| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Ely, K. S., et al.
(author)
-
A reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata
- 2021
-
In: Ecological Informatics. - : Elsevier BV. - 1574-9541. ; 61
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Leaf-level gas exchange data support the mechanistic understanding of plant fluxes of carbon and water. These fluxes inform our understanding of ecosystem function, are an important constraint on parameterization of terrestrial biosphere models, are necessary to understand the response of plants to global environmental change, and are integral to efforts to improve crop production. Collection of these data using gas analyzers can be both technically challenging and time consuming, and individual studies generally focus on a small range of species, restricted time periods, or limited geographic regions. The high value of these data is exemplified by the many publications that reuse and synthesize gas exchange data, however the lack of metadata and data reporting conventions make full and efficient use of these data difficult. Here we propose a reporting format for leaf-level gas exchange data and metadata to provide guidance to data contributors on how to store data in repositories to maximize their discoverability, facilitate their efficient reuse, and add value to individual datasets. For data users, the reporting format will better allow data repositories to optimize data search and extraction, and more readily integrate similar data into harmonized synthesis products. The reporting format specifies data table variable naming and unit conventions, as well as metadata characterizing experimental conditions and protocols. For common data types that were the focus of this initial version of the reporting format, i.e., survey measurements, dark respiration, carbon dioxide and light response curves, and parameters derived from those measurements, we took a further step of defining required additional data and metadata that would maximize the potential reuse of those data types. To aid data contributors and the development of data ingest tools by data repositories we provided a translation table comparing the outputs of common gas exchange instruments. Extensive consultation with data collectors, data users, instrument manufacturers, and data scientists was undertaken in order to ensure that the reporting format met community needs. The reporting format presented here is intended to form a foundation for future development that will incorporate additional data types and variables as gas exchange systems and measurement approaches advance in the future. The reporting format is published in the U.S. Department of Energy?s ESS-DIVE data repository, with documentation and future development efforts being maintained in a version control system.
|
|
| 3. |
- Furukawa, T. A., et al.
(author)
-
Dismantling, optimising, and personalising internet cognitive behavioural therapy for depression: a systematic review and component network meta-analysis using individual data
- 2021
-
In: Lancet Psychiatry. - : Elsevier BV. - 2215-0374 .- 2215-0366. ; 8:6, s. 500-511
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Findings We identified 76 RCTs, including 48 trials contributing individual participant data (11 704 participants) and 28 trials with aggregate data (6474 participants). The participants' weighted mean age was 42.0 years and 12 406 (71%) of 17 521 reported were women. There was suggestive evidence that behavioural activation might be beneficial (iMD -1.83 [95% credible interval (CrI) -2.90 to -0.80]) and that relaxation might be harmful (1.20 [95% CrI 0.17 to 2.27]). Baseline severity emerged as the strongest prognostic factor for endpoint depression. Combining human and automated encouragement reduced dropouts from treatment (incremental odds ratio, 0.32 [95% CrI 0.13 to 0.93]). The risk of bias was low for the randomisation process, missing outcome data, or selection of reported results in most of the included studies, uncertain for deviation from intended interventions, and high for measurement of outcomes. There was moderate to high heterogeneity among the studies and their components. 511
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
-
The Seventeenth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys : Complete Release of MaNGA, MaStar, and APOGEE-2 Data
- 2022
-
In: Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series. - : Institute of Physics (IOP). - 0067-0049 .- 1538-4365. ; 259:2
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- This paper documents the seventeenth data release (DR17) from the Sloan Digital Sky Surveys; the fifth and final release from the fourth phase (SDSS-IV). DR17 contains the complete release of the Mapping Nearby Galaxies at Apache Point Observatory (MaNGA) survey, which reached its goal of surveying over 10,000 nearby galaxies. The complete release of the MaNGA Stellar Library accompanies this data, providing observations of almost 30,000 stars through the MaNGA instrument during bright time. DR17 also contains the complete release of the Apache Point Observatory Galactic Evolution Experiment 2 survey that publicly releases infrared spectra of over 650,000 stars. The main sample from the Extended Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (eBOSS), as well as the subsurvey Time Domain Spectroscopic Survey data were fully released in DR16. New single-fiber optical spectroscopy released in DR17 is from the SPectroscipic IDentification of ERosita Survey subsurvey and the eBOSS-RM program. Along with the primary data sets, DR17 includes 25 new or updated value-added catalogs. This paper concludes the release of SDSS-IV survey data. SDSS continues into its fifth phase with observations already underway for the Milky Way Mapper, Local Volume Mapper, and Black Hole Mapper surveys.
|
|
| 6. |
- Axfors, Cathrine, et al.
