is their legitimacy to spread the indicator in the critical infrastructure? Secondly, indicators should be developed in dialogue with end users, in order to increase the likelihood that they cover areas that are relevant and currently not sufficiently covered; are relevant, understandable and legitimate; and are designed according to end users’ own motives for assessing resilience and perceptions of usefulness. Thirdly, indicators should be developed in alignment with end users’ organizational processes. This suggests that the project should develop indicators which are easy to understand in order to decrease the dependency of individual expertise and misunderstandings across different organizations; meet the level of capacity of resources that the organization(s) are willing to spend on assessments of resilience; and allow end users to collect, process and share (big) data, taking data security into account.
|
|
| 2. |
- George, Julie, et al.
(author)
-
Comprehensive genomic profiles of small cell lung cancer
- 2015
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0028-0836 .- 1476-4687. ; 524:7563, s. 47-U73
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We have sequenced the genomes of 110 small cell lung cancers (SCLC), one of the deadliest human cancers. In nearly all the tumours analysed we found bi-allelic inactivation of TP53 and RB1, sometimes by complex genomic rearrangements. Two tumours with wild-type RB1 had evidence of chromothripsis leading to overexpression of cyclin D1 (encoded by the CCND1 gene), revealing an alternative mechanism of Rb1 deregulation. Thus, loss of the tumour suppressors TP53 and RB1 is obligatory in SCLC. We discovered somatic genomic rearrangements of TP73 that create an oncogenic version of this gene, TP73Dex2/3. In rare cases, SCLC tumours exhibited kinase gene mutations, providing a possible therapeutic opportunity for individual patients. Finally, we observed inactivating mutations in NOTCH family genes in 25% of human SCLC. Accordingly, activation of Notch signalling in a pre-clinical SCLC mouse model strikingly reduced the number of tumours and extended the survival of the mutant mice. Furthermore, neuroendocrine gene expression was abrogated by Notch activity in SCLC cells. This first comprehensive study of somatic genome alterations in SCLC uncovers several key biological processes and identifies candidate therapeutic targets in this highly lethal form of cancer.
|
|
| 3. |
- Kozisek, Frantisek, et al.
(author)
-
Background
- 2015
-
In: Drinking Water Minerals and Mineral Balance. - Cham : Springer. - 9783319095936 - 9783319095929 ; , s. 1-23
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Water plays an important role in the body. Normal–weight adults need 2.0–2.5 L/day of water for proper hydration, and it is known for centuries that minerals from the water are important for humans and animals. Different minerals are important in different ranges for different organs and functions. Due to the mass–related need for the minerals, they are labeled macro and micro elements, respectively. Weathering of rocks is responsible for most of the minerals appearing in water. The importance of minerals from drinking water have been denied for some time. However, in districts of Norway, high frequencies of softening of bone tissue among domestic animals, later identified as phosphorous-deficient soils and water, was known hundreds of years ago, and parts of China had increased levels of heart failure, nowadays identified as low selenium. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, well–off people in Europe went to health resorts to drink their specific water, water chosen with mineral content expected to be good for a specific complaint.
|
|
| 4. |
- Rosborg, Ingegerd, et al.
(author)
-
Background
- 2019. - 2
-
In: Drinking Water Minerals and Mineral Balance. - Cham : Springer. - 9783030180348 - 9783030180331 - 9783030180362 ; , s. 1-24, s. 1-24
-
Book chapter (other academic/artistic)abstract
- Water plays an important role in the body. Normal–weight adults need 2.0–2.5 L/day of water for proper hydration, and it is known for centuries that minerals from the water are important for humans and animals. Different minerals are important in different ranges for different organs and functions. Due to the mass–related need for the minerals, they are labeled macro and micro elements, respectively. Weathering of rocks is responsible for most of the minerals appearing in water. The importance of minerals from drinking water have been denied for some time. However, in districts of Norway, high frequencies of softening of bone tissue among domestic animals, later identified as phosphorous-deficient soils and water, was known hundreds of years ago, and parts of China had increased levels of heart failure, nowadays identified as low selenium. In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, well–off people in Europe went to health resorts to drink their specific water, water chosen with mineral content expected to be good for a specific complaint.
|
|
