Pesticides. Comment réduire les risques associés?

Pesticides. Comment réduire les risques associés?. Evaluation et réduction des risques liés à l'utilisation des pesticide

Bilan et enjeux du programme interdisciplinaire Ingeco du CNRS (2007-2011): un tournant pour l’ingénierie écologique en France

International audienceNous présentons un bilan du Programme interdisciplinaire de recherche (PIR) « Ingénierie écologique » (Ingeco, CNRS/Irstea). Nous montrons la contribution de ce programme à l’émergence et à la structuration d’une réelle communauté française de recherche sur l’ingénierie écologique

Bilan et enjeux du programme interdisciplinaire Ingeco du CNRS (2007-2011): un tournant pour l’ingénierie écologique en France

International audienceNous présentons un bilan du Programme interdisciplinaire de recherche (PIR) « Ingénierie écologique » (Ingeco, CNRS/Irstea). Nous montrons la contribution de ce programme à l’émergence et à la structuration d’une réelle communauté française de recherche sur l’ingénierie écologique

Introduction

Introduction générale de l'ouvrag

Introduction

Introduction générale de l'ouvrag

Measurement of charged particle spectra in minimum-bias events from proton-proton collisions at root s =13 TeV

Pseudorapidity, transverse momentum, and multiplicity distributions are measured in the pseudorapidity range vertical bar eta vertical bar 0.5 GeV in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of root s = 13 TeV. Measurements are presented in three different event categories. The most inclusive of the categories corresponds to an inelastic pp data set, while the other two categories are exclusive subsets of the inelastic sample that are either enhanced or depleted in single diffractive dissociation events. The measurements are compared to predictions from Monte Carlo event generators used to describe high-energy hadronic interactions in collider and cosmic-ray physics.Peer reviewe

Respiratory support in patients with severe COVID-19 in the International Severe Acute Respiratory and Emerging Infection (ISARIC) COVID-19 study: a prospective, multinational, observational study

Background: Up to 30% of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 require advanced respiratory support, including high-flow nasal cannulas (HFNC), non-invasive mechanical ventilation (NIV), or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV). We aimed to describe the clinical characteristics, outcomes and risk factors for failing non-invasive respiratory support in patients treated with severe COVID-19 during the first two years of the pandemic in high-income countries (HICs) and low middle-income countries (LMICs). Methods: This is a multinational, multicentre, prospective cohort study embedded in the ISARIC-WHO COVID-19 Clinical Characterisation Protocol. Patients with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection who required hospital admission were recruited prospectively. Patients treated with HFNC, NIV, or IMV within the first 24 h of hospital admission were included in this study. Descriptive statistics, random forest, and logistic regression analyses were used to describe clinical characteristics and compare clinical outcomes among patients treated with the different types of advanced respiratory support. Results: A total of 66,565 patients were included in this study. Overall, 82.6% of patients were treated in HIC, and 40.6% were admitted to the hospital during the first pandemic wave. During the first 24 h after hospital admission, patients in HICs were more frequently treated with HFNC (48.0%), followed by NIV (38.6%) and IMV (13.4%). In contrast, patients admitted in lower- and middle-income countries (LMICs) were less frequently treated with HFNC (16.1%) and the majority received IMV (59.1%). The failure rate of non-invasive respiratory support (i.e. HFNC or NIV) was 15.5%, of which 71.2% were from HIC and 28.8% from LMIC. The variables most strongly associated with non-invasive ventilation failure, defined as progression to IMV, were high leukocyte counts at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 5.86 [4.83–7.10]), treatment in an LMIC (OR [95%CI]; 2.04 [1.97–2.11]), and tachypnoea at hospital admission (OR [95%CI]; 1.16 [1.14–1.18]). Patients who failed HFNC/NIV had a higher 28-day fatality ratio (OR [95%CI]; 1.27 [1.25–1.30]). Conclusions: In the present international cohort, the most frequently used advanced respiratory support was the HFNC. However, IMV was used more often in LMIC. Higher leucocyte count, tachypnoea, and treatment in LMIC were risk factors for HFNC/NIV failure. HFNC/NIV failure was related to worse clinical outcomes, such as 28-day mortality. Trial registration This is a prospective observational study; therefore, no health care interventions were applied to participants, and trial registration is not applicable

The value of open-source clinical science in pandemic response: lessons from ISARIC

International audienc