NASA Constellation Distributed Simulation Middleware Trade Study

This paper presents the results of a trade study designed to assess three distributed simulation middleware technologies for support of the NASA Constellation Distributed Space Exploration Simulation (DSES) project and Test and Verification Distributed System Integration Laboratory (DSIL). The technologies are the High Level Architecture (HLA), the Test and Training Enabling Architecture (TENA), and an XML-based variant of Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS-XML) coupled with the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP). According to the criteria and weights determined in this study, HLA scores better than the other two for DSES as well as the DSIL

Finite size scaling for quantum criticality using the finite-element method

Finite size scaling for the Schr\"{o}dinger equation is a systematic approach to calculate the quantum critical parameters for a given Hamiltonian. This approach has been shown to give very accurate results for critical parameters by using a systematic expansion with global basis-type functions. Recently, the finite element method was shown to be a powerful numerical method for ab initio electronic structure calculations with a variable real-space resolution. In this work, we demonstrate how to obtain quantum critical parameters by combining the finite element method (FEM) with finite size scaling (FSS) using different ab initio approximations and exact formulations. The critical parameters could be atomic nuclear charges, internuclear distances, electron density, disorder, lattice structure, and external fields for stability of atomic, molecular systems and quantum phase transitions of extended systems. To illustrate the effectiveness of this approach we provide detailed calculations of applying FEM to approximate solutions for the two-electron atom with varying nuclear charge; these include Hartree-Fock, density functional theory under the local density approximation, and an "exact"' formulation using FEM. We then use the FSS approach to determine its critical nuclear charge for stability; here, the size of the system is related to the number of elements used in the calculations. Results prove to be in good agreement with previous Slater-basis set calculations and demonstrate that it is possible to combine finite size scaling with the finite-element method by using ab initio calculations to obtain quantum critical parameters. The combined approach provides a promising first-principles approach to describe quantum phase transitions for materials and extended systems.Comment: 15 pages, 19 figures, revision based on suggestions by referee, accepted in Phys. Rev.

Directive and Nondirective E-Coach Support for Weight Loss in Overweight Adults

Although e-coach support increases the effectiveness of Internet weight loss interventions, no studies have assessed influence of type of e-coach support

HARBER ET AL. DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT DIRECTIVE SUPPORT, NONDIRECTIVE SUPPORT, AND MORALE

