150 research outputs found

    Case-Based Capture and Reuse of Aerospace Design Rationale

    Get PDF
    The goal of this project is to apply artificial intelligence techniques to facilitate capture and reuse of aerospace design rationale. The project applies case-based reasoning (CBR) and concept mapping (CMAP) tools to the task of capturing, organizing, and interactively accessing experiences or "cases" encapsulating the methods and rationale underlying expert aerospace design. As stipulated in the award, Indiana University and Ames personnel are collaborating on performance of research and determining the direction of research, to assure that the project focuses on high-value tasks. In the first five months of the project, we have made two visits to Ames Research Center to consult with our NASA collaborators, to learn about the advanced aerospace design tools being developed there, and to identify specific needs for intelligent design support. These meetings identified a number of task areas for applying CBR and concept mapping technology. We jointly selected a first task area to focus on: Acquiring the convergence criteria that experts use to guide the selection of useful data from a set of numerical simulations of high-lift systems. During the first funding period, we developed two software systems. First, we have adapted a CBR system developed at Indiana University into a prototype case-based reasoning shell to capture and retrieve information about design experiences, with the sample task of capturing and reusing experts' intuitive criteria for determining convergence (work conducted at Indiana University). Second, we have also adapted and refined existing concept mapping tools that will be used to clarify and capture the rationale underlying those experiences, to facilitate understanding of the expert's reasoning and guide future reuse of captured information (work conducted at the University of West Florida). The tools we have developed are designed to be the basis for a general framework for facilitating tasks within systems developed by the Advanced Design Technologies Testbed (ADTT) project at ARC. The tenets of our framework are (1) that the systems developed should leverage a designer's knowledge, rather than attempting to replace it; (2) that learning and user feedback must play a central role, so that the system can adapt to how it is used, and (3) that the learning and feedback processes must be as natural and as unobtrusive as possible. In the second funding period we will extend our current work, applying the tools to capturing higher-level design rationale

    INTERVAL (investigation of NICE technologies for enabling risk-variable-adjusted-length) dental recalls trial: a multicentre randomised controlled trial investigating the best dental recall interval for optimum, cost-effective maintenance of oral health in dentate adults attending dental primary care

    Get PDF
    Background Traditionally, patients at low risk and high risk of developing dental disease have been encouraged to attend dental recall appointments at regular intervals of six months between appointments. The lack of evidence for the effect that different recall intervals between dental check-ups have on patient outcomes, provider workload and healthcare costs is causing considerable uncertainty for the profession and patients, despite the publication of the NICE Guideline on dental recall. The need for primary research has been highlighted in the Health Technology Assessment Group’s systematic review of routine dental check-ups, which found little evidence to support or refute the practice of encouraging 6-monthly dental check-ups in adults. The more recent Cochrane review on recall interval concluded there was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions regarding the potential beneficial or harmful effects of altering the recall interval between dental check-ups. There is therefore an urgent need to assess the relative effectiveness and cost-benefit of different dental recall intervals in a robust, sufficiently powered randomised control trial (RCT) in primary dental care. Methods This is a four year multi-centre, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded outcome assessment based in dental primary care in the UK. Practitioners will recruit 2372 dentate adult patients. Patient participants will be randomised to one of three groups: fixed-period six month recall, risk-based recall, or fixed-period twenty-four month recall. Outcome data will be assessed through clinical examination, patient questionnaires and NHS databases. The primary outcomes measure gingival inflammation/bleeding on probing and oral health-related quality of life. Discussion INTERVAL will provide evidence for the most clinically-effective and cost-beneficial recall interval for maintaining optimum oral health in dentate adults attending general dental practice

