24 research outputs found

    New physics in ttbar spin correlations at the Tevatron

    Full text link
    We show that the angular distributions of leptons or jets due to ttbar spin correlations allow a determination of the top chromomagnetic moment kappa with an accuracy of order 0.1. The method is quite insensitive to background, event reconstruction, and other experimental uncertainties. The total event number is important, so we suggest the inclusion of all-hadronic events.Comment: 13 pages, 3 figures, two references added and cosmetic change

    Just regionalisation: rehabilitating care for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Regionalised models of health care delivery have important implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses yet the ethical issues surrounding disability and regionalisation have not yet been explored. Although there is ethics-related research into disability and chronic illness, studies of regionalisation experiences, and research directed at improving health systems for these patient populations, to our knowledge these streams of research have not been brought together. Using the Canadian province of Ontario as a case study, we address this gap by examining the ethics of regionalisation and the implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. The critical success factors we provide have broad applicability for guiding and/or evaluating new and existing regionalised health care strategies. DISCUSSION: Ontario is in the process of implementing fourteen Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs). The implementation of the LHINs provides a rare opportunity to address systematically the unmet diverse care needs of people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. The core of this paper provides a series of composite case vignettes illustrating integration opportunities relevant to these populations, namely: (i) rehabilitation and services for people with disabilities; (ii) chronic illness and cancer care; (iii) senior's health; (iv) community support services; (v) children's health; (vi) health promotion; and (vii) mental health and addiction services. For each vignette, we interpret the governing principles developed by the LHINs – equitable access based on patient need, preserving patient choice, responsiveness to local population health needs, shared accountability and patient-centred care – and describe how they apply. We then offer critical success factors to guide the LHINs in upholding these principles in response to the needs of people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. SUMMARY: This paper aims to bridge an important gap in the literature by examining the ethics of a new regionalisation strategy with a focus on the implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses across multiple sites of care. While Ontario is used as a case study to contextualize our discussion, the issues we identify, the ethical principles we apply, and the critical success factors we provide have broader applicability for guiding and evaluating the development of – or revisions to – a regionalised health care strategy

    Research priorities for children's cancer : a James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership in the UK

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: To engage children who have experienced cancer, childhood cancer survivors, their families and professionals to systematically identify and prioritise research questions about childhood cancer to inform the future research agenda. DESIGN: James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership. SETTING: UK health service and community. METHODS: A steering group oversaw the initiative. Potential research questions were collected in an online survey, then checked to ensure they were unanswered. Shortlisting via a second online survey identified the highest priority questions. A parallel process with children was undertaken. A final consensus workshop was held to determine the Top 10 priorities. PARTICIPANTS: Children and survivors of childhood cancer, diagnosed before age 16, their families, friends and professionals who work with this population. RESULTS: Four hundred and eighty-eight people submitted 1299 potential questions. These were refined into 108 unique questions; 4 were already answered and 3 were under active study, therefore, removed. Three hundred and twenty-seven respondents completed the shortlisting survey. Seventy-one children submitted questions in the children's surveys, eight children attended a workshop to prioritise these questions. The Top 5 questions from children were taken to the final workshop where 23 questions in total were discussed by 25 participants (young adults, carers and professionals). The top priority was 'can we find effective and kinder (less burdensome, more tolerable, with fewer short and long-term effects) treatments for children with cancer, including relapsed cancer?' CONCLUSIONS: We have identified research priorities for children's cancer from the perspectives of children, survivors, their families and the professionals who care for them. Questions reflect the breadth of the cancer experience, including diagnosis, relapse, hospital experience, support during/after treatment and the long-term impact of cancer. These should inform funding of future research as they are the questions that matter most to the people who could benefit from research

    Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

    The Beneficial Role of a Judicial Process When "Everything" Is Too Much?

