22 research outputs found

    Optical Properties of Graphene Nanoflakes: Shape Matters

    Get PDF
    In recent years there has been significant debate on whether the edge type of graphene nanoflakes (GNF) or graphene quantum dots (GQD) are relevant for their electronic structure, thermal stability and optical properties. Using computer simulations, we have proven that there is a fundamental difference in the calculated absorption spectra between samples of the same shape, similar size but different edge type, namely, armchair or zigzag edges. These can be explained by the presence of electronic structures near the Fermi level which are localized on the edges. These features are also evident from the dependence of band gap on the GNF size, which shows three very distinct trends for different shapes and edge geometries.Comment: 8 pages, 9 figures. Submitted to The Journal of Chemical Physic

    Conceptual approaches in combating health inequity: A scoping review protocol

    No full text
    Introduction What are the different ways in which health equity can be sought through policy and programs? Although there is a central focus on health equity in global and public health, we recognize that stakeholders can understand health equity as taking different approaches and that there is not a single conceptual approach. However, information on conceptual categories of actions to improve health equity and/or reduce health inequity is scarce. Therefore, this study asks the research question: “what conceptual approaches exist in striving for health equity and/or reducing health inequity?” with the aim of presenting a comprehensive overview of approaches. Methods A scoping review will be undertaken following the PRISMA guidelines for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) and in consultation with a research librarian. Both the peer-reviewed and grey literatures will be searched using: Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, PAIS Index (ProQuest), JSTOR, Canadian Public Documents Collection, the World Health Organization IRIS (Institutional Repository for Information Sharing), and supplemented by a Google Advanced Search. Screening will be conducted by two independent reviewers and data will be charted, coded, and narratively synthesized. Discussion We anticipate developing a foundational document compiling categories of approaches and discussing the nuances inherent in each conceptualization to promote clarified and united action

    The implementation of the bioequivalence certification policy in Chile: An analysis of market authorization data.

    No full text
    BackgroundAffordability is a key barrier to access to medicines. Generic medicines policies can address this barrier and promote access. Successful uptake of generic medicines depends, in part, on ensuring that these products are interchangeable with reference products. Typically, bioequivalence certification is established in order to demonstrate such interchangeability.ObjectiveTo study the implementation of the bioequivalence certification policy in Chile.MethodsWe used Chilean Market Regulatory Authority data for analysis to study the number of products that obtained bioequivalence certification, the time until bioequivalence certification and associated factors to obtain bioequivalence.ResultsAs of January 2017, out of 2,336 products with a valid market authorization containing at least one of the 167 APIs that required BE certification, 1,026 products actually have BE certification (1,026/2,336, 43.9% compliance). Where data were available, the time between submission of the market authorization as a bioequivalent product to final authorization by the national medicine regulatory authority for most products varied between 4-6 months. The fraction of all BE products containing a given API out of the total marketed products containing that API varies considerably, e.g. for the API olmesartan there was only a single BE product marketed, the API diclofenac had none.ConclusionsAlthough the implementation of Chile's bioequivalence policy increased the number of bioequivalent products, over 50% of generic products requiring bioequivalence that did not obtain this certification. Also for some of the API none or very few BE products are marketed which limits the success of a substitution policy. Further studies are required to identify the apparent lack of incentives to obtain bioequivalence certification. Studies of sales volumes and prices of the products are needed to identify whether generic products without bioequivalence certification either become bioequivalent or eventually exit the market

    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 2.

    No full text
    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 2.</p

    A demand-driven taxonomy of the types of question that could be addressed by evidence.

    No full text
    A demand-driven taxonomy of the types of question that could be addressed by evidence.</p

    Complete prioritized list of study designs used to address each type of question.

    No full text
    Complete prioritized list of study designs used to address each type of question.</p

    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 1.

    No full text
    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 1.</p

    Response rate and Kendall’s W for the types of question in which consensus was reached.

    No full text
    Response rate and Kendall’s W for the types of question in which consensus was reached.</p

    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 4.

    No full text
    Ranking of the first four study designs to address the types of question in which consensus was reached in stage 4.</p

    Characteristics of the participants included in the study per each round (n = 21 for round 1; n = 8 for round 2), ranked by frequency in round 1.

    No full text
    Characteristics of the participants included in the study per each round (n = 21 for round 1; n = 8 for round 2), ranked by frequency in round 1.</p
    corecore