| 1. |
- Bousquet, J., et al.
(author)
-
Building Bridges for Innovation in Ageing : Synergies between Action Groups of the EIP on AHA
- 2017
-
In: The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging. - : Springer Nature. - 1279-7707 .- 1760-4788. ; 21:1, s. 92-104
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The Strategic Implementation Plan of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) proposed six Action Groups. After almost three years of activity, many achievements have been obtained through commitments or collaborative work of the Action Groups. However, they have often worked in silos and, consequently, synergies between Action Groups have been proposed to strengthen the triple win of the EIP on AHA. The paper presents the methodology and current status of the Task Force on EIP on AHA synergies. Synergies are in line with the Action Groups' new Renovated Action Plan (2016-2018) to ensure that their future objectives are coherent and fully connected. The outcomes and impact of synergies are using the Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the EIP on AHA (MAFEIP). Eight proposals for synergies have been approved by the Task Force: Five cross-cutting synergies which can be used for all current and future synergies as they consider overarching domains (appropriate polypharmacy, citizen empowerment, teaching and coaching on AHA, deployment of synergies to EU regions, Responsible Research and Innovation), and three cross-cutting synergies focussing on current Action Group activities (falls, frailty, integrated care and chronic respiratory diseases).
|
|
| 2. |
- Blain, H., et al.
(author)
-
A comprehensive fracture prevention strategy in older adults : the European union geriatric medicine society (EUGMS) statement
- 2016
-
In: European Geriatric Medicine. - : Elsevier. - 1878-7649 .- 1878-7657. ; 7:6, s. 519-525
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Prevention of fragility fractures in older people has become a public health priority, although the most appropriate and cost-effective strategy remains unclear. In the present statement, the Interest group on falls and fracture prevention of the European union geriatric medicine society (EUGMS), in collaboration with the International association of gerontology and geriatrics for the European region (IAGG-ER), the European union of medical specialists (EUMS), the Fragility fracture network (FFN), the International osteoporosis foundation (IOF) - European society for clinical and economic aspects of osteoporosis and osteoarthritis (ECCEO), outlines its views on the main points in the current debate in relation to the primary and secondary prevention of falls, the diagnosis and treatment of bone fragility, and the place of combined falls and fracture liaison services for fracture prevention in older people.
|
|
| 3. |
- Aarestrup, FM, et al.
(author)
-
Towards a European health research and innovation cloud (HRIC)
- 2020
-
In: Genome medicine. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1756-994X. ; 12:1, s. 18-
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- The European Union (EU) initiative on the Digital Transformation of Health and Care (Digicare) aims to provide the conditions necessary for building a secure, flexible, and decentralized digital health infrastructure. Creating a European Health Research and Innovation Cloud (HRIC) within this environment should enable data sharing and analysis for health research across the EU, in compliance with data protection legislation while preserving the full trust of the participants. Such a HRIC should learn from and build on existing data infrastructures, integrate best practices, and focus on the concrete needs of the community in terms of technologies, governance, management, regulation, and ethics requirements. Here, we describe the vision and expected benefits of digital data sharing in health research activities and present a roadmap that fosters the opportunities while answering the challenges of implementing a HRIC. For this, we put forward five specific recommendations and action points to ensure that a European HRIC: i) is built on established standards and guidelines, providing cloud technologies through an open and decentralized infrastructure; ii) is developed and certified to the highest standards of interoperability and data security that can be trusted by all stakeholders; iii) is supported by a robust ethical and legal framework that is compliant with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR); iv) establishes a proper environment for the training of new generations of data and medical scientists; and v) stimulates research and innovation in transnational collaborations through public and private initiatives and partnerships funded by the EU through Horizon 2020 and Horizon Europe.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Combe, G., et al.
(author)
-
Experimental evidence of granulence
- 2013
-
In: AIP Conference Proceedings. - : AIP. - 0094-243X. ; 1542, s. 453-456
-
Conference paper (peer-reviewed)abstract
- We present an experimental study of velocity fluctuations in quasistatic flow of a 2D granular material deformed in a shear apparatus named 1γ2ε [1]. Radjaï and Roux [2] revealed systematic similarities between velocity fluctuations observed in discrete element simulations of quasistatic flow of granular material and turbulent flows in fluids. The character of these velocity fluctuations - named granulence by [2] - manifests as a non-Gaussian broadening of the probability density function of the fluctuations as the length of the analyzed shear-window is decreased, and exhibits some space and time scaling. The experiments presented are simple shear tests on granular samples composed of about 2000 wooden rods. The kinematics of the rod centers was followed by means of 2D Particle Image Tracking (PIT) technique applied to a sequence of 24 Mpixels digital pictures acquired throughout the duration of the loading at a frequency of 0.08 image/s. This analysis confirms the existence of granulence features in a real experimental test, which is comparable to that previously observed in numerical simulations of [2]. The experimental results obtained open up a new avenue for further studies on fluctuations in granular materials.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
|
|
| 11. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(author)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs
- 2010
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 69:6, s. 964-975
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may differ among rheumatologists and currently, clear and consensual international recommendations on RA treatment are not available. In this paper recommendations for the treatment of RA with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects, are described. The recommendations are based on evidence from five systematic literature reviews (SLRs) performed for synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs, GCs, treatment strategies and economic issues. The SLR-derived evidence was discussed and summarised as an expert opinion in the course of a Delphi-like process. Levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Fifteen recommendations were developed covering an area from general aspects such as remission/low disease activity as treatment aim via the preference for methotrexate monotherapy with or without GCs vis-à-vis combination of synthetic DMARDs to the use of biological agents mainly in patients for whom synthetic DMARDs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had failed. Cost effectiveness of the treatments was additionally examined. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA, based on evidence and expert opinion.
