Testing Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA)

Regular, automated testing is a foundational principle of modern software development. Numerous widely-used continuous integration systems exist, but they are often not suitable for the unique needs of scientific simulation software. Here we describe the testing infrastructure developed for and used by the Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) project. This system allows the computationally-demanding MESA test suite to be regularly run on a heterogeneous set of computers and aggregates and displays the testing results in a form that allows for the rapid identification and diagnosis of regressions. Regularly collecting comprehensive testing data also enables longitudinal studies of the performance of the software and the properties of the models it generates.Comment: 12 page, 7 figures, Accepted to ApJ

Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA): Convective Boundaries, Element Diffusion, and Massive Star Explosions

We update the capabilities of the software instrument Modules for Experiments in Stellar Astrophysics (MESA) and enhance its ease of use and availability. Our new approach to locating convective boundaries is consistent with the physics of convection, and yields reliable values of the convective core mass during both hydrogen and helium burning phases. Stars with $M<8\,{\rm M_\odot}$ become white dwarfs and cool to the point where the electrons are degenerate and the ions are strongly coupled, a realm now available to study with MESA due to improved treatments of element diffusion, latent heat release, and blending of equations of state. Studies of the final fates of massive stars are extended in MESA by our addition of an approximate Riemann solver that captures shocks and conserves energy to high accuracy during dynamic epochs. We also introduce a 1D capability for modeling the effects of Rayleigh-Taylor instabilities that, in combination with the coupling to a public version of the STELLA radiation transfer instrument, creates new avenues for exploring Type II supernovae properties. These capabilities are exhibited with exploratory models of pair-instability supernova, pulsational pair-instability supernova, and the formation of stellar mass black holes. The applicability of MESA is now widened by the capability of importing multi-dimensional hydrodynamic models into MESA. We close by introducing software modules for handling floating point exceptions and stellar model optimization, and four new software tools -- MESAWeb, MESA-Docker, pyMESA, and mesastar.org -- to enhance MESA's education and research impact.Comment: 64 pages, 61 figures; Accepted to AAS Journal

Cell transformation assays for prediction of carcinogenic potential: State of the science and future research needs

Copyright @ 2011 The Authors. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0), which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Cell transformation assays (CTAs) have long been proposed as in vitro methods for the identification of potential chemical carcinogens. Despite showing good correlation with rodent bioassay data, concerns over the subjective nature of using morphological criteria for identifying transformed cells and a lack of understanding of the mechanistic basis of the assays has limited their acceptance for regulatory purposes. However, recent drivers to find alternative carcinogenicity assessment methodologies, such as the Seventh Amendment to the EU Cosmetics Directive, have fuelled renewed interest in CTAs. Research is currently ongoing to improve the objectivity of the assays, reveal the underlying molecular changes leading to transformation and explore the use of novel cell types. The UK NC3Rs held an international workshop in November 2010 to review the current state of the art in this field and provide directions for future research. This paper outlines the key points highlighted at this meeting

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs):PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PurposeAlthough comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measure- ment INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.MethodsThe development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.ResultsFrom the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final check- list to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review’s title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.ConclusionPRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding expla- nation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA- COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application

Guideline for reporting systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs):PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024

PurposeAlthough comprehensive and widespread guidelines on how to conduct systematic reviews of outcome measurement instruments (OMIs) exist, for example from the COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measure- ment INstruments) initiative, key information is often missing in published reports. This article describes the development of an extension of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guideline: PRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024.MethodsThe development process followed the Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR) guidelines and included a literature search, expert consultations, a Delphi study, a hybrid workgroup meeting, pilot testing, and an end-of-project meeting, with integrated patient/public involvement.ResultsFrom the literature and expert consultation, 49 potentially relevant reporting items were identified. Round 1 of the Delphi study was completed by 103 panelists, whereas round 2 and 3 were completed by 78 panelists. After 3 rounds, agreement (≥ 67%) on inclusion and wording was reached for 44 items. Eleven items without consensus for inclusion and/or wording were discussed at a workgroup meeting attended by 24 participants. Agreement was reached for the inclusion and wording of 10 items, and the deletion of 1 item. Pilot testing with 65 authors of OMI systematic reviews further improved the guideline through minor changes in wording and structure, finalized during the end-of-project meeting. The final check- list to facilitate the reporting of full systematic review reports contains 54 (sub)items addressing the review’s title, abstract, plain language summary, open science, introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Thirteen items pertaining to the title and abstract are also included in a separate abstract checklist, guiding authors in reporting for example conference abstracts.ConclusionPRISMA-COSMIN for OMIs 2024 consists of two checklists (full reports; abstracts), their corresponding expla- nation and elaboration documents detailing the rationale and examples for each item, and a data flow diagram. PRISMA- COSMIN for OMIs 2024 can improve the reporting of systematic reviews of OMIs, fostering their reproducibility and allowing end-users to appraise the quality of OMIs and select the most appropriate OMI for a specific application

Variation in carbon and nitrogen concentrations among peatland categories at the global scale

Publisher Copyright: © 2022 This is an open access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.Peatlands account for 15 to 30% of the world's soil carbon (C) stock and are important controls over global nitrogen (N) cycles. However, C and N concentrations are known to vary among peatlands contributing to the uncertainty of global C inventories, but there are few global studies that relate peatland classification to peat chemistry. We analyzed 436 peat cores sampled in 24 countries across six continents and measured C, N, and organic matter (OM) content at three depths down to 70 cm. Sites were distinguished between northern (387) and tropical (49) peatlands and assigned to one of six distinct broadly recognized peatland categories that vary primarily along a pH gradient. Peat C and N concentrations, OM content, and C:N ratios differed significantly among peatland categories, but few differences in chemistry with depth were found within each category. Across all peatlands C and N concentrations in the 10-20 cm layer, were 440 ± 85.1 g kg-1 and 13.9 ± 7.4 g kg-1, with an average C:N ratio of 30.1 ± 20.8. Among peatland categories, median C concentrations were highest in bogs, poor fens and tropical swamps (446-532 g kg-1) and lowest in intermediate and extremely rich fens (375-414 g kg-1). The C:OM ratio in peat was similar across most peatland categories, except in deeper samples from ombrotrophic tropical peat swamps that were higher than other peatlands categories. Peat N concentrations and C:N ratios varied approximately two-fold among peatland categories and N concentrations tended to be higher (and C:N lower) in intermediate fens compared with other peatland types. This study reports on a unique data set and demonstrates that differences in peat C and OM concentrations among broadly classified peatland categories are predictable, which can aid future studies that use land cover assessments to refine global peatland C and N stocks.Peer reviewe