The concept of social support as being directive or nondirective may help explain why helping can either boost or impede morale. The Inventory of Nondirective and Directive Instrumental Support (INDIS) was developed to investigate this question. The directive factor concerns others' attempts to dominate coping and the nondirective factor concerns others' attempts to facilitate but not dominate coping. Studies 1 and 2 identified and confirmed these factors. Study 3 showed predicted associations between INDIS subscales and measures of morale. Nondirective support (from a family member) was positively related to hope and optimism, and directive support (from either a family member or a friend) was positively related to depression and loneliness, even after controlling for other social support measures. Maintaining hope and morale is one of the most important and difficult challenges faced by people coping with serious problems. Events such as loss of loved ones, professional or interpersonal failure, and cata- 691 Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 5, 2005, pp. 691-722 Kent D. Harber, Department of Psychology, Rutgers University at Newark; Joanne Kraenzle Schneider, Department of Nursing, St. Louis University; Kelly Everard and Edwin Fisher, Division of Health Behavior Research, Departments of Medicine and Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine. We thank Gabrielle Highstein, Ian Brissette, Lee Jussim, Bäerbel Knauper, and Annette La Greca for their contributions to this research. We also thank Alan Lambert for his assistance. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kent D. Harber, Department of Psychology, Rutgers University, Smith Hall, 101 Warren Street, Newark, NJ 07044; E-mail: [email protected]. strophic damage to oneself or to one's prized possessions can shake victims' confidence in their self worth and self-efficacy However, support is not always nurturing. In many cases social ties can fail to buttress morale, and can even exacerbate the psychological challenge of coping. Research into "negative social support" identifies a number of ways in which helping attempts can be unhelpful. Sometimes would-be supporters aggravate recovery by being critical, antagonistic, disruptive or even exploitative One of the most common forms of failed support is not generally attributable to insufficient caring, knowledge, or skills. Instead, this form of counterproductive helping is most often and most potently delivered by those closest to copers, and by those most heavily invested in their recovery. Referred to as "over-involvement" By taking charge of too much, supporters may communicate through their very acts of support that copers lack the skills or strengths needed to remedy their own problems 692 HARBER ET AL. teem However, despite these operational difficulties, advances in social support research buttress the over-involvement framework. Cutrona, To a certain degree this tension is an inescapable dilemma of support provision. However, underlying and perhaps aggravating the copers' conflicting needs for help and for autonomy may be helpers' conflicting motives to step in and step back. These motives can be characterized by the degree to which helping is nondirective or directive. In essence, what distinguishes nondirective from directive help is whether supporters attempt to advance the coper's own recuperative agenda or instead impose an agenda of recovery upon the coper. Supporters provide nondirective support when they cooperate without assuming primary responsibility for the other person's performance. Supporters provide directive support when they assume, or attempt to assume, primary responsibility for coping DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 693 nondirective or directive, depending on the manner in which helpers supply it. For example, a supporter who screens phone calls based on the coper's instructions would be providing nondirective support, but would be supplying directive support by screening calls either without, or against, the coper's instruction. The former advances the copers' intent, while the latter supercedes it. It is important to emphasize that nondirective and directive support do not necessarily differ in the degree to which they meet the immediate objective needs of the coper. Screening phone calls may ultimately prove helpful or unhelpful, regardless of whether this action has been requested or not. Instead, nondirective and directive helping differ in the kinds of meta-messages they communicate to copers regarding their physical, mental, and emotional competencies. These messages, we believe, can profoundly affect copers' morale regarding their coping efforts. NONDIRECTIVE SUPPORT VS. DIRECTIVE SUPPORT AND MORALE Kurt Lewin defined morale as the ability to set valued goals combined with confidence in one's own ability to achieve those goals 1 More recently, Charles Snyder and colleagues used this same prescription to define and measure hope. In much the same way as Lewin characterized morale, Snyder et al. define hope as consisting of both an ability to set goals and confidence in one's own capacity to achieve them. Hope serves "as a means of maintaining a fighting spirit" in the face of adversity (Snyder et al., 1998, p. 195). Snyder and his colleagues have demonstrated the contribution of hope to realizing important personal goals The themes of planning, agency, and control that are integral to morale are centrally implicated in the distinction between nondirective and directive support. People who receive primarily nondirective support are encouraged to identify and articulate the goals of their own recovery and, through the assistance of their supporters, to achieve the goals that they, themselves, have set. Moreover, by controlling the amount, nature, 694 HARBER ET AL. 1. Lewin explicitly associated morale with social support, stating "group 'belongingness' may increase a feeling of security, thereby raising the morale . . . of the individual" (Lewin, 1948, p. 85). and timing of help, recipients of nondirective support may be better able to both ascertain and exercise their own coping abilities. Because nondirective support allows them to assert greater agency in their own recovery, copers who mainly receive this kind of support-at least for generally tractable problems-should experience greater morale, compared to people who receive primarily directive support, where others prescribe the nature, time-course, and degree of helping. Research conducted by our group generally confirms these hypotheses DEVELOPMENT OF A SELF REPORT MEASURE OF NONDIRECTIVE AND DIRECTIVE SUPPORT The distinction between nondirective and directive support may help differentiate the ways that over-involved helping depletes morale. According to over-involvement researchers, help that over-reaches can convey to copers a lack of faith in their capacity to solve their own problems The nondirective/directive distinction has two other important advantages over "over-involvement." First, over-involvement is largely empirically derived and for this reason definitions of it vary across the studies in which it has been observed DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 695 ence, judgment, or need of the recipient. Nondirective support and directive support are defined a priori. They remain conceptually consistent across support situations and can be assessed independent of the recipients' preferences or situation. Second, nondirective support and directive support are not necessarily evaluative terms. Indeed there may be situations in which an emphasis on one or the other might be especially appropriate (a point we elaborate upon in the Discussion). "Over-involvement" (and "over-protectiveness"), on the other hand, carries pejorative connotations that may obscure the necessary relation between, for example, assertive helping and acute crises (see HARBER ET AL. 2. Indeed, there may be cases where directive and nondirective support are supplied invisibly, perhaps making the former less injurious and the latter less beneficial to esteem. 3. The adjective "Instrumental" emphasizes the more tangible and action-oriented kinds of support as reported in the over-involvement literature. SPECIFYING SUPPORT SOURCE Many extant measures of social support inquire about the overall quality of support people receive from their social networks. However, there is an increasing appreciation that support does not come from an undifferentiated social field. Instead, the nature and impact of support are strongly affected by support source, such as family versus friends The research reported here describes three studies regarding the development of the INDIS and the testing of the nondirective/directive model. The purpose of the first study was to identify and confirm the directive and non-directive constructs. The second study was conducted to re-confirm these sub-scales. The third study used the INDIS to test whether directive support and nondirective support are differentially associated with morale. STUDY 1 METHOD PARTICIPANTS The participants in this study were 353 Washington University undergraduates enrolled in an introductory psychology class. Two hundred thirteen (60.3%) were women and 140 (39.7%) were men. Participants' ages ranged from 17 to 21 (M = 18.5, SD = 0.92). The sample, in order of representation, was comprised of 250 non-Hispanic whites (70.8%), 73 Asians (20.7%), 18 African Americans (5.1%), and two Latinos (0.6%). Ten participants (2.8%) did not indicate their ethnicity. The religious