|
|
| 12. |
- Smolen, JS, et al.
(author)
-
EULAR recommendations for the management of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs: 2016 update
- 2017
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:6, s. 960-977
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Recent insights in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) necessitated updating the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) RA management recommendations. A large international Task Force based decisions on evidence from 3 systematic literature reviews, developing 4 overarching principles and 12 recommendations (vs 3 and 14, respectively, in 2013). The recommendations address conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (methotrexate (MTX), leflunomide, sulfasalazine); glucocorticoids (GC); biological (b) DMARDs (tumour necrosis factor (TNF)-inhibitors (adalimumab, certolizumab pegol, etanercept, golimumab, infliximab), abatacept, rituximab, tocilizumab, clazakizumab, sarilumab and sirukumab and biosimilar (bs) DMARDs) and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs (Janus kinase (Jak) inhibitors tofacitinib, baricitinib). Monotherapy, combination therapy, treatment strategies (treat-to-target) and the targets of sustained clinical remission (as defined by the American College of Rheumatology-(ACR)-EULAR Boolean or index criteria) or low disease activity are discussed. Cost aspects were taken into consideration. As first strategy, the Task Force recommends MTX (rapid escalation to 25 mg/week) plus short-term GC, aiming at >50% improvement within 3 and target attainment within 6 months. If this fails stratification is recommended. Without unfavourable prognostic markers, switching to—or adding—another csDMARDs (plus short-term GC) is suggested. In the presence of unfavourable prognostic markers (autoantibodies, high disease activity, early erosions, failure of 2 csDMARDs), any bDMARD (current practice) or Jak-inhibitor should be added to the csDMARD. If this fails, any other bDMARD or tsDMARD is recommended. If a patient is in sustained remission, bDMARDs can be tapered. For each recommendation, levels of evidence and Task Force agreement are provided, both mostly very high. These recommendations intend informing rheumatologists, patients, national rheumatology societies, hospital officials, social security agencies and regulators about EULAR's most recent consensus on the management of RA, aimed at attaining best outcomes with current therapies.
|
|
| 13. |
|
|
| 14. |
|
|
| 15. |
- Combe, B, et al.
(author)
-
2016 update of the EULAR recommendations for the management of early arthritis
- 2017
-
In: Annals of the rheumatic diseases. - : BMJ. - 1468-2060 .- 0003-4967. ; 76:6, s. 948-959
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Since the 2007 recommendations for the management of early arthritis have been presented, considerable research has been published in the field of early arthritis, mandating an update of the 2007 European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) recommendations for management of early arthritis.MethodsIn accordance with the 2014 EULAR Standardised Operating Procedures, the expert committee pursued an approach that was based on evidence in the literature and on expert opinion. The committee involved 20 rheumatologists, 2 patients and 1 healthcare professional representing 12 European countries. The group defined the focus of the expert committee and target population, formulated a definition of ‘management’ and selected the research questions. A systematic literature research (SLR) was performed by two fellows with the help of a skilled librarian. A set of draft recommendations was proposed on the basis of the research questions and the results of the SLR. For each recommendation, the categories of evidence were identified, the strength of recommendations was derived and the level of agreement was determined through a voting process.ResultsThe updated recommendations comprise 3 overarching principles and 12 recommendations for managing early arthritis. The selected statements involve the recognition of arthritis, referral, diagnosis, prognostication, treatment (information, education, pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions), monitoring and strategy. Eighteen items were identified as relevant for future research.ConclusionsThese recommendations provide rheumatologists, general practitioners, healthcare professionals, patients and other stakeholders with an updated EULAR consensus on the entire management of early arthritis.
|
|
| 16. |
|
|
| 17. |
|
|
| 18. |
|
|
| 19. |
|
|
| 20. |
|
|
| 21. |
|
|
