14 research outputs found

    Automatic Code Placement Alternatives for Ad-Hoc And Sensor Networks

    Full text link
    Developing applications for ad-hoc and sensor networks poses significant challenges. Many interesting applications in these domains entail collaboration between components distributed throughout an ad-hoc network. Defining these components, optimally placing them on nodes in the ad-hoc network and relocating them in response to changes is a fundamental problem faced by such applications. Manual approaches to code and data migration are not only platform-dependent and error-prone, but also needlessly complicate application development. Further, locally optimal decisions made by applications that share the same network can lead to globally unstable and energy inefficient behavior. In this paper we describe the design and implementation of a distributed operating system for ad-hoc and sensor networks whose goal is to enable power-aware, adaptive, and easy-to-develop ad-hoc networking applications. Our system achieves this goal by providing a single system image of a unified Java virtual machine to applications over an ad-hoc collection of heterogeneous nodes. It automatically and transparently partitions applications into components and dynamically finds a placement of these components on nodes within the ad-hoc network to reduce energy consumption and increase system longevity. This paper outlines the design of our system and evaluates two practical, power-aware, online algorithms for object placement that form the core of our system. We demonstrate that our algorithms can increase system longevity by a factor of four to five by effectively distributing energy consumption, and are suitable for use in an energy efficient operating system in which applications are distributed automatically and transparently

    Impact of opioid-free analgesia on pain severity and patient satisfaction after discharge from surgery: multispecialty, prospective cohort study in 25 countries

    Get PDF
    Background: Balancing opioid stewardship and the need for adequate analgesia following discharge after surgery is challenging. This study aimed to compare the outcomes for patients discharged with opioid versus opioid-free analgesia after common surgical procedures.Methods: This international, multicentre, prospective cohort study collected data from patients undergoing common acute and elective general surgical, urological, gynaecological, and orthopaedic procedures. The primary outcomes were patient-reported time in severe pain measured on a numerical analogue scale from 0 to 100% and patient-reported satisfaction with pain relief during the first week following discharge. Data were collected by in-hospital chart review and patient telephone interview 1 week after discharge.Results: The study recruited 4273 patients from 144 centres in 25 countries; 1311 patients (30.7%) were prescribed opioid analgesia at discharge. Patients reported being in severe pain for 10 (i.q.r. 1-30)% of the first week after discharge and rated satisfaction with analgesia as 90 (i.q.r. 80-100) of 100. After adjustment for confounders, opioid analgesia on discharge was independently associated with increased pain severity (risk ratio 1.52, 95% c.i. 1.31 to 1.76; P < 0.001) and re-presentation to healthcare providers owing to side-effects of medication (OR 2.38, 95% c.i. 1.36 to 4.17; P = 0.004), but not with satisfaction with analgesia (beta coefficient 0.92, 95% c.i. -1.52 to 3.36; P = 0.468) compared with opioid-free analgesia. Although opioid prescribing varied greatly between high-income and low- and middle-income countries, patient-reported outcomes did not.Conclusion: Opioid analgesia prescription on surgical discharge is associated with a higher risk of re-presentation owing to side-effects of medication and increased patient-reported pain, but not with changes in patient-reported satisfaction. Opioid-free discharge analgesia should be adopted routinely

    AUTOMATIC CODE PLACEMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR AD-HOC AND SENSOR NETWORKS

    No full text
    Developing applications for ad-hoc and sensor networks poses significant challenges. Many interesting applications in these domains entail collaboration between components distributed throughout an ad-hoc network. Defining these components, optimally placing them on nodes in the ad-hoc network and relocating them in response to changes is a fundamental problem faced by such applications. Manual approaches to code and data migration are not only platform-dependent and error-prone, but also needlessly complicate application development. Further, locally optimal decisions made by applications that share the same network can lead to globally unstable and energy inefficient behavior. In this paper we describe the design and implementation of a distributed operating system for adhoc and sensor networks whose goal is to enable power-aware, adaptive, and easy-to-develop adhoc networking applications. Our system achieves this goal by providing a single system image of a unified Java virtual machine to applications over an ad-hoc collection of heterogeneous nodes. It automatically and transparently partitions applications into components and dynamically finds a placement of these components on nodes within the ad-hoc network to reduce energy consumption and increase system longevity. This paper outlines the design of our system and evaluates two practical, power-aware, online algorithms for object placement that form the core of our system. We demonstrate that our algorithms can increase system longevity by a factor of four to five by effectively distributing energy consumption, and are suitable for use in an energy efficient operating system in which applications are distributed automatically and transparently. Supported in part by ONR Grant N00014-01-1-0968. The views and conclusions contained herein are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the official policies or endorsements, either expressed or implied, of these organizations or the U.S. Government.

