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. |
|
|
3. |
|
|
4. |
|
|
5. |
|
|
6. |
- Mishra, A, et al.
(author)
-
Diminishing benefits of urban living for children and adolescents' growth and development
- 2023
-
In: Nature. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1476-4687 .- 0028-0836. ; 615:7954, s. 874-883
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Optimal growth and development in childhood and adolescence is crucial for lifelong health and well-being1–6. Here we used data from 2,325 population-based studies, with measurements of height and weight from 71 million participants, to report the height and body-mass index (BMI) of children and adolescents aged 5–19 years on the basis of rural and urban place of residence in 200 countries and territories from 1990 to 2020. In 1990, children and adolescents residing in cities were taller than their rural counterparts in all but a few high-income countries. By 2020, the urban height advantage became smaller in most countries, and in many high-income western countries it reversed into a small urban-based disadvantage. The exception was for boys in most countries in sub-Saharan Africa and in some countries in Oceania, south Asia and the region of central Asia, Middle East and north Africa. In these countries, successive cohorts of boys from rural places either did not gain height or possibly became shorter, and hence fell further behind their urban peers. The difference between the age-standardized mean BMI of children in urban and rural areas was <1.1 kg m–2 in the vast majority of countries. Within this small range, BMI increased slightly more in cities than in rural areas, except in south Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and some countries in central and eastern Europe. Our results show that in much of the world, the growth and developmental advantages of living in cities have diminished in the twenty-first century, whereas in much of sub-Saharan Africa they have amplified.
|
|
7. |
|
|
8. |
- Niemi, MEK, et al.
(author)
-
- 2021
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
9. |
|
|
10. |
|
|
11. |
- Kanai, M, et al.
(author)
-
- 2023
-
swepub:Mat__t
|
|
12. |
|
|
13. |
|
|
14. |
|
|
15. |
|
|
16. |
|
|
17. |
|
|
18. |
|
|
19. |
|
|
20. |
|
|
21. |
|
|
22. |
|
|
23. |
|
|
24. |
|
|
25. |
|
|
26. |
|
|
27. |
|
|
28. |
|
|
29. |
|
|
30. |
|
|
31. |
|
|
32. |
|
|
33. |
|
|
34. |
|
|
35. |
|
|
36. |
- Ozgen, H, et al.
(author)
-
International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder
- 2020
-
In: European addiction research. - : S. Karger AG. - 1421-9891 .- 1022-6877. ; 26:4-5, s. 223-232
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- <b><i>Background:</i></b> Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a risk factor for substance misuse and substance use disorder (SUD) in adolescence and (early) adulthood. ADHD and SUD also frequently co-occur in treatment-seeking adolescents, which complicates diagnosis and treatment and is associated with poor treatment outcomes. Research on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on the prevention of adolescent SUD is inconclusive, and studies on the diagnosis and treatment of adolescents with ADHD and SUD are scarce. Thus, the available evidence is generally not sufficient to justify robust treatment recommendations. <b><i>Objective:</i></b> The aim of the study was to obtain a consensus statement based on a combination of scientific data and clinical experience. <b><i>Method:</i></b> A modified Delphi study to reach consensus based upon the combination of scientific data and clinical experience with a multidisciplinary group of 55 experts from 17 countries. The experts were asked to rate a set of statements on the effect of treatment of childhood ADHD on adolescent SUD and on the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of adolescents with comorbid ADHD and SUD. <b><i>Results:</i></b> After 3 iterative rounds of rating and adapting 37 statements, consensus was reached on 36 of these statements representing 6 domains: general (<i>n</i> = 4), risk of developing SUD (<i>n</i> = 3), screening and diagnosis (<i>n</i> = 7), psychosocial treatment (<i>n</i> = 5), pharmacological treatment (<i>n</i> = 11), and complementary treatments (<i>n</i> = 7). Routine screening is recommended for ADHD in adolescent patients in substance abuse treatment and for SUD in adolescent patients with ADHD in mental healthcare settings. Long-acting stimulants are recommended as the first-line treatment of ADHD in adolescents with concurrent ADHD and SUD, and pharmacotherapy should preferably be embedded in psychosocial treatment. The only remaining no-consensus statement concerned the requirement of abstinence before starting pharmacological treatment in adolescents with ADHD and concurrent SUD. In contrast to the majority, some experts required full abstinence before starting any pharmacological treatment, some were against the use of stimulants in the treatment of these patients (independent of abstinence), while some were against the alternative use of bupropion. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> This international consensus statement can be used by clinicians and patients together in a shared decision-making process to select the best interventions and to reach optimal outcomes in adolescent patients with concurrent ADHD and SUD.
|
|
37. |
- Ozgen, H, et al.