    Crop Updates 2007 - Farming Systems

    Get PDF
    This session covers forty papers from different authors: 1. Quality Assurance and industry stewardship, David Jeffries, Better Farm IQ Manager, Cooperative Bulk Handling 2. Sothis: Trifolium dasyurum (Eastern Star clover), A. Loi, B.J. Nutt and C.K. Revell, Department of Agriculture and Food 3. Poor performing patches of the paddock – to ameliorate or live with low yield? Yvette Oliver1, Michael Robertson1, Bill Bowden2, Kit Leake3and Ashley Bonser3, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems1, Department of Food and Agriculture2, Kellerberrin Farmer3 4. What evidence is there that PA can pay? Michael Robertson, CSIRO Floreat, Ian Maling, SilverFox Solutions and Bindi Isbister, Department of Agriculture and Food 5.The journey is great, but does PA pay? Garren Knell, ConsultAg; Alison Slade, Department of Agriculture and Food, CFIG 6. 2007 Seasonal outlook, David Stephens and Michael Meuleners, Department of Agriculture and Food 7. Towards building farmer capacity to better manage climate risk, David Beard and Nicolyn Short, Department of Agriculture and Food 8. A NAR farmers view of his farming system in 2015, Rob Grima, Department of Agriculture and Food 9. Biofuels opportunities in Australia, Ingrid Richardson, Food and Agribusiness Research, Rabobank 10. The groundwater depth on the hydrological benefits of lucerne and the subsequent recharge values, Ruhi Ferdowsian1and Geoff Bee2; 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Landholder, Laurinya, Jerramungup 11. Subsoil constraints to crop production in the high rainfall zone of Western Australia, Daniel Evans1, Bob Gilkes1, Senthold Asseng2and Jim Dixon3; 1University of Western Australia, 2CSIRO Plant Industry, 3Department of Agriculture and Food 12. Prospects for lucerne in the WA wheatbelt, Michael Robertson, CSIRO Floreat, Felicity Byrne and Mike Ewing, CRC for Plant-Based Management of Dryland Salinity, Dennis van Gool, Department of Agriculture and Food 13. Nitrous oxide emissions from a cropped soil in the Western Australian grainbelt, Louise Barton1, Ralf Kiese2, David Gatter3, Klaus Butterbach-Bahl2, Renee Buck1, Christoph Hinz1and Daniel Murphy1,1School of Earth and Geographical Sciences, The University of Western Australia, 2Institute for Meteorology and Climate Research, Atmospheric Environmental Research, Garmisch-Partenkirchen, Germany, 3The Department of Agriculture and Food 14. Managing seasonal risk is an important part of farm management but is highly complex and therefore needs a ‘horses for courses’ approach, Cameron Weeks, Planfarm / Mingenew-Irwin Group, Dr Michael Robertson, Dr Yvette Oliver, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems and Dr Meredith Fairbanks, Department of Agriculture and Food 15. Novel use application of clopyralid in lupins, John Peirce, and Brad Rayner Department of Agriculture and Food 16. Long season wheat on the South Coast – Feed and grain in a dry year – a 2006 case study, Sandy White, Department of Agriculture and Food 17. Wheat yield response to potassium and the residual value of PKS fertiliser drilled at different depths, Paul Damon1, Bill Bowden2, Qifu Ma1 and Zed Rengel1; Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, The University of Western Australia1, Department of Agriculture and Food2 18. Saltbush as a sponge for summer rain, Ed Barrett-Lennard and Meir Altman, Department of Agriculture and Food and CRC for Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity 19. Building strong working relationships between grower groups and their industry partners, Tracey M. Gianatti, Grower Group Alliance 20. To graze or not to graze – the question of tactical grazing of cereal crops, Lindsay Bell and Michael Robertson, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems 21. Can legume pastures and sheep replace lupins? Ben Webb and Caroline Peek, Department of Agriculture and Food 22. EverGraze – livestock and perennial pasture performance during a drought year, Paul Sanford, Department of Agriculture and Food, and CRC for Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity 23. Crop survival in challenging times, Paul Blackwell1, Glen Riethmuller1, Darshan Sharma1and Mike Collins21Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Okura Plantations, Kirikiri New Zealand 24. Soil health constraints to production potential – a precision guided project, Frank D’Emden, and David Hall, Department of Agriculture and Food 25. A review of pest and disease occurrence in 2006, Mangano, G.P. and Severtson, D.L., Department of Agriculture and Food 26. e-weed – an information resource on seasonal weed management issues, Vanessa Stewart and Julie Roche, Department of Agriculture and Food 27. Review of Pesticide Legislation and Policies in Western Australia, Peter Rutherford, BSc (Agric.), Pesticide Legislation Review, Office of the Chief Medical Adviser, WA Department of Health 28. Future wheat yields in the West Australian wheatbelt, Imma Farré and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture and Food, Stephen Charles, CSIRO Land and Water 29. Organic matter in WA arable soils: What’s active and what’s not, Frances Hoyle, Department of Agriculture and Food, Australia and Daniel Murphy, UWA 30. Soil quality indicators in Western Australian farming systems, D.V. Murphy1, N. Milton1, M. Osman1, F.C. Hoyle2, L.K Abbott1, W.R. Cookson1and S. Darmawanto1; 1UWA, 2Department of Agriculture and Food 31. Impact of stubble on input efficiencies, Geoff Anderson, formerly employed by Department of Agriculture and Food 32. Mixed farming vs All crop – true profit, not just gross margins, Rob Sands and David McCarthy, FARMANCO Management Consultants, Western Australia 33. Evaluation of Local Farmer Group Network – group leaders’ surveys 2005 and 2006, Paul Carmody, Local Farmer Group Network, Network Coordinator, UWA 34. Seeding rate and nitrogen application and timing effects in wheat, J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 35. Foliar fungicide application and disease control in barley, J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 36. Brown manuring effects on a following wheat crop in the central wheatbelt, , J. Russell, Department of Agriculture and Food, J. Eyres, G. Fosbery and A. Roe, ConsultAg, Northam 37. Management of annual pastures in mixed farming systems – transition from a dry season, Dr Clinton Revell and Dr Phil Nichols; Department of Agriculture and Food 38. The value of new annual pastures in mixed farm businesses of the wheatbelt, Dr Clinton Revell1, Mr Andrew Bathgate2and Dr Phil Nichols1; 1Department of Agriculture and Food, 2Farming Systems Analysis Service, Albany 39. The influence of winter SOI and Indian Ocean SST on WA winter rainfall, Meredith Fairbanks and Ian Foster, Department of Agriculture and Food 40. Market outlook – Grains, Anne Wilkins, Market Analyst, Grains, Department of Agriculture and Foo

