The Netherlands – Transatlantic litigation: the Bijlmer air crash case

Article reporting on the international litigation aspects of the crash of an El Al cargo plane into two apartment buildings in the south-eastern (“Bijlmer”) district of Amsterdam on Sunday 4 October 1992. Published in the Letter from … section of Amicus Curiae - Journal of the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies and its Society for Advanced Legal Studies. The Journal is produced by the Society for Advanced Legal Studies at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, University of London

The Mechanochemistry of Endocytosis

An integrated theoretical model reveals how the chemical and the mechanical aspects of endocytosis are coordinated coherently in yeast cells, driving progression through the endocytic pathway and ensuring efficient vesicle scission in vivo

Interobserver reliability of classification and characterization of proximal humeral fractures: a comparison of two and three-dimensional CT

Interobserver reliability for the classification of proximal humeral fractures is limited. The aim of this study was to test the null hypothesis that interobserver reliability of the AO classification of proximal humeral fractures, the preferred treatment, and fracture characteristics is the same for two-dimensional (2-D) and three-dimensional (3-D) computed tomography (CT). Members of the Science of Variation Group--fully trained practicing orthopaedic and trauma surgeons from around the world--were randomized to evaluate radiographs and either 2-D CT or 3-D CT images of fifteen proximal humeral fractures via a web-based survey and respond to the following four questions: (1) Is the greater tuberosity displaced? (2) Is the humeral head split? (3) Is the arterial supply compromised? (4) Is the glenohumeral joint dislocated? They also classified the fracture according to the AO system and indicated their preferred treatment of the fracture (operative or nonoperative). Agreement among observers was assessed with use of the multirater kappa (κ) measure. Interobserver reliability of the AO classification, fracture characteristics, and preferred treatment generally ranged from "slight" to "fair." A few small but statistically significant differences were found. Observers randomized to the 2-D CT group had slightly but significantly better agreement on displacement of the greater tuberosity (κ = 0.35 compared with 0.30, p < 0.001) and on the AO classification (κ = 0.18 compared with 0.17, p = 0.018). A subgroup analysis of the AO classification results revealed that shoulder and elbow surgeons, orthopaedic trauma surgeons, and surgeons in the United States had slightly greater reliability on 2-D CT, whereas surgeons in practice for ten years or less and surgeons from other subspecialties had slightly greater reliability on 3-D CT. Proximal humeral fracture classifications may be helpful conceptually, but they have poor interobserver reliability even when 3-D rather than 2-D CT is utilized. This may contribute to the similarly poor interobserver reliability that was observed for selection of the treatment for proximal humeral fractures. The lack of a reliable classification confounds efforts to compare the outcomes of treatment methods among different clinical trials and reports

The Room at the Top: Separate Opinions in the Grand Chambers of the ECHR (1998‐2006)

A quantitative and qualitative analysis of the separate opinions in the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (n=106, from November 1998 until September 2006) reveals the following patterns: a) judges elected in respect of the new member States of Central and Eastern Europe deliver significantly less separate opinions than judges elected in respect of the old member States; b) national bias in the sense that the judges take a more benevolent position when their home country is the respondent State does in fact occur, and more so among ad hoc judges than among elected judges; and c) the lawyer‐statesmanʹs perspective seems to prevail in the majority judgment while human rights activism finds an outlet in separate opinions. Interviews with (19) judges enrich these data with insights into the social and institutional context of judicial decision making in the Grand Chamber