38 research outputs found
Managing biomass feedstocks: selection of satellite storage locations for different harvesting systems
Biomass feedstocks including switchgrass and corn stover are currently being considered for use in direct combustion systems, and for value-added products such as ethanol. A major roadblock associated with utilization of biomass feedstocks is the high cost of handling and storage due to low bulk density of these feedstocks. A wide variety of existing harvest systems creates logistics difficulties for bioenergy industries. The utilization of herbaceous biomass materials requires low-cost handling systems to collect, store, and transport year round. This then requires selecting the most economical methods from various existing handling systems for loose and baled biomass materials. How these different harvesting systems can be integrated into a cost-effective supply system is a challenge. A method of selecting lowest cost harvest and handling machine system was proposed; the model developed could calculate costs of different systems so as to assist field managers to select the best handling method for every point in a given location of a biorefinery plant. The results of the model calculation can provide users a map which shows the lowest-cost handling scenario for all handling systems analyzed by this program. This result will enable biorefinary industries and landowners to determine the most cost-effective way to harvest, store, and transport biomass materials according to the size of the biorefinery plant
Socioeconomic status and non-fatal injuries among Canadian adolescents: variations across SES and injury measures
BACKGROUND: While research to date has consistently demonstrated that socioeconomic status (SES) is inversely associated with injury mortality in both children and adults, findings have been less consistent for non-fatal injuries. The literature addressing SES and injury morbidity among adolescents has been particularly inconclusive. To explore potential explanations for these discrepant research findings, this study uniquely compared the relationship across different measures of SES and different causes of injury (recreation versus non-recreation injuries) within a sample of Canadian adolescents. METHODS: The sample included adolescent participants (aged 12 to 19 years) in the Canadian 1996â1997 cross-sectional National Population Health Survey (n = 6967). Five SES measures (household income, two neighbourhood-level proxy measures, two parental indicators) were examined in relation to three injury outcomes (total, recreation, and non-recreation injuries) using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among males, a clear relationship with injury was observed only for a parental SES index, which was positively associated with total and recreation injuries (odds ratios for the highest versus lowest SES category of 1.9 for total and 2.5 for recreation injuries). Among females, there was some evidence of a positive relationship between SES and injuries, particularly for a neighbourhood-level education measure with total and recreation injuries (odds ratios of 1.7 for total and 2.0 for recreation injuries). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that differences related to the measures of SES chosen and the causes of injury under study may both contribute to discrepancies in past research on SES and non-fatal injuries among adolescents. To clarify the potential SES-injury relationship among youth, the findings emphasize a need for a greater understanding of the meaning and relevance of different SES measures for adolescents, and for an exploration of the pathways through which SES may be related to injury risk
"It's a balance of just getting things right"
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. This study was funded by NHS Grampian. FD, LC, JC, and GMcN receive personal support from the RESAS programme of the Scottish Government Nutrition and Health. We would also like to thank Caroline Comerford of NHS Grampian and other members of the research steering group for their advice during the study; the parents for their time and input; the nursery school staff for distributing study packs for parents; Andrea Gilmartin for organising the focus groups and Dr Sandra Carlisle for the helpful comments on earlier drafts of the manuscript.Peer reviewedPublisher PD
Small-Group Phonological Awareness Training for Pre-Kindergarten Children with Hearing Loss Who Wear Cochlear Implants and/or Hearing Aids
BORDER BLUNDERS: THE UNANTICIPATED HUMAN AND ECONOMIC COSTS OF THE U.S. APPROACH TO IMMIGRATION CONTROL, 1986-2007
Marketing Studentsâ Perceptions of Teaching Evaluations: An Application of Expectancy Theory
The Measurements and Determinants of Budgetary Slack: Empirical Evidence of Listed Companies in Thailand
Phase Ib study of pevonedistat, a NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor, in combination with docetaxel, carboplatin and paclitaxel, or gemcitabine, in patients with advanced solid tumors
Purpose This phase Ib study (NCT01862328) evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of pevonedistat in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapies in patients with solid tumors. Methods Patients received pevonedistat with docetaxel (arm 1, n =â22), carboplatin plus paclitaxel (arm 2, n =â26), or gemcitabine (arm 3, n =â10) in 21-days (arms 1 and 2) or 28-days (arm 3) cycles. A lead-in cohort (arm 2a, n =â6) determined the arm 2 carboplatin dose. Dose escalation proceeded via continual modified reassessment. Results Pevonedistat MTD was 25 mg/m
(arm 1) or 20Â mg/m
(arm 2); arm 3 was discontinued due to poor tolerability. Fifteen (23%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 (grade â„3 liver enzyme elevations, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia), managed with dose holds or reductions. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Most common AEs included fatigue (56%) and nausea (50%). One drug-related death occurred in arm 3 (febrile neutropenia). Pevonedistat exposure increased when co-administered with carboplatin plus paclitaxel; no obvious changes were observed when co-administered with docetaxel or gemcitabine. Among 54 response-evaluable patients, two had complete responses (arm 2) and 10 had partial responses (three in arm 1, one in arm 2a, six in arm 2); overall response rates were 16% (arm 1) and 35% (arm 2). High ERCC1 expression correlated with clinical benefit in arm 2. Conclusion Pevonedistat with docetaxel or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel was tolerable without cumulative toxicity. Sustained clinical responses were observed in pretreated patients receiving pevonedistat with carboplatin and paclitaxel. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01862328