27,436 research outputs found
A customisable pipeline for continuously harvesting socially-minded Twitter users
On social media platforms and Twitter in particular, specific classes of
users such as influencers have been given satisfactory operational definitions
in terms of network and content metrics.
Others, for instance online activists, are not less important but their
characterisation still requires experimenting.
We make the hypothesis that such interesting users can be found within
temporally and spatially localised contexts, i.e., small but topical fragments
of the network containing interactions about social events or campaigns with a
significant footprint on Twitter.
To explore this hypothesis, we have designed a continuous user profile
discovery pipeline that produces an ever-growing dataset of user profiles by
harvesting and analysing contexts from the Twitter stream.
The profiles dataset includes key network and content-based users metrics,
enabling experimentation with user-defined score functions that characterise
specific classes of online users.
The paper describes the design and implementation of the pipeline and its
empirical evaluation on a case study consisting of healthcare-related campaigns
in the UK, showing how it supports the operational definitions of online
activism, by comparing three experimental ranking functions. The code is
publicly available.Comment: Procs. ICWE 2019, June 2019, Kore
Topical agents or dressings for pain in venous leg ulcers.
Venous leg ulcers affect up to 1% of people at some time in their lives and are often painful. The main treatments are compression bandages and dressings. Topical treatments to reduce pain during and between dressing changes are sometimes used
Recommended from our members
Adherence, compliance, persistence and concordance in the management of glaucoma, Part I
Adherence is laden with difficulties in relation to the management of glaucoma. Perhaps a significant issue associated with a lack of the aforementioned is associated with the patient's failure to recognize there is a need to administer their eye drops as prescribed. Undoubtedly the greatest issue is that patients experience no pain with their debilitating eye disease. It is not until there is considerable loss of vision that awareness of the need to administer eye drops becomes a reality. Understanding the complexities of adherence and its association with compliance, persistence and concordance as discussed in this article can assist the healthcare practitioner in developing models of care that help the patient in self management of their glaucoma. This article is published in two parts. Part I addresses the background to issues associated with adherence in glaucoma management including definition of terms, assessing adherence and barriers and interventions to improve adherence. Part 2 addresses the theory of adherence and self management of chronic open angle glaucoma (COAG). It provides perspectives, theories and models that can be employed to improve adherence in the self-management of glaucoma
Recommended from our members
Current Knowledge and Attitudes Concerning Cost-Effectiveness in Glaucoma Pharmacotherapy: A Glaucoma Specialists Focus Group Study.
Background:Rising healthcare costs motivate continued cost-reduction efforts. To help lower costs associated with open-angle glaucoma (OAG), a prevalent, progressive disease with substantial direct and indirect costs, clinicians need to understand the cost-effectiveness of intraocular pressure (IOP)-lowering pharmacotherapies. There is little published information on clinicians' knowledge and attitudes about cost-effectiveness in glaucoma treatment. Purpose:This pilot focus group study aimed to explore clinician attitudes and perspectives around the costs and cost drivers of glaucoma therapy; the implementation of cost-effectiveness decisions; the clinical utility of cost-effectiveness studies; and the cost-effectiveness of available treatments. Methods:Six US glaucoma specialists participated in two separate teleconferencing sessions (three participants each), managed by an independent, skilled moderator (also a glaucoma specialist) using a discussion guide. Participants reviewed recent publications (n=25) on health economics outcomes research in glaucoma prior to the sessions. Results:Participants demonstrated a clear understanding of the economic burden of glaucoma therapy and identified medications, diagnostics, office visits, and treatment changes as key cost drivers. They considered cost-effectiveness an appropriate component of treatment decision-making but identified the need for additional data to inform these decisions. Participants indicated that there were only a few recent studies on health economics outcomes in glaucoma which evaluate parameters important to patient care, such as quality of life and medication adherence, and that longitudinal data were scant. In addition to efficacy, participants felt patient adherence and side-effect profile should be included in economic evaluations of glaucoma pharmacotherapy. Recently approved medications were evaluated in this context. Conclusion:Clinicians deem treatment decisions based on cost-effectiveness data as clinically appropriate. Newer IOP-lowering therapies with potentially greater efficacy and favorable side-effect and adherence profiles may help optimize cost-effectiveness. Future studies should include: clinicians' perspectives; lack of commercial bias; analysis of long-term outcomes/costs; more comprehensive parameters; real-world (including quality-of-life) data; and a robust Markov model
Nasal decongestants in monotherapy for the common cold
Background : Many treatments for the common cold exist and are sold over-the-counter. Nevertheless, evidence on the effectiveness and safety of nasal decongestants is limited.