    Evidence and rationale for the World Health Organization recommended standards for Japanese encephalitis surveillance

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Japanese encephalitis (JE) is the most important form of viral encephalitis in Asia. Surveillance for the disease in many countries has been limited. To improve collection of accurate surveillance data in order to increase understanding of the full impact of JE and monitor control programs, World Health Organization (WHO) Recommended Standards for JE Surveillance have been developed. To aid acceptance of the Standards, we describe the process of development, provide the supporting evidence, and explain the rationale for the recommendations made in the document.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A JE Core Working Group was formed in 2002 and worked on development of JE surveillance standards. A series of questions on specific topics was initially developed. A literature review was undertaken and the findings were discussed and documented. The group then prepared a draft document, with emphasis placed on the feasibility of implementation in Asian countries. A field test version of the Standards was published by WHO in January 2006. Feedback was then sought from countries that piloted the Standards and from public health professionals in forums and individual meetings to modify the Standards accordingly.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>After revisions, a final version of the JE surveillance standards was published in August 2008. The supporting information is presented here together with explanations of the rationale and levels of evidence for specific recommendations.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Provision of the supporting evidence and rationale should help to facilitate successful implementation of the JE surveillance standards in JE-endemic countries which will in turn enable better understanding of disease burden and the impact of control programs.</p