(author)
-
[International Consensus Statement for the Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Adolescents with Concurrent Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Substance Use Disorder]
- 2022
-
In: Zeitschrift fur Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie. - : Hogrefe Publishing Group. - 1422-4917 .- 1664-2880. ; 50:1, s. 54-67
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Zusammenfassung. Hintergrund: Eine Aufmerksamkeitsdefizit-/Hyperaktivitätsstörung (ADHS) im Kindesalter stellt einen Risikofaktor für Substanzmissbrauch und Störungen durch Substanzgebrauch (Substance Use Disorder, SUD) in der Pubertät und dem (frühen) Erwachsenenalter dar. ADHS und SUD treten auch häufig bei therapiesuchenden Jugendlichen auf, was die Diagnosestellung und Therapie erschwert sowie mit schlechten Behandlungsergebnissen verbunden ist. Forschungsergebnisse über die Wirkung der Behandlung von ADHS im Kindesalter auf die Prävention von SUD im Jugendalter sind nicht eindeutig und Studien über die Diagnose und Behandlung von Jugendlichen mit ADHS und SUD sind selten. Daher reicht die verfügbare Evidenz allgemein nicht aus, um starke Behandlungsempfehlungen zu rechtfertigen. Fragestellung: Ziel dieser Arbeit war es, eine Konsenserklärung auf der Grundlage von wissenschaftlichen Daten und klinischen Erfahrungen zu erhalten. Methodik: Es wurde eine modifizierte Delphi-Studie durchgeführt, um basierend auf der Kombination von wissenschaftlichen Daten und klinischer Erfahrung mit einer multidisziplinären Gruppe von 55 Expert_innen aus 17 Ländern einen Konsens zu erzielen. Die Expert_innen wurden gebeten, eine Reihe von Aussagen über die Wirkung der Behandlung von ADHS im Kindesalter auf die SUD bei Jugendlichen sowie über das Screening, die Diagnostik und die Behandlung von Jugendlichen mit komorbidem ADHS und SUD zu bewerten. Ergebnisse: Nach drei iterativen Bewertungsrunden und der Anpassung von 37 Aussagen wurde ein Konsens über 36 dieser Aussagen erzielt, die sechs Bereiche repräsentieren: allgemein ( n = 4), Risiko der Entwicklung einer SUD ( n = 3), Screening und Diagnostik ( n = 7), psychosoziale Behandlung ( n = 5), pharmakologische Behandlung ( n = 11) und komplementäre Behandlungen ( n = 7). Der Einsatz von Routinescreenings auf ADHS wird bei adoleszenten Patient_innen in einer Suchtbehandlung ebenso wie Routinescreenings auf SUD bei jugendlichen Patient_innen mit ADHS in allgemeinpsychiatrischen Therapiesettings empfohlen. Langwirksame Stimulanzien werden als Behandlung der ersten Wahl von ADHS bei Jugendlichen mit gleichzeitiger ADHS und SUD empfohlen. Die Pharmakotherapie sollte vorzugsweise in psychosoziale Behandlung eingebettet werden. Die einzige nichtkonsentierte Aussage betraf die Notwendigkeit von Abstinenz vor Beginn einer pharmakologischen Behandlung bei Jugendlichen mit ADHS und gleichzeitigem SUD. Im Gegensatz zur Mehrheit verlangten einige Expert_innen eine vollständige Abstinenz vor Beginn einer pharmakologischen Behandlung, einige waren gegen die Verwendung von Stimulanzien bei der Behandlung dieser Patient_innen (unabhängig von Abstinenz), während einige sich gegen die alternative Anwendung von Bupropion aussprachen. Schlussfolgerungen: Diese internationale Konsenserklärung kann von Kliniker_innen und Patient_innen zusammen in einem gemeinsamen Entscheidungsprozess genutzt werden, um die besten Interventionen auszuwählen und die bestmöglichen Ergebnisse bei adoleszenten Patient_innen mit gleichzeitiger ADHS und SUD zu erzielen.
|
|
38. |
|
|
39. |
|
|
40. |
|
|
41. |
|
|
42. |
|
|