composition of the sample included 100 Protestants (28.3%), 93 Jews (26.3%), 73 Catholics (20.7%), and 44 atheist or agnostic (12.5%). Forty-three participants (12.2%) did not indicate their religious affiliation. Participants completed the questionnaire as part of a class exercise. DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 697 MEASURES Inventory of Nondirective and Directive Instrumental Support (INDIS). A pool of 40 directive and nondirective items, emphasizing instrumental support, was generated for purposes of modified Q-sorting. These items were based upon themes that emerged from structured interviews investigating directive and nondirective support, and from general concepts of these kinds of support developed by Fisher and his colleagues (e.g., Fisher, Bickle et al., 1997; Fisher, La Greca et al.,1997). Seven colleagues who have conducted extensive interviews designed to investigate directive support and nondirective support were enlisted to complete the sorting task. Sixteen items were excluded due to low concordance (i.e., less than 75% agreement that they represented either directive or nondirective support). The remaining 24 items (12 directive and 12 nondirective) were subsequently administered in survey form. There were two parallel versions of the INDIS, one focusing on support from a family member and the other focusing on support from a friend. The items comprising these versions were the same; the difference between the versions was in the specific source (family member or friend) to which the items referred. Participants indicated how accurately each item reflected the kind of help that they received from their respective support source, using five-point Likert scales that ranged from 1 = not at all accurate to 5 = extremely accurate. Background Questionnaire. A brief background questionnaire was prepared that sampled participants' age, race, gender, and religion. In addition, it instructed participants to indicate whether or not they had experienced any of nine major kinds of problems including personal health, romantic relationships, non-romantic relationships, bereavement, loved one's injury or illness, personal victimization, loved one's victimization, or problems in academics, jobs, or other valued area, or any other kind of problem. Two final questions asked participants to indicate which problem was the most severe, and which family member or friend (depending on INDIS version) served as their primary source of support. PROCEDURE Participants completed the background survey first. They then completed either the family member or the friend version of the INDIS, according to random assignment. Participants completed the INDIS in the context of the most severe problem they weathered in the past 12 months, and in reference to the individual friend or family member (de- 698 HARBER ET AL. pending on INDIS version) who served as their primary support source in dealing with this particular problem. RESULTS PSYCHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF STUDY 1 Because we had anticipated the underlying latent variable structure of the sub-scales (one directive and one nondirective latent variable), it would have been appropriate for us to immediately test the model using confirmatory factor analysis The 24 survey items were entered into principal components analyses. Because we expected to find two distinct constructs, one directive and one nondirective, two factors were rotated orthogonally using Varimax rotation. For both the family member and friend version of the INDIS items were eliminated if: (1) they did not load on either factor at or above .30; (2) they cross-loaded with a difference in loadings less than .10; or (3) they failed to load on the same factor for both the family member and friend versions. Four items were eliminated through this process. The remaining 20 items accounted for 44.2% of the family version variance and 40.6% of the friend version variance. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacies (KMO) of .86 and .82 respectively indicated that factor analysis was appropriate for these data. As expected, two factors emerged from this analysis, for both the family and friend versions, which were respectively comprised of nondirective and directive items. The nondirective factor contained those items that reflected support in which the provider cooperated with the recipient without "taking over" responsibility or control. The directive factor contained items that reflected taking over the tasks of coping. DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 699 CONFIRMATORY FACTOR ANALYSIS In order to determine how well individual items fit the overall model, we proceeded to confirmatory factor analysis, using structural equation modeling to evaluate the fit indices of the remaining 20 items. Confirmatory factor analysis uses a set of measured variables (e.g., questionnaire items) to form a variance/covariance matrix from which unobservable latent variables (e.g., hypothesized factors) can be tested. The loading of each questionnaire item indicates its relationship with the latent variable (i.e., construct or factor). In confirmatory factor analysis, the measurement model specifies the observed variables that define the constructs and "reflects the extent to which the observed variables are assessing the latent variables in terms of reliability and validity" (Schumaker & Lomax, 1996, p. 64). We conducted confirmatory factor analysis to detect and delete weak questionnaire items (i.e., items that detract from overall model fit). The process is iterative; after detecting and deleting a weak item, the entire model is re-analyzed in order to detect and delete additional weak items, the model is analyzed again, and so forth until the model cannot be improved with additional deletions guidelines as aids for interpretation and not as absolute thresholds. We reported the RMSEA 90% confidence intervals as recommended by DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 701 STUDY 2 INTRODUCTION Study 1 provided initial confirmation of the predicted two-factor structure of the INDIS. Exploratory analyses showed that items predicted to comprise the nondirective and directive subscales did so, and confirmatory analyses demonstrated that these items generally fit the overall model. However, in order to ensure that the confirmatory results obtained in Study 1 were reliable, we conducted Study 2 to obtain a separate confirmatory test of the two-factor model. METHOD PARTICIPANTS The sample consisted of 142 undergraduates recruited from Rutgers University at Newark (74%) and from Washington University (26% PROCEDURE Participants were tested en masse in a large introductory psychology course at Rutgers, or individually at Washington University, where the study was included as an added task to other ongoing experiments. Participants first completed the revised nine-item INDIS and then filled out a brief background questionnaire sampling gender, age, and ethnic background. Data were collected anonymously. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The nine items that comprise the INDIS (as identified in Study 1) were taken into confirmatory factor analysis using LISREL. The measurement models for the family member version and the friend version were reexamined separately. As before, items were constrained to zero on latent 702 HARBER ET AL. DIRECTIVE AND NONDIRECTIVE SOCIAL SUPPORT 703 constructs to which they did not belong and the latent constructs were allowed to correlate. Initial fit indices for the family member version (N = 142) were R 2 (26) = 123.24, p = 0.00; RMSEA = .16, 90% CI = 0.13-0.19; CFI = .88; and IFI = .88. Initial fit indices for the friend version (N = 142) were R 2 (26) = 107.40, p = 0.00; RMSEA = .15, 90%CI = 0.12-0.18; CFI = .82; and IFI = .82. Item trimming indicated that the friend model would be improved slightly by deleting the weakest item, "Knows when to back off from being helpful." However, we decided to provisionally retain this item because it fit the model in the Study 1 confirmatory analysis, it is conceptually central to the non-directive factor, and because the model demonstrated acceptable fit in Study 2 when this item was included in the friend version. We therefore decided that the final disposition of this item would be determined in confirmatory analysis conducted in Study 3. Several directive items were allowed to covary. "Decided what kind of help I needed" covaried with "Decided who could help me" and "Organized my schedule for me." "Solved problems for me" covaried with "Took charge of my problems." These items were allowed to covary based on the modification indices and supported conceptually Cumulatively, these fit indices show that the hypothesized constructs of the INDIS are supported by the data reasonably well, and that they support the findings obtained in the prior study. Coefficient alphas were satisfactory. For the family member version, alpha coefficients were .78 for Nondirective Support and .84 for Directive Support. For the friend version they were .75 for Nondirective Support and .79 for Directive Support. Consistent with the fit indices, subscale alphas also supported the strength of the measures. In sum, confirmatory analyses of the INDIS in Study 2 provided further evidence that both the family member and friend versions of the INDIS are psychometrically sound measures. Notably, this reconfirmation was obtained even after sampling from a population largely distinct from the one sampled in the initial test of the two-factor INDIS