    Global age-sex-specific fertility, mortality, healthy life expectancy (HALE), and population estimates in 204 countries and territories, 1950-2019 : a comprehensive demographic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background: Accurate and up-to-date assessment of demographic metrics is crucial for understanding a wide range of social, economic, and public health issues that affect populations worldwide. The Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019 produced updated and comprehensive demographic assessments of the key indicators of fertility, mortality, migration, and population for 204 countries and territories and selected subnational locations from 1950 to 2019. Methods: 8078 country-years of vital registration and sample registration data, 938 surveys, 349 censuses, and 238 other sources were identified and used to estimate age-specific fertility. Spatiotemporal Gaussian process regression (ST-GPR) was used to generate age-specific fertility rates for 5-year age groups between ages 15 and 49 years. With extensions to age groups 10–14 and 50–54 years, the total fertility rate (TFR) was then aggregated using the estimated age-specific fertility between ages 10 and 54 years. 7417 sources were used for under-5 mortality estimation and 7355 for adult mortality. ST-GPR was used to synthesise data sources after correction for known biases. Adult mortality was measured as the probability of death between ages 15 and 60 years based on vital registration, sample registration, and sibling histories, and was also estimated using ST-GPR. HIV-free life tables were then estimated using estimates of under-5 and adult mortality rates using a relational model life table system created for GBD, which closely tracks observed age-specific mortality rates from complete vital registration when available. Independent estimates of HIV-specific mortality generated by an epidemiological analysis of HIV prevalence surveys and antenatal clinic serosurveillance and other sources were incorporated into the estimates in countries with large epidemics. Annual and single-year age estimates of net migration and population for each country and territory were generated using a Bayesian hierarchical cohort component model that analysed estimated age-specific fertility and mortality rates along with 1250 censuses and 747 population registry years. We classified location-years into seven categories on the basis of the natural rate of increase in population (calculated by subtracting the crude death rate from the crude birth rate) and the net migration rate. We computed healthy life expectancy (HALE) using years lived with disability (YLDs) per capita, life tables, and standard demographic methods. Uncertainty was propagated throughout the demographic estimation process, including fertility, mortality, and population, with 1000 draw-level estimates produced for each metric. Findings: The global TFR decreased from 2·72 (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 2·66–2·79) in 2000 to 2·31 (2·17–2·46) in 2019. Global annual livebirths increased from 134·5 million (131·5–137·8) in 2000 to a peak of 139·6 million (133·0–146·9) in 2016. Global livebirths then declined to 135·3 million (127·2–144·1) in 2019. Of the 204 countries and territories included in this study, in 2019, 102 had a TFR lower than 2·1, which is considered a good approximation of replacement-level fertility. All countries in sub-Saharan Africa had TFRs above replacement level in 2019 and accounted for 27·1% (95% UI 26·4–27·8) of global livebirths. Global life expectancy at birth increased from 67·2 years (95% UI 66·8–67·6) in 2000 to 73·5 years (72·8–74·3) in 2019. The total number of deaths increased from 50·7 million (49·5–51·9) in 2000 to 56·5 million (53·7–59·2) in 2019. Under-5 deaths declined from 9·6 million (9·1–10·3) in 2000 to 5·0 million (4·3–6·0) in 2019. Global population increased by 25·7%, from 6·2 billion (6·0–6·3) in 2000 to 7·7 billion (7·5–8·0) in 2019. In 2019, 34 countries had negative natural rates of increase; in 17 of these, the population declined because immigration was not sufficient to counteract the negative rate of decline. Globally, HALE increased from 58·6 years (56·1–60·8) in 2000 to 63·5 years (60·8–66·1) in 2019. HALE increased in 202 of 204 countries and territories between 2000 and 2019

    Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019 : A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Methods Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (≥65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0–100 based on the 2·5th and 97·5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target—1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023—we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Findings Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45·8 (95% uncertainty interval 44·2–47·5) in 1990 to 60·3 (58·7–61·9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2·6% [1·9–3·3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010–2019 relative to 1990–2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0·79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach 1398pooledhealthspendingpercapita(US1398 pooled health spending per capita (US adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388·9 million (358·6–421·3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3·1 billion (3·0–3·2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968·1 million [903·5–1040·3]) residing in south Asia. Interpretation The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people—the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close—or how far—all populations are in benefiting from UHC

    Measuring universal health coverage based on an index of effective coverage of health services in 204 countries and territories, 1990–2019: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019

