58 research outputs found
Establishing Visible Interferometer System Responses: Resolved and Unresolved Calibrators
The propagation of errors through the uniform disk visibility function is
examined. Implications of those errors upon measures of absolute visibility
through optical and near-infrared interferometers are considered within the
context of using calibration stars to establish system visibilities for these
instruments. We suggest a simple ratio test to establish empirically whether or
not the measured visibilities produced by such an instrument are relative
(errors dominated by calibrator angular size prediction error) or absolute
(errors dominated by measurement error).Comment: 20 pages, 7 figures, to be published in the PAS
Serum Cholinesterase Inhibition in Relation to Paraoxonase-1 (PON1) Status among Organophosphate-Exposed Agricultural Pesticide Handlers
The United States of America and Scientific Research
To gauge the current commitment to scientific research in the United States of America (US), we compared federal research funding (FRF) with the US gross domestic product (GDP) and industry research spending during the past six decades. In order to address the recent globalization of scientific research, we also focused on four key indicators of research activities: research and development (R&D) funding, total science and engineering doctoral degrees, patents, and scientific publications. We compared these indicators across three major population and economic regions: the US, the European Union (EU) and the People's Republic of China (China) over the past decade. We discovered a number of interesting trends with direct relevance for science policy. The level of US FRF has varied between 0.2% and 0.6% of the GDP during the last six decades. Since the 1960s, the US FRF contribution has fallen from twice that of industrial research funding to roughly equal. Also, in the last two decades, the portion of the US government R&D spending devoted to research has increased. Although well below the US and the EU in overall funding, the current growth rate for R&D funding in China greatly exceeds that of both. Finally, the EU currently produces more science and engineering doctoral graduates and scientific publications than the US in absolute terms, but not per capita. This study's aim is to facilitate a serious discussion of key questions by the research community and federal policy makers. In particular, our results raise two questions with respect to: a) the increasing globalization of science: “What role is the US playing now, and what role will it play in the future of international science?”; and b) the ability to produce beneficial innovations for society: “How will the US continue to foster its strengths?
Evolution of European Union legislation on emergency research
Aim: Emergency research is necessary to prevent exposure of patients to
unvalidated clinical practice (nonmaleficence), and to improve the
dismal prognosis of disorders requiring emergent treatment such as
cardiac arrest (beneficence). Regulations that govern clinical research
should conform to bioethical principles of respect for nonmaleficence,
beneficence, autonomy, and justice. Our objectives are to review the
evolution of European Union (EU) legislation on emergency research, and
to identify potentially remaining problems.
Data sources: EU legislative sources on clinical research and medical
literature describing the impact of EU Regulations on emergency
research.
Results: Article 5 of EU Directive 2001/20/EC required consent before
enrolment in a research study to ensure the autonomy of potentially
incapacitated research subjects. However, obtaining such consent is
often impossible in emergency situations. Directive 2001/20/EC was
criticized for potentially preventing emergency research. Several EU
Member States addressed this problem by permitting deferred consent.
International ethical guidelines supporting deferred consent were also
cited by Good Clinical Practice Directive 2005/28/EC. However, Directive
2001/20/EC was not revised to achieve harmonization of EU emergency
research, thus resulting in ongoing “ambiguity” as regards to
emergency research legitimacy. This will be definitively addressed by
applying EU Regulation No. 536/2014 and repealing Directive 2001/20/EC.
The new EU Regulation permits using deferred consent under clearly
specified conditions, and may foster emergency research that evaluates
interventions posing minimal risk relative to standard practice.
Conclusions: Legislation related to emergency research in Europe has
evolved to increase concordance with bioethical principles so as to
increase evidence-based improvements in emergency care. (C) 2015
Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved
International variation in policies and practices related to informed consent in acute cardiovascular research: Results from a 44 country survey
Background: Research in an emergency setting such as that with an acute
cardiovascular event is challenging because the window of opportunity to
treat may be short and may preclude time to obtain informed consent from
the patient or their representative. Some perceive that requiring
informed consent in emergency situations has limited improvements in
care. Vulnerable populations including minorities or residents of
low-income countries are at greatest risk of need for resuscitation.
Lack of enrollment of such patients would increase uncertainties in
treatment benefit or harm in those at greater risk of need for
resuscitation. We sought to assess international variation in policies
and procedures related to exception from informed consent (EFIC) or
deferred consent for emergency research.
Methods: A brief survey instrument was developed and modified by
consensus among the investigators. Included were multiple choice and
open-ended responses. The survey included an illustrative example of a
hypothetical randomized study. Elicited information included the
possibility of conducting such a study in the respondent’s country, as
well as approvals required to conduct the study. The population of
interest was emergency physicians or other practitioners of acute
cardiovascular event research.
Results: Usable responses were obtained from 44 countries (76% of
surveyed). Community opposition to EFIC was noted in 6 (14%) countries.
Emergency Medical Services (EMS) providers in 8 (20%) countries were
judged unable or unwilling to participate. A majority of countries (36,
82%) required approval by a Research Ethics Committee or similar.
Government approval was required in 25 (57%) countries.
Conclusion: There is international variation in practices and polices
related to consent for emergency research. There is an ongoing need to
converge regulations based on the usefulness of multinational emergency
research to benefit both affluent and disadvantaged populations. (C)
2015 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd
- …