Patient Navigators Connecting Patients to Community Resources to Improve Diabetes Outcomes

BACKGROUND: Despite the recognized importance of lifestyle modification in reducing risk of developing type 2 diabetes and in diabetes management, the use of available community resources by both patients and their primary care providers (PCPs) remains low. The patient navigator model, widely used in cancer care, may have the potential to link PCPs and community resources for reduction of risk and control of type 2 diabetes. In this study we tested the feasibility and acceptability of telephone-based nonprofessional patient navigation to promote linkages between the PCP office and community programs for patients with or at risk for diabetes. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods interventional prospective cohort study conducted between November 2012 and August 2013. We included adult patients with and at risk for type 2 diabetes from six primary care practices. Patient-level measures of glycemic control, diabetes care, and self-efficacy from medical records, and qualitative interview data on acceptability and feasibility, were used. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients participated in the study. Two patient navigators provided services over the phone, using motivational interviewing techniques. Patient navigators provided regular feedback to PCPs and followed up with the patients through phone calls. The patient navigators made 1028 calls, with an average of 6 calls per patient. At follow-up, reduction in HbA1c (7.8 ± 1.9% vs 7.2 ± 1.3%; P = .001) and improvement in patient self-efficacy (3.1 ± 0.8 vs 3.6 ± 0.7; P < .001) were observed. Qualitative analysis revealed uniformly positive feedback from providers and patients. CONCLUSIONS: The patient navigator model is a promising and acceptable strategy to link patient, PCP, and community resources for promoting lifestyle modification in people living with or at risk for type 2 diabetes