    No full text
    Abstract: This narrative is written with the intent to encourage physicians as well as other healthcare professionals to use judicial processes, such as those provided by the Ontario Consent and Capacity Board, to help resolve conflict with treatment decisions between care providers and decisionmakers. Through the presentation of a fictional yet common case scenario, it is argued that after all attempts at mediation have been attempted that the timely use of a third party is in the patient's, the family's and the healthcare team's best interests. Recently there has been media attention about two families who have involved the legal system to challenge end-of-life decisions recommended by the medical care providers. The first case involved a family in Alberta who contested the do not resuscitate (DNR) order made by an MD, and the second case involved a Winnipeg family contesting the decision of medical staff who want to withdraw life support from a person for whom ventilator support is deemed to be of no benefit. In this article, a fictional scenario familiar to healthcare professionals involved in end-of-life care decision-making is presented to illustrate the challenges of a difficult case, the process and benefits of involving a neutral party and some lessons learned. The overall argument presented in this article is that when all mediation attempts have failed, involving a neutral third party like Ontario's Consent and Capacity Board (CCB) is in the best interest of the staff, the family and, of foremost importance, the patient. (CCB is an independent body created by the provincial government of Ontari

    Trends in high performance graphic systems(Panel Session)

    No full text

    Disability and Dignity-Enabling Home Environments

    No full text
    In Canada where long-term care is primarily oriented to elderly persons and affordable accessible housing is limited, younger disabled adults may be living in circumstances that do not meet their health needs and contribute to their social exclusion. The purpose of this study was to undertake an ethical analysis of what constitute an ‘adequate’ home environment for adults with significant mobility disabilities. An integrated design was used that combined qualitative interviews with normative ethical analysis in an iterative process. Twenty interviews with 19 participants were conducted in Ontario, Canada with two groups: younger adults (ages 18 to 55) with mobility disabilities and ‘decision-makers’ who consisted of policy makers, program administrators and discharge planners. Data were analyzed using a critical disability ethics approach and processes of reflective equilibrium. Drawing on Nora Jacobson’s taxonomy of dignity and pluralistic approaches to social justice, the concept of ‘social dignity’ provides a lens for exploring the adequacy of home environments for disabled people. Analyses suggested seven threshold conditions necessary for a dignity-enabling home: the ability to form and sustain meaningful relationships; access to community and civic life; access to control and flexibility of daily activities; access to opportunities for self-expression and identity affirmation; access to respectful relationships with attendants; access to opportunities to participate in school, work or leisure; access to physical, psychological and ontological security. The results have implications for housing, health and social care policies, and political reform. Social-dignity provides a normative ethical grounding for assessing the adequacy of home environments. The threshold elements outline specific dignity-enabling conditions that are open to further specification or elaboration in different contexts.Canadian Institutes of Health Research Catalyst Grant: Ethics (#87367

    Just regionalisation: rehabilitating care for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses

    No full text
    Abstract Background Regionalised models of health care delivery have important implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses yet the ethical issues surrounding disability and regionalisation have not yet been explored. Although there is ethics-related research into disability and chronic illness, studies of regionalisation experiences, and research directed at improving health systems for these patient populations, to our knowledge these streams of research have not been brought together. Using the Canadian province of Ontario as a case study, we address this gap by examining the ethics of regionalisation and the implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. The critical success factors we provide have broad applicability for guiding and/or evaluating new and existing regionalised health care strategies. Discussion Ontario is in the process of implementing fourteen Local Health Integration Networks (LHINs). The implementation of the LHINs provides a rare opportunity to address systematically the unmet diverse care needs of people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. The core of this paper provides a series of composite case vignettes illustrating integration opportunities relevant to these populations, namely: (i) rehabilitation and services for people with disabilities; (ii) chronic illness and cancer care; (iii) senior's health; (iv) community support services; (v) children's health; (vi) health promotion; and (vii) mental health and addiction services. For each vignette, we interpret the governing principles developed by the LHINs – equitable access based on patient need, preserving patient choice, responsiveness to local population health needs, shared accountability and patient-centred care – and describe how they apply. We then offer critical success factors to guide the LHINs in upholding these principles in response to the needs of people with disabilities and chronic illnesses. Summary This paper aims to bridge an important gap in the literature by examining the ethics of a new regionalisation strategy with a focus on the implications for people with disabilities and chronic illnesses across multiple sites of care. While Ontario is used as a case study to contextualize our discussion, the issues we identify, the ethical principles we apply, and the critical success factors we provide have broader applicability for guiding and evaluating the development of – or revisions to – a regionalised health care strategy
    corecore