Nivel de la ejecución presupuestal y su incidencia en el logro del programa de incentivos en la Municipalidad Distrital de Baños del Inca durante el periodo 2016

RESUMEN: El presente trabajo tiene como objetivo evaluar el comportamiento de la ejecución presupuestal en el cumplimiento de las metas institucionales dentro del ejercicio presupuestal referidas al Presupuesto Institucional de Apertura, Presupuesto Institucional Modificado, presupuesto ejecutada por fuentes de financiamiento, categoría presupuestal y proyectos de inversión social. Es por ello la importancia del presente trabajo de investigación para mostrar las dificultades con respecto a la ejecución del presupuesto del programa de Incentivos de la Municipalidad Distrital de Baños del Inca, que conllevan a la no satisfacción de acuerdo a las necesidades de la población y por ende no logra alcanzar las metas y objetivos de dicha municipalidad. Para la investigación se ha utilizado los métodos deductivo, descriptivo, analítico y comparativo para evaluar la problemática de la ejecución presupuestal. El objetivo general de la investigación es: Evaluar el nivel de cumplimiento de los planes de ejecución presupuestal y su incidencia en el logro del programa de incentivos de la Municipalidad Distrital de Baños del Inca en el periodo 2016. PALABRAS CLAVE: ejecución presupuestal, logro del Programa de Incentivos; Municipalidad Distrital de Baños del Inca

Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins-3

digestion and MALDI MS. C) Some examples of proteins whose expression differed between the two samples. ATPB, ATP synthase β chain, mitochondrial;1433Z, 14-3-3 protein zeta/delta; GLNA, Glutamine synthetase; PHB, Prohibitin; SYPH, Synaptophysin; PSB7, Proteasome subunit β type 7; ERP29, Endoplasmic reticulum protein ERp29; TPIS, Triosephosphate isomerase.<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/9/36</p><p>BMC Neuroscience 2008;9():36-36.</p><p>Published online 10 Apr 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2324106.</p><p></p

Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins-1

Ional gel electrophoresis and silver stained. B) Distribution of spot intensities (black histograms) and background noise (grey histograms) from the same 2D gels in panel A from cultures (upper panel) and hippocampal tissue (lower panel). C) Some exemplar proteins whose expression differed between the two samples. TPIS: Triosophosphate isomerase; ACOM: mitochondrial aconitase; PEBP1: Phosphatydilethanolamine-binding protein 1; GMFB: Glial maturation factor beta; TCTP: translationally controlled tumor protein (see also table 1).<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/9/36</p><p>BMC Neuroscience 2008;9():36-36.</p><p>Published online 10 Apr 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2324106.</p><p></p

Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins-2

D silver stained. B) Distributions of spot intensities (black histograms) and background noise (grey histograms) from the same 2D gels of panel A from cytosol (upper panel) and synaptosomes (lower panel). C) Digital representation of the superimposition of the two protein profiles (cytosol, blue; synaptosomes, red) after spot detection (see methods for details).<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Protein fingerprints of cultured CA3-CA1 hippocampal neurons: comparative analysis of the distribution of synaptosomal and cytosolic proteins"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2202/9/36</p><p>BMC Neuroscience 2008;9():36-36.</p><p>Published online 10 Apr 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2324106.</p><p></p

Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and last 30 min of the HD session.

<p>Patients are grouped in tertiles of pre-dialysis FO/ECW%.</p><p>Comparisons between baseline (BL) and last 30 min of hemodialysis (HD)</p><p># Wilcoxon signed rank test p-value< 0.05, or</p><p>§ p-value<0.01 (italics)</p><p>*Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 1st tertile</p><p>°Kruskal–Wallis one-way analysis of variance p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 2nd tertile</p><p>The bold values mark the indices, which significantly differ among groups.</p><p>Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and last 30 min of the HD session.</p

Hematocrit values.

<p>Boxplot of patient hematocrit values at the start and end of hemodialysis grouped by pre-dialysis FO/ECW% tertiles. HD: hemodialysis. BVM: Blood Volume Monitor device.</p

Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and the last 30 min of the HD session.

<p>Patients are grouped in tertiles of pre-dialysis FO/ECW%. Diabetic patients are excluded.</p><p>Comparisons between baseline (BL) and last 30 min of hemodialysis (HD)</p><p># Wilcoxon signed rank test p-value< 0.05, or</p><p>§ p-value<0.01 (italics)</p><p>Values of time and frequency domain indices estimated during the first 15 min (baseline) and the last 30 min of the HD session.</p

Data of analyzed patients.

<p>Values are expressed as median (25°,75° percentile) and the occurence of comorbidities and drug prescription are reported</p><p>* one-way ANOVA p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 1^st tertile and 2^nd tertile</p><p>§ kruskall wallis ANOVA p<0.05, post hoc comparison p-value <0.05 vs 2^nd tertile.</p><p>SBP = systolic blood pressure; DBP = diastolic blood pressure.</p><p>Data of analyzed patients.</p

Values of the LF differences between baseline and last 30 minutes of hemodialysis.

<p>Values of the LF differences between baseline and last 30 minutes of hemodialysis in the three groups by excluding diabetes (see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0120167#pone.0120167.t003" target="_blank">Table 3</a>). The circles represent the singular patients. The errorbar represents the median and the 25^th and 75^th percentile (patients are grouped by the tertiles of FO_pre/ECW% values). Note the increase in LF in the first tertile. The outliers are inserted in the picture at a different scale in order to focus the attention to the errorbars.</p

RMSE at medium time scales over HP and QT series.

<p>RMSE mean (plus standard deviation) assessed at medium time scales (i.e. τ = 2–4) over HP series, RMSE_{HP,τ = 2–4} (a,c,e), and QT series, RMSE_{QT,τ = 2–4} (b,d,f), is shown as a function of the experimental protocol. RMSE_{HP,τ = 2–4} and RMSE_{QT,τ = 2–4} are depicted as a function of the group of subjects in the NMC-MC protocol in (a) and (b) respectively, as a function of the period of analysis in the DAY-NIGHT protocol in (c) and (d) respectively, and as a function of the therapy in the BBoff-BBon protocol in (e) and (f) respectively. The gray, dark and white bars are relevant to NMC, ASYMP and SYMP individuals, respectively. The symbol * indicates a significant difference between experimental conditions (i.e. DAY versus NIGHT, BBoff versus BBon) within the same group with p<0.05. The symbol ^# indicates a significant difference between groups within the same experimental conditions (i.e. DAY, NIGHT, BBoff or BBon) with p<0.05.</p