Chinese Road and Its Significance for World History

面对中国的崛起，全球掀起了研究中国道路的热潮。中国道路指中国特色社会主义道路，它是一条既不同于苏联模式又异于资本主义的现代化道路，它不仅证明现代化道路的多样性，而且也为世界上其他经济文化落后的国家探索符合自己国情的现代化道路提供了可资借鉴的经验。中国道路还是一个不断生成和发展的道路，分析和研究中国道路的内涵、特点、基础和世界历史意义，对于我们在实践中进一步推进中国特色社会主义伟大事业和实现中华民族伟大复兴的中国梦具有非常重要的价值。 本文从以下三个方面展开。第一部分，中国道路的内涵和特征。通过对“中国模式”、“中国经验”和“中国道路”这三个概念的辨析，指出中国道路就是具有中国特色的社会主义道...With China’s rise, there are an increasing number of studies investigating Chinese Road all over the world. Chinese Road is a socialist road that is characteristic of China and differentiates not only from the Soviet Model but also from the modern capitalist road. Chinese Road not only testifies the diversity of modern roads, but also sets an example to the rest economically and culturally less de...学位：法学硕士院系专业：马克思主义学院_马克思主义基本原理学号：3322013115225

新媒体时代下社会主义意识形态话语权的建构

随着新媒体向全球化、数字化和日常生活化发展,我国的社会主流意识形态话语权建设面临缺乏竞争力、监管力和吸引力等挑战。因此,新媒体时代下社会主义意识形态话语权的建构,要面向群众、关注大众生活,增强意识形态的实效性;掌握群众心理,创新话语体系,增强社会主义意识形态的吸引力;扩大意识形态宣传与群众交流的场域,整合传统媒介和新媒介资源,扩大大众话语权的交流空间,增强社会主义意识形态的控制力

马克思主义经典作家视域中的“中国发展道路”

马克思、恩格斯提出的理论与实际相结合原理是中国发展道路的方法论原则。列宁运用马克思恩格斯的原理与俄国实际相结合,成功缔造了苏联社会主义国家并提出有创见的诸多新思想、新观点,成为中国发展道路的可以借鉴的范例。毛泽东和邓小平实现了马克思主义与中国实际相结合,终于走出一条中国特色社会主义的路子。可以说,理论与实际相结合是马克思主义经典作家共同坚持的基本原理,这一结合过程是动态的过程,永远不是完成了的陈列品。坚持中国发展道路要反对西方中心主义,走一条不同于西方的现代化道路。中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目(T2013221022); 厦门大学哲学社会科学繁荣计划项目“中国发展道路的理论与实践研究”(2013-2017

2004-2016年中国生态系统研究网络（CERN）台站水中八大离子数据集

水是自然界重要的组成物质,是生态系统的主要环境因子,中国生态系统研究网络(CERN)对中国典型生态系统水环境开展了长期定位监测。本数据集收集整理了CERN 34个生态站2004–2016年地下水、静止地表水、流动地表水的八大离子(Ca~(2+)、Mg~(2+)、Na~+、K~+、HCO_3~-、CO_3~(2-)、SO_4~(2-)、Cl~-)数据,包含了农田、草地、森林、荒漠、沼泽5类中国典型生态系统。我们对数据进行了准确性检验,剔除异常值,整理后的数据格式更规范,提高了数据的可靠性。本数据集有助于认识各生态系统的水化学变化特征

Aripiprazole versus other atypical antipsychotics for schizophrenia

BACKGROUND: In most western industrialised countries, second generation (atypical) antipsychotics are recommended as first line drug treatments for people with schizophrenia. In this review we specifically examine how the efficacy and tolerability of one such agent - aripiprazole - differs from that of other comparable second generation antipsychotics. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of aripiprazole compared with other atypical antipsychotics for people with schizophrenia and schizophrenia-like psychoses. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (November 2011), inspected references of all identified studies for further trials, and contacted relevant pharmaceutical companies, drug approval agencies and authors of trials for additional information. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised clinical trials (RCTs) comparing aripiprazole (oral) with oral and parenteral forms of amisulpride, clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, sertindole, ziprasidone or zotepine for people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like psychoses. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We extracted data independently. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis based on a random-effects model. Where possible, we calculated illustrative comparative risks for primary outcomes. For continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), again based on a random-effects model. We assessed risk of bias for each included study. MAIN RESULTS: We included 12 trials involving 6389 patients. Aripiprazole was compared to olanzapine, risperidone and ziprasidone. All trials were sponsored by an interested drug manufacturer. The overall number of participants leaving studies early was 30% to 40%, limiting validity (no differences between groups).When compared with olanzapine no differences were apparent for global state (no clinically important change: n = 703, 1 RCT, RR short-term 1.00 95% CI 0.81 to 1.22; n = 317, 1 RCT, RR medium-term 1.08 95% CI 0.95 to 1.22) but mental state tended to favour olanzapine (n = 1360, 3 RCTs, MD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 4.68 95% CI 2.21 to 7.16). There was no significant difference in extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 529, 2 RCTs, RR 0.99 95% CI 0.62 to 1.59) but fewer in the aripiprazole group had increased cholesterol levels (n = 223, 1 RCT, RR 0.32 95% CI 0.19 to 0.54) or weight gain of 7% or more of total body weight (n = 1095, 3 RCTs, RR 0.39 95% CI 0.28 to 0.54).When compared with risperidone, aripiprazole showed no advantage in terms of global state (n = 384, 2 RCTs, RR no important improvement 1.14 95% CI 0.81 to 1.60) or mental state (n = 372, 2 RCTs, MD total PANSS 1.50 95% CI -2.96 to 5.96).One study compared aripiprazole with ziprasidone (n = 247) and both the groups reported similar change in the global state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD average change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) score -0.03 95% CI -0.28 to 0.22) and mental state (n = 247, 1 RCT, MD change PANSS -3.00 95% CI -7.29 to 1.29).When compared with any one of several new generation antipsychotic drugs the aripiprazole group showed improvement in global state in energy (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.69 95% CI 0.56 to 0.84), mood (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.77 95% CI 0.65 to 0.92), negative symptoms (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.82 95% CI 0.68 to 0.99), somnolence (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.80 95% CI 0.69 to 0.93) and weight gain (n = 523, 1 RCT, RR 0.84 95% CI 0.76 to 0.94). Significantly more people given aripiprazole reported symptoms of nausea (n = 2881, 3 RCTs, RR 3.13 95% CI 2.12 to 4.61) but weight gain (7% or more of total body weight) was less common in people allocated aripiprazole (n = 330, 1 RCT, RR 0.35 95% CI 0.19 to 0.64). Aripiprazole may have value in aggression but data are limited. This will be the focus of another review. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Information on all comparisons are of limited quality, are incomplete and problematic to apply clinically. Aripiprazole is an antipsychotic drug with a variant but not absent adverse effect profile. Long-term data are sparse and there is considerable scope for another update of this review as new data emerges from the many Chinese studies as well as from ongoing larger, independent pragmatic trials