COVID-19 restrictions and fathers of infants in neonatal care.

This is a letter without an abstract

How is neighborhood social disorganization associated with diabetes outcomes? A multilevel investigation of glycemic control and self-reported use of acute or emergency health care services

Abstract Background Diabetes management is influenced by a number of factors beyond the individual-level. This study examined how neighborhood social disorganization (i.e., neighborhoods characterized by high economic disadvantage, residential instability, and ethnic heterogeneity), is associated with diabetes-related outcomes. Methods We used a multilevel modeling approach to investigate the associations between census-tract neighborhood social disorganization, A1c, and self-reported use of acute or emergency health care services for a sample of 424 adults with type 2 diabetes. Results Individuals living in neighborhoods with high social disorganization had higher A1c values than individuals living in neighborhoods with medium social disorganization (B = 0.39, p = 0.01). Individuals living in neighborhoods with high economic disadvantage had higher self-reported use of acute or emergency health care services than individuals living in neighborhoods with medium economic disadvantage (B = 0.60, p = 0.02). Conclusions High neighborhood social disorganization was associated with higher A1c values and high neighborhood economic disadvantage was associated with greater self-reported use of acute or emergency health care services. Controlling for individual level variables diminished this effect for A1c, but not acute or emergency health care use. Comprehensive approaches to diabetes management should include attention to neighborhood context. Failure to do so may help explain the continuing disproportionate diabetes burden in many neighborhoods despite decades of attention to individual-level clinical care and education. Trial registration For this study, we used baseline data from a larger study investigating the impacts on patient-centered outcomes of three different approaches to self-monitoring of blood glucose among 450 adults with non-insulin dependent type 2 diabetes living in North Carolina. This study was registered as a clinical trial on 1/7/2014 ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02033499 )

Fathers in neonatal units: improving infant health by supporting the baby-father bond and mother-father co-parenting.

