Why are health care interventions delivered over the internet? : a systematic review of the published literature

Background: As Internet use grows, health interventions are increasingly being delivered online. Pioneering researchers are using the networking potential of the Internet, and several of them have evaluated these interventions. Objective: The objective was to review the reasons why health interventions have been delivered on the Internet and to reflect on the work of the pioneers in this field in order to inform future research. Methods: We conducted a qualitative systematic review of peer-reviewed evaluations of health interventions delivered to a known client/patient group using networked features of the Internet. Papers were reviewed for the reasons given for using the Internet, and these reasons were categorized. Results: We included studies evaluating 28 interventions plus 9 interventions that were evaluated in pilot studies. The interventions were aimed at a range of health conditions. Reasons for Internet delivery included low cost and resource implications due to the nature of the technology; reducing cost and increasing convenience for users; reduction of health service costs; overcoming isolation of users; the need for timely information; stigma reduction; and increased user and supplier control of the intervention. A small number of studies gave the existence of Internet interventions as the only reason for undertaking an evaluation of this mode of delivery. Conclusions: One must remain alert for the unintended effects of Internet delivery of health interventions due to the potential for reinforcing the problems that the intervention was designed to help. Internet delivery overcomes isolation of time, mobility, and geography, but it may not be a substitute for face-to-face contact. Future evaluations need to incorporate the evaluation of cost, not only to the health service but also to users and their social networks. When researchers report the outcomes of Internet-delivered health care interventions, it is important that they clearly state why they chose to use the Internet, preferably backing up their decision with theoretical models and exploratory work. Evaluation of the effectiveness of a health care intervention delivered by the Internet needs to include comparison with more traditional modes of delivery to answer the following question: What are the added benefits or disadvantages of Internet use that are particular to this mode of delivery

Systematic review of perioperative and quality-of-life outcomes following surgical management of localised renal cancer

UCAN Cancer Charity (www.ucanhelp.org.uk) and MacMillan Cancer Charity (www.macmillan.org.uk) helped design and conduct the study.Peer reviewedPostprin

Modality, Potentiality and Contradiction in Quantum Mechanics

In [11], Newton da Costa together with the author of this paper argued in favor of the possibility to consider quantum superpositions in terms of a paraconsistent approach. We claimed that, even though most interpretations of quantum mechanics (QM) attempt to escape contradictions, there are many hints that indicate it could be worth while to engage in a research of this kind. Recently, Arenhart and Krause [1, 2, 3] have raised several arguments against this approach and claimed that, taking into account the square of opposition, quantum superpositions are better understood in terms of contrariety propositions rather than contradictory propositions. In [17] we defended the Paraconsistent Approach to Quantum Superpositions (PAQS) and provided arguments in favor of its development. In the present paper we attempt to analyze the meanings of modality, potentiality and contradiction in QM, and provide further arguments of why the PAQS is better suited, than the Contrariety Approach to Quantum Superpositions (CAQS) proposed by Arenhart and Krause, to face the interpretational questions that quantum technology is forcing us to consider.Comment: Published in: New Directions in Paraconsistent Logic, J-Y B\'eziau M. Chakraborty & S. Dutta (Eds.), Springer, in press. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1404.518

Visually assessed breast density, breast cancer risk and the importance of the craniocaudal view

Contains fulltext : 69403.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)INTRODUCTION: Mammographic density is known to be a strong risk factor for breast cancer. A particularly strong association with risk has been observed when density is measured using interactive threshold software. This, however, is a labour-intensive process for large-scale studies. METHODS: Our aim was to determine the performance of visually assessed percent breast density as an indicator of breast cancer risk. We compared the effect on risk of density as measured with the mediolateral oblique view only versus that estimated as the average density from the mediolateral oblique view and the craniocaudal view. Density was assessed using a visual analogue scale in 10,048 screening mammograms, including 311 breast cancer cases diagnosed at that screening episode or within the following 6 years. RESULTS: Where only the mediolateral oblique view was available, there was a modest effect of breast density on risk with an odds ratio for the 76% to 100% density relative to 0% to 25% of 1.51 (95% confidence interval 0.71 to 3.18). When two views were available, there was a considerably stronger association, with the corresponding odds ratio being 6.77 (95% confidence interval 2.75 to 16.67). CONCLUSION: This indicates that a substantial amount of information on risk from percentage breast density is contained in the second view. It also suggests that visually assessed breast density has predictive potential for breast cancer risk comparable to that of density measured using the interactive threshold software when two views are available. This observation needs to be confirmed by studies applying the different measurement methods to the same individuals

Measurement of B(t->Wb)/B(t->Wq) at the Collider Detector at Fermilab

We present a measurement of the ratio of top-quark branching fractions R= B(t -> Wb)/B(t -> Wq), where q can be a b, s or a d quark, using lepton-plus-jets and dilepton data sets with integrated luminosity of ~162 pb^{-1} collected with the Collider Detector at Fermilab during Run II of the Tevatron. The measurement is derived from the relative numbers of t-tbar events with different multiplicity of identified secondary vertices. We set a lower limit of R > 0.61 at 95% confidence level.Comment: 7 pages, 2 figures, published in Physical Review Letters; changes made to be consistent with published versio

Search for ZZ and ZW Production in ppbar Collisions at sqrt(s) = 1.96 TeV

We present a search for ZZ and ZW vector boson pair production in ppbar collisions at sqrt(s) = 1.96 TeV using the leptonic decay channels ZZ --> ll nu nu, ZZ --> l l l' l' and ZW --> l l l' nu. In a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 194 pb-1 collected with the Collider Detector at Fermilab, 3 candidate events are found with an expected background of 1.0 +/- 0.2 events. We set a 95% confidence level upper limit of 15.2 pb on the cross section for ZZ plus ZW production, compared to the standard model prediction of 5.0 +/- 0.4 pb.Comment: 7 pages, 2 figures. This version is accepted for publication by Phys. Rev. D Rapid Communication

Measurement of the Cross Section for Prompt Diphoton Production in p-pbar Collisions at sqrt(s) = 1.96 TeV

We report a measurement of the rate of prompt diphoton production in $p\bar{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=1.96 ~\hbox{TeV}$ using a data sample of 207 pb$^{-1}$ collected with the upgraded Collider Detector at Fermilab (CDF II). The background from non-prompt sources is determined using a statistical method based on differences in the electromagnetic showers. The cross section is measured as a function of the diphoton mass, the transverse momentum of the diphoton system, and the azimuthal angle between the two photons and is found to be consistent with perturbative QCD predictions.Comment: 7 pages, 3 figures,revtex4. Version accepted by PRL, but with cross section tables i