    Get PDF
    Background Achieving universal health coverage (UHC) involves all people receiving the health services they need, of high quality, without experiencing financial hardship. Making progress towards UHC is a policy priority for both countries and global institutions, as highlighted by the agenda of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and WHO's Thirteenth General Programme of Work (GPW13). Measuring effective coverage at the health-system level is important for understanding whether health services are aligned with countries' health profiles and are of sufficient quality to produce health gains for populations of all ages. Methods Based on the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors Study (GBD) 2019, we assessed UHC effective coverage for 204 countries and territories from 1990 to 2019. Drawing from a measurement framework developed through WHO's GPW13 consultation, we mapped 23 effective coverage indicators to a matrix representing health service types (eg, promotion, prevention, and treatment) and five population-age groups spanning from reproductive and newborn to older adults (≥65 years). Effective coverage indicators were based on intervention coverage or outcome-based measures such as mortality-to-incidence ratios to approximate access to quality care; outcome-based measures were transformed to values on a scale of 0–100 based on the 2·5th and 97·5th percentile of location-year values. We constructed the UHC effective coverage index by weighting each effective coverage indicator relative to its associated potential health gains, as measured by disability-adjusted life-years for each location-year and population-age group. For three tests of validity (content, known-groups, and convergent), UHC effective coverage index performance was generally better than that of other UHC service coverage indices from WHO (ie, the current metric for SDG indicator 3.8.1 on UHC service coverage), the World Bank, and GBD 2017. We quantified frontiers of UHC effective coverage performance on the basis of pooled health spending per capita, representing UHC effective coverage index levels achieved in 2019 relative to country-level government health spending, prepaid private expenditures, and development assistance for health. To assess current trajectories towards the GPW13 UHC billion target—1 billion more people benefiting from UHC by 2023—we estimated additional population equivalents with UHC effective coverage from 2018 to 2023. Findings Globally, performance on the UHC effective coverage index improved from 45·8 (95% uncertainty interval 44·2–47·5) in 1990 to 60·3 (58·7–61·9) in 2019, yet country-level UHC effective coverage in 2019 still spanned from 95 or higher in Japan and Iceland to lower than 25 in Somalia and the Central African Republic. Since 2010, sub-Saharan Africa showed accelerated gains on the UHC effective coverage index (at an average increase of 2·6% [1·9–3·3] per year up to 2019); by contrast, most other GBD super-regions had slowed rates of progress in 2010–2019 relative to 1990–2010. Many countries showed lagging performance on effective coverage indicators for non-communicable diseases relative to those for communicable diseases and maternal and child health, despite non-communicable diseases accounting for a greater proportion of potential health gains in 2019, suggesting that many health systems are not keeping pace with the rising non-communicable disease burden and associated population health needs. In 2019, the UHC effective coverage index was associated with pooled health spending per capita (r=0·79), although countries across the development spectrum had much lower UHC effective coverage than is potentially achievable relative to their health spending. Under maximum efficiency of translating health spending into UHC effective coverage performance, countries would need to reach 1398pooledhealthspendingpercapita(US1398 pooled health spending per capita (US adjusted for purchasing power parity) in order to achieve 80 on the UHC effective coverage index. From 2018 to 2023, an estimated 388·9 million (358·6–421·3) more population equivalents would have UHC effective coverage, falling well short of the GPW13 target of 1 billion more people benefiting from UHC during this time. Current projections point to an estimated 3·1 billion (3·0–3·2) population equivalents still lacking UHC effective coverage in 2023, with nearly a third (968·1 million [903·5–1040·3]) residing in south Asia. Interpretation The present study demonstrates the utility of measuring effective coverage and its role in supporting improved health outcomes for all people—the ultimate goal of UHC and its achievement. Global ambitions to accelerate progress on UHC service coverage are increasingly unlikely unless concerted action on non-communicable diseases occurs and countries can better translate health spending into improved performance. Focusing on effective coverage and accounting for the world's evolving health needs lays the groundwork for better understanding how close—or how far—all populations are in benefiting from UHC
    corecore