The Family Initiative’s International Neonatal Fathers Working Group, whose members are the authors of this paper, has reviewed the literature on engaging fathers in neonatal units, with the aim of making recommendations for improving experience of fathers as well as health outcomes in neonatal practice. We believe that supporting the fatherbaby bond and supporting co-parenting between the mother and the father benefits the health of the baby, for example, improved weight gain and oxygen saturation and enhanced rates of breastfeeding. We find, however, that despite much interest in engaging with parents as full partners in the care of their baby, engaging fathers remains suboptimal. Fathers typically describe the opportunity to bond with their babies, particularly skin-to-skin care, in glowing terms of gratitude, happiness and love. These sensations are underpinned by hormonal and neurobiological changes that take place in fathers when they care for their babies, as also happens with mothers. Fathers, however, are subject to different social expectations from mothers and this shapes how they respond to the situation and how neonatal staff treats them. Fathers are more likely to be considered responsible for earning, they are often considered to be less competent at caring than mothers and they are expected to be “the strong one”, providing support to mothers but not expecting it in return. Our review ends with 12 practical recommendations for neonatal teams to focus on: (1) assess the needs of mother and father individually, (2) consider individual needs and wants in family care plans, (3) ensure complete flexibility of access to the neonatal unit for fathers, (4) gear parenting education towards co-parenting, (5) actively promote father-baby bonding, (6) be attentive to fathers hiding their stress, (7) inform fathers directly not just via the mother, (8) facilitate peer-to-peer communication for fathers, (9) differentiate and analyse by gender in service evaluations, (10) train staff to work with fathers and to support co-parenting, (11) develop a father-friendly audit tool for neonatal units, and (12) organise an international consultation to update guidelines for neonatal care, including those of UNICEF

Cluster randomised controlled trial of a peer-led lifestyle intervention program: study protocol for the Kerala diabetes prevention program.

BACKGROUND: India currently has more than 60 million people with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) and this is predicted to increase by nearly two-thirds by 2030. While management of those with T2DM is important, preventing or delaying the onset of the disease, especially in those individuals at 'high risk' of developing T2DM, is urgently needed, particularly in resource-constrained settings. This paper describes the protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a peer-led lifestyle intervention program to prevent diabetes in Kerala, India. METHODS/DESIGN: A total of 60 polling booths are randomised to the intervention arm or control arm in rural Kerala, India. Data collection is conducted in two steps. Step 1 (Home screening): Participants aged 30-60 years are administered a screening questionnaire. Those having no history of T2DM and other chronic illnesses with an Indian Diabetes Risk Score value of ≥60 are invited to attend a mobile clinic (Step 2). At the mobile clinic, participants complete questionnaires, undergo physical measurements, and provide blood samples for biochemical analysis. Participants identified with T2DM at Step 2 are excluded from further study participation. Participants in the control arm are provided with a health education booklet containing information on symptoms, complications, and risk factors of T2DM with the recommended levels for primary prevention. Participants in the intervention arm receive: (1) eleven peer-led small group sessions to motivate, guide and support in planning, initiation and maintenance of lifestyle changes; (2) two diabetes prevention education sessions led by experts to raise awareness on T2DM risk factors, prevention and management; (3) a participant handbook containing information primarily on peer support and its role in assisting with lifestyle modification; (4) a participant workbook to guide self-monitoring of lifestyle behaviours, goal setting and goal review; (5) the health education booklet that is given to the control arm. Follow-up assessments are conducted at 12 and 24 months. The primary outcome is incidence of T2DM. Secondary outcomes include behavioural, psychosocial, clinical, and biochemical measures. An economic evaluation is planned. DISCUSSION: Results from this trial will contribute to improved policy and practice regarding lifestyle intervention programs to prevent diabetes in India and other resource-constrained settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australia and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12611000262909