Spreadsheets for Analyzing and Optimizing Space Missions

XCALIBR (XML Capability Analysis LIBRary) is a set of Extensible Markup Language (XML) database and spreadsheet- based analysis software tools designed to assist in technology-return-on-investment analysis and optimization of technology portfolios pertaining to outer-space missions. XCALIBR is also being examined for use in planning, tracking, and documentation of projects. An XCALIBR database contains information on mission requirements and technological capabilities, which are related by use of an XML taxonomy. XCALIBR incorporates a standardized interface for exporting data and analysis templates to an Excel spreadsheet. Unique features of XCALIBR include the following: It is inherently hierarchical by virtue of its XML basis. The XML taxonomy codifies a comprehensive data structure and data dictionary that includes performance metrics for spacecraft, sensors, and spacecraft systems other than sensors. The taxonomy contains >700 nodes representing all levels, from system through subsystem to individual parts. All entries are searchable and machine readable. There is an intuitive Web-based user interface. The software automatically matches technologies to mission requirements. The software automatically generates, and makes the required entries in, an Excel return-on-investment analysis software tool. The results of an analysis are presented in both tabular and graphical displays

Liver PPARα is crucial for whole-body fatty acid homeostasis and is protective against NAFLD.

OBJECTIVE: Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor α (PPARα) is a nuclear receptor expressed in tissues with high oxidative activity that plays a central role in metabolism. In this work, we investigated the effect of hepatocyte PPARα on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). DESIGN: We constructed a novel hepatocyte-specific PPARα knockout (Pparα(hep-/-)) mouse model. Using this novel model, we performed transcriptomic analysis following fenofibrate treatment. Next, we investigated which physiological challenges impact on PPARα. Moreover, we measured the contribution of hepatocytic PPARα activity to whole-body metabolism and fibroblast growth factor 21 production during fasting. Finally, we determined the influence of hepatocyte-specific PPARα deficiency in different models of steatosis and during ageing. RESULTS: Hepatocyte PPARα deletion impaired fatty acid catabolism, resulting in hepatic lipid accumulation during fasting and in two preclinical models of steatosis. Fasting mice showed acute PPARα-dependent hepatocyte activity during early night, with correspondingly increased circulating free fatty acids, which could be further stimulated by adipocyte lipolysis. Fasting led to mild hypoglycaemia and hypothermia in Pparα(hep-/-) mice when compared with Pparα(-/-) mice implying a role of PPARα activity in non-hepatic tissues. In agreement with this observation, Pparα(-/-) mice became overweight during ageing while Pparα(hep-/-) remained lean. However, like Pparα(-/-) mice, Pparα(hep-/-) fed a standard diet developed hepatic steatosis in ageing. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, these findings underscore the potential of hepatocyte PPARα as a drug target for NAFLD

Pathways from built environment to health: a conceptual framework linking behavior and exposure-based impacts

Background and purpose A growing body of evidence documents multiple ways in which land use and transportation investments influence health. To date, most evidence linking the built environment to health either focuses on behavioral change or environmental exposures. Few studies simultaneously assess how behavior and exposure-based impacts of the built environment interact. This is concerning as increased walkability and transit access can possibly lead to increased exposure to air pollution and injury risk. Method This paper synthesizes recent research on behavior and exposure-based mechanisms that connect land use and transportation investments with various health outcomes. Exploring the nexus between these pathways provides a framework to identify priority areas for research to inform policies and investments. Results The most studied pathway articulates how land use and transportation can support healthy behaviors, such as increased physical activity, healthy diet, and social interactions. The second pathway articulates exposure to harmful substances and stressors and potential differential impacts by travel modes. Increased rates of active travel lead to lower generation of vehicle emissions and kilometers traveled; but may actually result in increased exposure which may have adverse effects on sensitive populations such as elderly and youth. Unhealthy exposures have historically concentrated in areas where the most disadvantaged reside – along major transportation corridors where land is cheapest and more affordable housing is located. Implications A high priority for future research is to examine mechanisms that spatially link built environment and chronic disease. More longitudinal evidence is required inclusive of biomarker data within clinical trials to isolate independent and interactive effects of biological and neurological mechanisms from behavioral and exposure related impacts of the environment. Downstream impacts of the built environment on healthcare utilization and costs and workforce productivity is needed for policy makers to justify the major investments required to plan or retrofit communities.</p

Pathways from built environment to health: A conceptual framework linking behavior and exposure-based impacts

Background and purpose A growing body of evidence documents multiple ways in which land use and transportation investments influence health. To date, most evidence linking the built environment to health either focuses on behavioral change or environmental exposures. Few studies simultaneously assess how behavior and exposure-based impacts of the built environment interact. This is concerning as increased walkability and transit access can possibly lead to increased exposure to air pollution and injury risk. Method This paper synthesizes recent research on behavior and exposure-based mechanisms that connect land use and transportation investments with various health outcomes. Exploring the nexus between these pathways provides a framework to identify priority areas for research to inform policies and investments. Results The most studied pathway articulates how land use and transportation can support healthy behaviors, such as increased physical activity, healthy diet, and social interactions. The second pathway articulates exposure to harmful substances and stressors and potential differential impacts by travel modes. Increased rates of active travel lead to lower generation of vehicle emissions and kilometers traveled; but may actually result in increased exposure which may have adverse effects on sensitive populations such as elderly and youth. Unhealthy exposures have historically concentrated in areas where the most disadvantaged reside – along major transportation corridors where land is cheapest and more affordable housing is located. Implications A high priority for future research is to examine mechanisms that spatially link built environment and chronic disease. More longitudinal evidence is required inclusive of biomarker data within clinical trials to isolate independent and interactive effects of biological and neurological mechanisms from behavioral and exposure related impacts of the environment. Downstream impacts of the built environment on healthcare utilization and costs and workforce productivity is needed for policy makers to justify the major investments required to plan or retrofit communities.</p

