Flexural and Shear Capacities of Reinforced Concrete Beams with Volcanic Tuff

An experimental investigation was carried out to study the effect of volcanic tuff (V.T.), as a fine aggregate on the flexural and shear capacities of reinforced concrete beams. Three different types of volcanic tuff which is a local material that is available at different locations in Jordan (known as yellow, gray and brown volcanic tuff) were used in this study. Four grades of concrete compressive strengths (20, 30, 40 and 50 MPa) are also used. The experimental program consisted of testing 64 beams (16 beams with 0% of volcanic tuff and 16 beams with 20% volcanic tuff as a fine aggregate for each type of volcanic tuff). The analysis showed that replacing the fine aggregate by 20% volcanic tuff will improve the flexural and shear capacities of the reinforced concrete beams by 6% to 16% for brown tuff, 3% to 8% for gray tuff and 10 % to 26 % for yellow tuff for the four concrete strength grades.Key Words: Pozzolan (Volcanic tuff), flexural and shear capacities, Reinforced concrete beam

Candida dubliniensis fungemia: the first four cases in North America.

We report the first four North American cases of Candida dubliniensis fungemia, including the first isolation of this organism from the bloodstream of an HIV-infected person. All isolates were susceptible in vitro to commonly used antifungal drugs. This report demonstrates that C. dubliniensis can cause bloodstream infection; however, the incidence of disease is not known

Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies: Data collection, analysis and reporting results

The case-control methodology is frequently used to evaluate vaccine effectiveness post-licensure. The results of such studies provide important insight into the level of protection afforded by vaccines in a \u27real world\u27 context, and are commonly used to guide vaccine policy decisions. However, the potential for bias and confounding are important limitations to this method, and the results of a poorly conducted or incorrectly interpreted case-control study can mislead policies. In 2012, a group of experts met to review recent experience with case-control studies evaluating vaccine effectiveness; we summarize the recommendations of that group regarding best practices for data collection, analysis, and presentation of the results of case-control vaccine effectiveness studies. Vaccination status is the primary exposure of interest, but can be challenging to assess accurately and with minimal bias. Investigators should understand factors associated with vaccination as well as the availability of documented vaccination status in the study context; case-control studies may not be a valid method for evaluating vaccine effectiveness in settings where many children lack a documented immunization history. To avoid bias, it is essential to use the same methods and effort gathering vaccination data from cases and controls. Variables that may confound the association between illness and vaccination are also important to capture as completely as possible, and where relevant, adjust for in the analysis according to the analytic plan. In presenting results from case-control vaccine effectiveness studies, investigators should describe enrollment among eligible cases and controls as well as the proportion with no documented vaccine history. Emphasis should be placed on confidence intervals, rather than point estimates, of vaccine effectiveness. Case-control studies are a useful approach for evaluating vaccine effectiveness; however careful attention must be paid to the collection, analysis and presentation of the data in order to best inform evidence-based vaccine policies

Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies: Preparation, design, and enrollment of cases and control

Case-control studies are commonly used to evaluate effectiveness of licensed vaccines after deployment in public health programs. Such studies can provide policy-relevant data on vaccine performance under \u27real world\u27 conditions, contributing to the evidence base to support and sustain introduction of new vaccines. However, case-control studies do not measure the impact of vaccine introduction on disease at a population level, and are subject to bias and confounding, which may lead to inaccurate results that can misinform policy decisions. In 2012, a group of experts met to review recent experience with case-control studies evaluating the effectiveness of several vaccines; here we summarize the recommendations of that group regarding best practices for planning, design and enrollment of cases and controls. Rigorous planning and preparation should focus on understanding the study context including healthcare-seeking and vaccination practices. Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies are best carried out soon after vaccine introduction because high coverage creates strong potential for confounding. Endpoints specific to the vaccine target are preferable to non-specific clinical syndromes since the proportion of non-specific outcomes preventable through vaccination may vary over time and place, leading to potentially confusing results. Controls should be representative of the source population from which cases arise, and are generally recruited from the community or health facilities where cases are enrolled. Matching of controls to cases for potential confounding factors is commonly used, although should be reserved for a limited number of key variables believed to be linked to both vaccination and disease. Case-control vaccine effectiveness studies can provide information useful to guide policy decisions and vaccine development, however rigorous preparation and design is essential

Surveillance for Unexplained Deaths and Critical Illnesses

Population-based surveillance for unexplained death and critical illness possibly due to infectious causes (UNEX) was conducted in four U.S. Emerging Infections Program sites (population 7.7 million) from May 1, 1995, to December 31, 1998, to define the incidence, epidemiologic features, and etiology of this syndrome. A case was defined as death or critical illness in a hospitalized, previously healthy person, 1 to 49 years of age, with infection hallmarks but no cause identified after routine testing. A total of 137 cases were identified (incidence rate 0.5 per 100,000 per year). Patients’ median age was 20 years, 72 (53%) were female, 112 (82%) were white, and 41 (30%) died. The most common clinical presentations were neurologic (29%), respiratory (27%), and cardiac (21%). Infectious causes were identified for 34 cases (28% of the 122 cases with clinical specimens); 23 (68%) were diagnosed by reference serologic tests, and 11 (32%) by polymerase chain reaction-based methods. The UNEX network model would improve U.S. diagnostic capacities and preparedness for emerging infections

Coccidioidomycosis among Workers at an Archeological Site, Northeastern Utah

In 2001, an outbreak of acute respiratory disease occurred among persons working at a Native American archeological site at Dinosaur National Monument in northeastern Utah. Epidemiologic and environmental investigations were undertaken to determine the cause of the outbreak. A clinical case was defined by the presence of at least two of the following symptoms: self-reported fever, shortness of breath, or cough. Ten workers met the clinical case definition; 9 had serologic confirmation of coccidioidomycosis, and 8 were hospitalized. All 10 were present during sifting of dirt through screens on June 19; symptoms began 9–12 days later (median 10). Coccidioidomycosis also developed in a worker at the site in September 2001. A serosurvey among 40 other Dinosaur National Monument workers did not find serologic evidence of recent infection. This outbreak documents a new endemic focus of coccidioidomycosis, extending northward its known geographic distribution in Utah by approximately 200 miles

Accelerating Policy Decisions to Adopt Haemophilus influenzae Type b Vaccine: A Global, Multivariable Analysis

Jessica Shearer and colleagues analyze data from 147 countries to identify factors that influence the time taken to introduce routine vaccination against Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib)