Hadron Production in Heavy Ion Collisions

We review hadron production in heavy ion collisions with emphasis on pion and kaon production at energies below 2 AGeV and on partonic collectivity at RHIC energies.Comment: 31 pages, 26 figures, accepted for publication in Landolt-Boernstein Volume 1-23

Can we apply the Mendelian randomization methodology without considering epigenetic effects?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>Instrumental variable (IV) methods have been used in econometrics for several decades now, but have only recently been introduced into the epidemiologic research frameworks. Similarly, Mendelian randomization studies, which use the IV methodology for analysis and inference in epidemiology, were introduced into the epidemiologist's toolbox only in the last decade.</p> <p>Analysis</p> <p>Mendelian randomization studies using instrumental variables (IVs) have the potential to avoid some of the limitations of observational epidemiology (confounding, reverse causality, regression dilution bias) for making causal inferences. Certain limitations of randomized controlled trials, such as problems with generalizability, feasibility and ethics for some exposures, and high costs, also make the use of Mendelian randomization in observational studies attractive. Unlike conventional randomized controlled trials (RCTs), Mendelian randomization studies can be conducted in a representative sample without imposing any exclusion criteria or requiring volunteers to be amenable to random treatment allocation.</p> <p>Within the last decade, epigenetics has gained recognition as an independent field of study, and appears to be the new direction for future research into the genetics of complex diseases. Although previous articles have addressed some of the limitations of Mendelian randomization (such as the lack of suitable genetic variants, unreliable associations, population stratification, linkage disequilibrium (LD), pleiotropy, developmental canalization, the need for large sample sizes and some potential problems with binary outcomes), none has directly characterized the impact of epigenetics on Mendelian randomization. The possibility of epigenetic effects (non-Mendelian, heritable changes in gene expression not accompanied by alterations in DNA sequence) could alter the core instrumental variable assumptions of Mendelian randomization.</p> <p>This paper applies conceptual considerations, algebraic derivations and data simulations to question the appropriateness of Mendelian randomization methods when epigenetic modifications are present.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Given an inheritance of gene expression from parents, Mendelian randomization studies not only need to assume a random distribution of alleles in the offspring, but also a random distribution of epigenetic changes (e.g. gene expression) at conception, in order for the core assumptions of the Mendelian randomization methodology to remain valid. As an increasing number of epidemiologists employ Mendelian randomization methods in their research, caution is therefore needed in drawing conclusions from these studies if these assumptions are not met.</p

Maximum-Entropy Weighting of Multi-Component Earth Climate Models

A maximum entropy-based framework is presented for the synthesis of projections from multiple Earth climate models. This identifies the most representative (most probable) model from a set of climate models -- as defined by specified constraints -- eliminating the need to calculate the entire set. Two approaches are developed, based on individual climate models or ensembles of models, subject to a single cost (energy) constraint or competing cost-benefit constraints. A finite-time limit on the minimum cost of modifying a model synthesis framework, at finite rates of change, is also reported.Comment: Inspired by discussions at the Mathematical and Statistical Approaches to Climate Modelling and Prediction workshop, Isaac Newton Institute for Mathematical Sciences, Cambridge, UK, 11 Aug. to 22 Dec. 2010. Accepted for publication in Climate Dynamics, 8 August 201

International Consensus Statement on Rhinology and Allergy: Rhinosinusitis

Background: The 5 years since the publication of the first International Consensus Statement on Allergy and Rhinology: Rhinosinusitis (ICAR‐RS) has witnessed foundational progress in our understanding and treatment of rhinologic disease. These advances are reflected within the more than 40 new topics covered within the ICAR‐RS‐2021 as well as updates to the original 140 topics. This executive summary consolidates the evidence‐based findings of the document. Methods: ICAR‐RS presents over 180 topics in the forms of evidence‐based reviews with recommendations (EBRRs), evidence‐based reviews, and literature reviews. The highest grade structured recommendations of the EBRR sections are summarized in this executive summary. Results: ICAR‐RS‐2021 covers 22 topics regarding the medical management of RS, which are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Additionally, 4 topics regarding the surgical management of RS are grade A/B and are presented in the executive summary. Finally, a comprehensive evidence‐based management algorithm is provided. Conclusion: This ICAR‐RS‐2021 executive summary provides a compilation of the evidence‐based recommendations for medical and surgical treatment of the most common forms of RS