    Expanding the genotypic and phenotypic spectrum in a diverse cohort of 104 individuals with Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome.

    No full text
    Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome (WSS) is an autosomal dominant disorder caused by monoallelic variants in KMT2A and characterized by intellectual disability and hypertrichosis. We performed a retrospective, multicenter, observational study of 104 individuals with WSS from five continents to characterize the clinical and molecular spectrum of WSS in diverse populations, to identify physical features that may be more prevalent in White versus Black Indigenous People of Color individuals, to delineate genotype-phenotype correlations, to define developmental milestones, to describe the syndrome through adulthood, and to examine clinicians' differential diagnoses. Sixty-nine of the 82 variants (84%) observed in the study were not previously reported in the literature. Common clinical features identified in the cohort included: developmental delay or intellectual disability (97%), constipation (63.8%), failure to thrive (67.7%), feeding difficulties (66.3%), hypertrichosis cubiti (57%), short stature (57.8%), and vertebral anomalies (46.9%). The median ages at walking and first words were 20 months and 18 months, respectively. Hypotonia was associated with loss of function (LoF) variants, and seizures were associated with non-LoF variants. This study identifies genotype-phenotype correlations as well as race-facial feature associations in an ethnically diverse cohort, and accurately defines developmental trajectories, medical comorbidities, and long-term outcomes in individuals with WSS. Keywords: KMT2A; MLL1; Wiedemann-Steiner syndrome; hypertrichosis; syndromic intellectual disability; syndromic short stature.Institute for Translational Medicine and Therapeutics of the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania United States Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA NIH National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS) United States Department of Health & Human Services National Institutes of Health (NIH) - USA Hartwell Foundatio

    Probability of major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI diagnostic interviews: A synthesis of three individual participant data meta-analyses

    No full text
    Introduction: Three previous individual participant data meta-analyses (IPDMAs) reported that, compared to the Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM (SCID), alternative reference standards, primarily the Composite International Diagnostic Interview (CIDI) and the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI), tended to misclassify major depression status, when controlling for depression symptom severity. However, there was an important lack of precision in the results. Objective: To compare the odds of the major depression classification based on the SCID, CIDI, and MINI. Methods: We included and standardized data from 3 IPDMA databases. For each IPDMA, separately, we fitted binomial generalized linear mixed models to compare the adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of major depression classification, controlling for symptom severity and characteristics of participants, and the interaction between interview and symptom severity. Next, we synthesized results using a DerSimonian-Laird random-effects meta-analysis. Results: In total, 69,405 participants (7,574 [11%] with major depression) from 212 studies were included. Controlling for symptom severity and participant characteristics, the MINI (74 studies; 25,749 participants) classified major depression more often than the SCID (108 studies; 21,953 participants; aOR 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.92]). Classification odds for the CIDI (30 studies; 21,703 participants) and the SCID did not differ overall (aOR 1.19; 95% CI 0.79-1.75); however, as screening scores increased, the aOR increased less for the CIDI than the SCID (interaction aOR 0.64; 95% CI 0.52-0.80). Conclusions: Compared to the SCID, the MINI classified major depression more often. The odds of the depression classification with the CIDI increased less as symptom levels increased. Interpretation of research that uses diagnostic interviews to classify depression should consider the interview characteristics.</p

    Abstracts from the 8th International Congress of the Asia Pacific Society of Infection Control (APSIC)

    Get PDF

    Sparsentan in patients with IgA nephropathy: a prespecified interim analysis from a randomised, double-blind, active-controlled clinical trial