Objectives : To assess the efficacy, and short-and long-termsafety, of nasal decongestants used inmonotherapy to alleviate symptoms of the common cold in adults and children.
Search methods : We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, Issue 6, June 2016), which contains the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections (ARI) Specialised Register, MEDLINE (1946 to July 2016), Embase (2010 to 15 July 2016), CINAHL (1981 to 15 July 2016), LILACS (1982 to July 2016), Web of Science (1955 to July 2016) and clinical trials registers.
Selection criteria : Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs investigating the effectiveness and adverse effects of nasal decongestants compared with placebo for treating the common cold in adults and children. We excluded quasi-RCTs.
Data collection and analysis : Three review authors independently extracted and summarised data on subjective measures of nasal congestion, overall patient wellbeing score, objective measures of nasal airway resistance, adverse effects and general recovery. One review author acted as arbiter in cases of disagreement. We categorised trials as single and multi-dose and analysed data both separately and together. We also analysed studies using an oral or topical nasal decongestant separately and together.
Main results : We included 15 trials with 1838 participants. Fourteen studies included adult participants only (aged 18 years and over). In six studies the intervention was a single dose and in nine studies multiple doses were used. Nine studies used pseudoephedrine and three studies used oxymetazoline. Other decongestants included phenylpropanolamine, norephedrine and xylometazoline. Phenylpropanolamine (or norephedrine) is no longer available on the market therefore we did not include the results of these studies in the meta-analyses. Eleven studies used oral decongestants; four studies used topical decongestants.
Participants were included after contracting the common cold. The duration of symptoms differed among studies; in 10 studies participants had symptoms for less than three days, in three studies symptoms were present for less than five days, one study counted the number of colds over one year, and one study experimentally induced the common cold. In the single-dose studies, the effectiveness of a nasal decongestant was measured on the same day, whereas the follow-up in multi-dose studies ranged between one and 10 days.
Most studies were conducted in university settings (N = eight), six at a specific university common cold centre. Three studies were conducted at a university in collaboration with a hospital and two in a hospital only setting. In two studies the setting was unclear.
There were large differences in the reporting of outcomes and the reporting of methods in most studies was limited. Therefore, we judged most studies to be at low or unclear risk of bias. Pooling was possible for a limited number of studies only; measures of effect are expressed as standardised mean differences (SMDs). A positive SMD represents an improvement in congestion. There is no defined minimal clinically important difference for measures of subjective improvement in nasal congestion, therefore we used the SMDs as a guide to assess whether an effect was small (0.2 to 0.49), moderate (0.5 to 0.79) or large (>= 0.8).
Single-dose decongestant versus placebo: 10 studies compared a single dose of nasal decongestant with placebo and their effectiveness was tested between 15 minutes and 10 hours after dosing. Seven of 10 studies reported subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion; none reported overall patient well-being. However, pooling was not possible due to the large diversity in the measurement and reporting of symptoms of congestion. Two studies recorded adverse events. Both studies used an oral decongestant and each of them showed that there was no statistical difference between the number of adverse events in the treatment group versus the placebo group.
Multi-dose decongestant versus placebo: nine studies compared multiple doses of nasal decongestants with placebo, but only five reported on the primary outcome, subjective symptom scores for nasal congestion. Only one study used a topical decongestant; none reported overall patient well-being. Subjective measures of congestion were significantly better for the treatment group compared with placebo approximately three hours after the last dose (SMD 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.92; P = 0.02; GRADE: low-quality evidence). However, the SMD of 0.49 only indicates a small clinical effect. Pooling was based on two studies, one oral and one topical, therefore we were unable to assess the effects of oral and topical decongestants separately. Seven studies reported adverse events (six oral and one topical decongestant); meta-analysis showed that there was no statistical difference between the number of adverse events in the treatment group (125 per 1000) compared to the placebo group (126 per 1000). The odds ratio (OR) for adverse events in the treatment group was 0.98 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.40; P = 0.90; GRADE: low-quality evidence). The results remained the same when we only considered studies using an oral decongestant (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.39; P = 0.80; GRADE: low-quality evidence).