Learning from the implementation of a surgical opioid reduction initiative in an integrated health system: a qualitative study among providers and patients

Abstract Background Surgical opioid overprescribing can result in long-term use or misuse. Between July 2018 and March 2019, the multicomponent intervention, Minimizing Opioid Prescribing in Surgery (MOPiS) was implemented in the general surgery clinics of five hospitals and successfully reduced opioid prescribing. To date, various studies have shown a positive outcome of similar reduction initiatives. However, in addition to evaluating the impact on clinical outcomes, it is important to understand the implementation process of an intervention to extend sustainability of interventions and allow for dissemination of the intervention into other contexts. This study aims to evaluate the contextual factors impacting intervention implementation. Methods We conducted a qualitative study with semi-structured interviews held with providers and patients of the general surgery clinics of five hospitals of a single health system between March and November of 2019. Interview questions focused on how contextual factors affected implementation of the intervention. We coded interview transcripts deductively, using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to identify the relevant contextual factors. Content analyses were conducted using a constant comparative approach to identify overarching themes. Results We interviewed 15 clinicians (e.g., surgeons, nurses), 1 quality representative, 1 scheduler, and 28 adult patients and identified 3 key themes. First, we found high variability in the responses of clinicians and patients to the intervention. There was a strong need for intervention components to be locally adaptable, particularly for the format and content of the patient and clinician education materials. Second, surgical pain management should be recognized as a team effort. We identified specific gaps in the engagement of team members, including nurses. We also found that the hierarchical relationships between surgical residents and attendings impacted implementation. Finally, we found that established patient and clinician views on opioid prescribing were an important facilitator to effective implementation. Conclusion Successful implementation of a complex set of opioid reduction interventions in surgery requires locally adaptable elements of the intervention, a team-centric approach, and an understanding of patient and clinician views regarding changes being proposed

The development of a safe opioid use agreement for surgical care using a modified Delphi method.

BackgroundOpioids prescribed to treat postsurgical pain have contributed to the ongoing opioid epidemic. While opioid prescribing practices have improved, most patients do not use all their pills and do not safely dispose of leftovers, which creates a risk for unsafe use and diversion. We aimed to generate consensus on the content of a "safe opioid use agreement" for the perioperative settings to improve patients' safe use, storage, and disposal of opioids.MethodsWe conducted a modified three-round Delphi study with clinicians across surgical specialties, quality improvement (QI) experts, and patients. In Round 1, participants completed a survey rating the importance and comprehensibility of 10 items on a 5-point Likert scale and provided comments. In Round 2, a sub-sample of participants attended a focus group to discuss items with the lowest agreement. In Round 3, the survey was repeated with the updated items. Quantitative values from the Likert scale and qualitative responses were summarized.ResultsThirty-six experts (26 clinicians, seven patients/patient advocates, and three QI experts) participated in the study. In Round 1, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five on the importance of nine items and on the comprehensibility of six items. In Round 2, participants provided feedback on the comprehensibility, formatting, importance, and purpose of the agreement, including a desire for more specificity and patient education. In Round 3, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five for comprehensibility and importance of all 10 updated item. The final agreement included seven items on safe use, two items on safe storage, and one item on safe disposal.ConclusionThe expert panel reached consensus on the importance and comprehensibility of the content for an opioid use agreement and identified additional patient education needs. The agreement should be used as a tool to supplement rather than replace existing, tailored education

Participants for each round of the Delphi study.

BackgroundOpioids prescribed to treat postsurgical pain have contributed to the ongoing opioid epidemic. While opioid prescribing practices have improved, most patients do not use all their pills and do not safely dispose of leftovers, which creates a risk for unsafe use and diversion. We aimed to generate consensus on the content of a “safe opioid use agreement” for the perioperative settings to improve patients’ safe use, storage, and disposal of opioids.MethodsWe conducted a modified three-round Delphi study with clinicians across surgical specialties, quality improvement (QI) experts, and patients. In Round 1, participants completed a survey rating the importance and comprehensibility of 10 items on a 5-point Likert scale and provided comments. In Round 2, a sub-sample of participants attended a focus group to discuss items with the lowest agreement. In Round 3, the survey was repeated with the updated items. Quantitative values from the Likert scale and qualitative responses were summarized.ResultsThirty-six experts (26 clinicians, seven patients/patient advocates, and three QI experts) participated in the study. In Round 1, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five on the importance of nine items and on the comprehensibility of six items. In Round 2, participants provided feedback on the comprehensibility, formatting, importance, and purpose of the agreement, including a desire for more specificity and patient education. In Round 3, >75% of respondents rated at least four out of five for comprehensibility and importance of all 10 updated item. The final agreement included seven items on safe use, two items on safe storage, and one item on safe disposal.ConclusionThe expert panel reached consensus on the importance and comprehensibility of the content for an opioid use agreement and identified additional patient education needs. The agreement should be used as a tool to supplement rather than replace existing, tailored education.</div