(author)
-
Association between convalescent plasma treatment and mortality in COVID-19 : a collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
- 2021
-
In: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : BioMed Central (BMC). - 1471-2334. ; 21:1
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Convalescent plasma has been widely used to treat COVID-19 and is under investigation in numerous randomized clinical trials, but results are publicly available only for a small number of trials. The objective of this study was to assess the benefits of convalescent plasma treatment compared to placebo or no treatment and all-cause mortality in patients with COVID-19, using data from all available randomized clinical trials, including unpublished and ongoing trials (Open Science Framework, ). Methods: In this collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis, clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform), the Cochrane COVID-19 register, the LOVE database, and PubMed were searched until April 8, 2021. Investigators of trials registered by March 1, 2021, without published results were contacted via email. Eligible were ongoing, discontinued and completed randomized clinical trials that compared convalescent plasma with placebo or no treatment in COVID-19 patients, regardless of setting or treatment schedule. Aggregated mortality data were extracted from publications or provided by investigators of unpublished trials and combined using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman random effects model. We investigated the contribution of unpublished trials to the overall evidence. Results: A total of 16,477 patients were included in 33 trials (20 unpublished with 3190 patients, 13 published with 13,287 patients). 32 trials enrolled only hospitalized patients (including 3 with only intensive care unit patients). Risk of bias was low for 29/33 trials. Of 8495 patients who received convalescent plasma, 1997 died (23%), and of 7982 control patients, 1952 died (24%). The combined risk ratio for all-cause mortality was 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.92; 1.02) with between-study heterogeneity not beyond chance (I-2 = 0%). The RECOVERY trial had 69.8% and the unpublished evidence 25.3% of the weight in the meta-analysis. Conclusions: Convalescent plasma treatment of patients with COVID-19 did not reduce all-cause mortality. These results provide strong evidence that convalescent plasma treatment for patients with COVID-19 should not be used outside of randomized trials. Evidence synthesis from collaborations among trial investigators can inform both evidence generation and evidence application in patient care.
|
|
| 7. |
- Butler, C. C., et al.
(author)
-
Oseltamivir plus usual care versus usual care for influenza-like illness in primary care: an open-label, pragmatic, randomised controlled trial
- 2020
-
In: Lancet. - : Elsevier BV. - 0140-6736. ; 395:10217, s. 42-52
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background Antivirals are infrequently prescribed in European primary care for influenza-like illness, mostly because of perceived ineffectiveness in real world primary care and because individuals who will especially benefit have not been identified in independent trials. We aimed to determine whether adding antiviral treatment to usual primary care for patients with influenza-like illness reduces time to recovery overall and in key subgroups. Methods We did an open-label, pragmatic, adaptive, randomised controlled trial of adding oseltamivir to usual care in patients aged 1 year and older presenting with influenza-like illness in primary care. The primary endpoint was time to recovery, defined as return to usual activities, with fever, headache, and muscle ache minor or absent. The trial was designed and powered to assess oseltamivir benefit overall and in 36 prespecified subgroups defined by age, comorbidity, previous symptom duration, and symptom severity, using a Bayesian piece-wise exponential primary analysis model. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN 27908921. Findings Between Jan 15, 2016, and April 12, 2018, we recruited 3266 participants in 15 European countries during three seasonal influenza seasons, allocated 1629 to usual care plus oseltamivir and 1637 to usual care, and ascertained the primary outcome in 1533 (94%) and 1526 (93%). 1590 (52%) of 3059 participants had PCR-confirmed influenza infection. Time to recovery was shorter in participants randomly assigned to oseltamivir (hazard ratio 1.29, 95% Bayesian credible interval [BCrI] 1.20-1.39) overall and in 30 of the 36 prespecified subgroups, with estimated hazard ratios ranging from 1.13 to 1.72. The estimated absolute mean benefit from oseltamivir was 1.02 days (95% [BCrI] 0.74-1.31) overall, and in the prespecified subgroups, ranged from 0.70 (95% BCrI 0.30-1.20) in patients younger than 12 years, with less severe symptoms, no comorbidities, and shorter previous illness duration to 3.20 (95% BCrI 1.00-5.50) in patients aged 65 years or older who had more severe illness, comorbidities, and longer previous illness duration. Regarding harms, an increased burden of vomiting or nausea was observed in the oseltamivir group. Interpretation Primary care patients with influenza-like illness treated with oseltamivir recovered one day sooner on average than those managed by usual care alone. Older, sicker patients with comorbidities and longer previous symptom duration recovered 2-3 days sooner. Copyright (C) 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Schwartz, K. L., et al.
(author)
-
Best practice guidance for antibiotic audit and feedback interventions in primary care: a modified Delphi study from the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial resistance: Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network (JPIAMR-PAAN)
- 2023
-
In: Antimicrobial Resistance and Infection Control. - 2047-2994. ; 12:1
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BackgroundPrimary care is a critical partner for antimicrobial stewardship efforts given its high human antibiotic usage. Peer comparison audit and feedback (A & F) is often used to reduce inappropriate antibiotic prescribing. The design and implementation of A & F may impact its effectiveness. There are no best practice guidelines for peer comparison A & F in antibiotic prescribing in primary care.ObjectiveTo develop best practice guidelines for peer comparison A & F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care in high income countries by leveraging international expertise via the Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance-Primary Care Antibiotic Audit and Feedback Network.MethodsWe used a modified Delphi process to achieve convergence of expert opinions on best practice statements for peer comparison A & F based on existing evidence and theory. Three rounds were performed, each with online surveys and virtual meetings to enable discussion and rating of each best practice statement. A five-point Likert scale was used to rate consensus with a median threshold score of 4 to indicate a consensus statement.ResultsThe final set of guidelines include 13 best practice statements in four categories: general considerations (n = 3), selecting feedback recipients (n = 1), data and indicator selection (n = 4), and feedback delivery (n = 5).ConclusionWe report an expert-derived best practice recommendations for designing and evaluating peer comparison A & F for antibiotic prescribing in primary care. These 13 statements can be used by A & F designers to optimize the impact of their quality improvement interventions, and improve antibiotic prescribing in primary care.
|
|