Authors' conclusions : We were unable to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of single-dose nasal decongestants due to the limited evidence available. For multiple doses of nasal decongestants, the current evidence suggests that these may have a small positive effect on subjective measures of nasal congestion in adults with the common cold. However, the clinical relevance of this small effect is unknown and there is insufficient good-quality evidence to draw any firm conclusions. Due to the small number of studies that used a topical nasal decongestant, we were also unable to draw conclusions on the effectiveness of oral versus topical decongestants. Nasal decongestants do not seem to increase the risk of adverse events in adults in the short term. The effectiveness and safety of nasal decongestants in children and the clinical relevance of their small effect in adults is yet to be determined
Towards Accountable AI: Hybrid Human-Machine Analyses for Characterizing System Failure
As machine learning systems move from computer-science laboratories into the
open world, their accountability becomes a high priority problem.
Accountability requires deep understanding of system behavior and its failures.
Current evaluation methods such as single-score error metrics and confusion
matrices provide aggregate views of system performance that hide important
shortcomings. Understanding details about failures is important for identifying
pathways for refinement, communicating the reliability of systems in different
settings, and for specifying appropriate human oversight and engagement.
Characterization of failures and shortcomings is particularly complex for
systems composed of multiple machine learned components. For such systems,
existing evaluation methods have limited expressiveness in describing and
explaining the relationship among input content, the internal states of system
components, and final output quality. We present Pandora, a set of hybrid
human-machine methods and tools for describing and explaining system failures.
Pandora leverages both human and system-generated observations to summarize
conditions of system malfunction with respect to the input content and system
architecture. We share results of a case study with a machine learning pipeline
for image captioning that show how detailed performance views can be beneficial
for analysis and debugging
The effectiveness of early lens extraction with intraocular lens implantation for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma (EAGLE) : study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Recommended from our members
TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce: consensus on how and when to measure the core dataset for atopic eczema treatment research registries.
BackgroundComparative, real-life and long-term evidence on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in moderate-to-severe atopic eczema (AE) is limited. Such data must come from well-designed prospective patient registries. Standardization of data collection is needed for direct comparisons and data pooling.ObjectivesTo reach a consensus on how and when to measure the previously defined domain items of the TREatment of ATopic eczema (TREAT) Registry Taskforce core dataset for research registries for paediatric and adult patients with AE.MethodsProposals for the measurement instruments were based on recommendations of the Harmonising Outcome Measures for Eczema (HOME) initiative, the existing AE database of TREATgermany, systematic reviews of the literature and expert opinions. The proposals were discussed at three face-to-face consensus meetings, one teleconference and via e-mail. The frequency of follow-up visits was determined by an expert survey.ResultsA total of 16 experts from seven countries participated in the 'how to measure' consensus process and 12 external experts were consulted. A consensus was reached for all domain items on how they should be measured by assigning measurement instruments. A minimum follow-up frequency of initially 4 weeks after commencing treatment, then every 3 months while on treatment and every 6 months while off treatment was defined.ConclusionsThis core dataset for national AE research registries will aid in the comparability and pooling of data across centres and country borders, and enables international collaboration to assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy used in patients with AE. What's already known about this topic? Comparable, real-life and long-term data on the effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in patients with atopic eczema (AE) are needed. There is a high diversity of outcomes and instruments used in AE research, which require harmonization to enhance comparability and allow data pooling. What does this study add? Our taskforce has reached international consensus on how and when to measure core domain items for national AE research registries. This core dataset is now available for use by researchers worldwide and will aid in the collection of unified data. What are the clinical implications of this work? The data collected through this core dataset will help to gain better insights into the long-term effectiveness and safety of phototherapy and systemic therapy in AE and will provide important information for clinical practice. Standardization of such data collection at the national level will also allow direct data comparisons and pooling across country borders (e.g. in the analysis of treatment-related adverse events that require large patient numbers)
- …