    No full text
    Background: Sparsentan is a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin and angiotensin receptor antagonist being examined in an ongoing phase 3 trial in adults with IgA nephropathy. We report the prespecified interim analysis of the primary proteinuria efficacy endpoint, and safety. Methods: PROTECT is an international, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled study, being conducted in 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries. The study examines sparsentan versus irbesartan in adults (aged ≥18 years) with biopsy-proven IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of 1·0 g/day or higher despite maximised renin-angiotensin system inhibitor treatment for at least 12 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive sparsentan 400 mg once daily or irbesartan 300 mg once daily, stratified by estimated glomerular filtration rate at screening (30 to 1·75 g/day). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 36 in urine protein-creatinine ratio based on a 24-h urine sample, assessed using mixed model repeated measures. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were safety endpoints. All endpoints were examined in all participants who received at least one dose of randomised treatment. The study is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings: Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 404 participants were randomly assigned to sparsentan (n=202) or irbesartan (n=202) and received treatment. At week 36, the geometric least squares mean percent change from baseline in urine protein-creatinine ratio was statistically significantly greater in the sparsentan group (-49·8%) than the irbesartan group (-15·1%), resulting in a between-group relative reduction of 41% (least squares mean ratio=0·59; 95% CI 0·51-0·69; p<0·0001). TEAEs with sparsentan were similar to irbesartan. There were no cases of severe oedema, heart failure, hepatotoxicity, or oedema-related discontinuations. Bodyweight changes from baseline were not different between the sparsentan and irbesartan groups. Interpretation: Once-daily treatment with sparsentan produced meaningful reduction in proteinuria compared with irbesartan in adults with IgA nephropathy. Safety of sparsentan was similar to irbesartan. Future analyses after completion of the 2-year double-blind period will show whether these beneficial effects translate into a long-term nephroprotective potential of sparsentan. Funding: Travere Therapeutics

    Efficacy and safety of sparsentan versus irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy (PROTECT): 2-year results from a randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 trial

    No full text
    Background Sparsentan, a novel, non-immunosuppressive, single-molecule, dual endothelin angiotensin receptor antagonist, significantly reduced proteinuria versus irbesartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, at 36 weeks (primary endpoint) in patients with immunoglobulin A nephropathy in the phase 3 PROTECT trial's previously reported interim analysis. Here, we report kidney function and outcomes over 110 weeks from the double-blind final analysis. Methods PROTECT, a double-blind, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3 study, was done across 134 clinical practice sites in 18 countries throughout the Americas, Asia, and Europe. Patients aged 18 years or older with biopsy-proven primary IgA nephropathy and proteinuria of at least 1·0 g per day despite maximised renin–angiotensin system inhibition for at least 12 weeks were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sparsentan (target dose 400 mg oral sparsentan once daily) or irbesartan (target dose 300 mg oral irbesartan once daily) based on a permuted-block randomisation method. The primary endpoint was proteinuria change between treatment groups at 36 weeks. Secondary endpoints included rate of change (slope) of the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), changes in proteinuria, a composite of kidney failure (confirmed 40% eGFR reduction, end-stage kidney disease, or all-cause mortality), and safety and tolerability up to 110 weeks from randomisation. Secondary efficacy outcomes were assessed in the full analysis set and safety was assessed in the safety set, both of which were defined as all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of randomly assigned study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03762850. Findings Between Dec 20, 2018, and May 26, 2021, 203 patients were randomly assigned to the sparsentan group and 203 to the irbesartan group. One patient from each group did not receive the study drug and was excluded from the efficacy and safety analyses (282 [70%] of 404 included patients were male and 272 [67%] were White) . Patients in the sparsentan group had a slower rate of eGFR decline than those in the irbesartan group. eGFR chronic 2-year slope (weeks 6–110) was −2·7 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·8 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·1 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI 0·1 to 2·1; p=0·037); total 2-year slope (day 1–week 110) was −2·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year versus −3·9 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year (difference 1·0 mL/min per 1·73 m2 per year, 95% CI −0·03 to 1·94; p=0·058). The significant reduction in proteinuria at 36 weeks with sparsentan was maintained throughout the study period; at 110 weeks, proteinuria, as determined by the change from baseline in urine protein-to-creatinine ratio, was 40% lower in the sparsentan group than in the irbesartan group (−42·8%, 95% CI −49·8 to −35·0, with sparsentan versus −4·4%, −15·8 to 8·7, with irbesartan; geometric least-squares mean ratio 0·60, 95% CI 0·50 to 0·72). The composite kidney failure endpoint was reached by 18 (9%) of 202 patients in the sparsentan group versus 26 (13%) of 202 patients in the irbesartan group (relative risk 0·7, 95% CI 0·4 to 1·2). Treatment-emergent adverse events were well balanced between sparsentan and irbesartan, with no new safety signals. Interpretation Over 110 weeks, treatment with sparsentan versus maximally titrated irbesartan in patients with IgA nephropathy resulted in significant reductions in proteinuria and preservation of kidney function.</p
    corecore