Technology-supported sitting balance therapy versus usual care in the chronic stage after stroke : a pilot randomized controlled trial

Background: Technology development for sitting balance therapy and trunk rehabilitation is scarce. Hence, intensive one-to-one therapist-patient training is still required. We have developed a novel rehabilitation prototype, specifically aimed at providing sitting balance therapy. We investigated whether technology-supported sitting balance training was feasible and safe in chronic stroke patients and we determined whether clinical outcomes improved after a four-week programme, compared with usual care. Methods: In this parallel-group, assessor-blinded, randomized controlled pilot trial, we divided first-event chronic stroke participants into two groups. The experimental group received usual care plus additional therapy supported by rehabilitation technology, consisting of 12 sessions of 50 min of therapy over four weeks. The control group received usual care only. We assessed all participants twice pre-intervention and once post-intervention. Feasibility and safety were descriptively analysed. Between-group analysis evaluated the pre-to-post differences in changes in motor and functional outcomes. Results: In total, 30 participants were recruited and 29 completed the trial (experimental group: n = 14; control group: n = 15). There were no between-group differences at baseline. Therapy was evaluated as feasible by participants and therapist. There were no serious adverse events during sitting balance therapy. Changes in clinical outcomes from pre- to post-intervention demonstrated increases in the experimental than in the control group for: sitting balance and trunk function, evaluated by the Trunk Impairment Scale (mean points score (SD) 7.07 (1.69) versus 0.33 (2.35); p < 0.000); maximum gait speed, assessed with the 10 Metre Walk Test (mean gait speed 0.16 (0.16) m/s versus 0.06 (0.06) m/s; p = 0.003); and functional balance, measured using the Berg balance scale (median points score (IQR) 4.5 (5) versus 0 (4); p = 0.014). Conclusions: Technology-supported sitting balance training in persons with chronic stroke is feasible and safe. A four-week, 12-session programme on top of usual care suggests beneficial effects for trunk function, maximum gait speed and functional balance

Relationship of admission blood proteomic biomarkers levels to lesion type and lesion burden in traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to understand the relationship between serum biomarker concentration and lesion type and volume found on computed tomography (CT) following all severities of TBI. METHODS: Concentrations of six serum biomarkers (GFAP, NFL, NSE, S100B, t-tau and UCH-L1) were measured in samples obtained <24 hours post-injury from 2869 patients with all severities of TBI, enrolled in the CENTER-TBI prospective cohort study (NCT02210221). Imaging phenotypes were defined as intraparenchymal haemorrhage (IPH), oedema, subdural haematoma (SDH), extradural haematoma (EDH), traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage (tSAH), diffuse axonal injury (DAI), and intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH). Multivariable polynomial regression was performed to examine the association between biomarker levels and both distinct lesion types and lesion volumes. Hierarchical clustering was used to explore imaging phenotypes; and principal component analysis and k-means clustering of acute biomarker concentrations to explore patterns of biomarker clustering. FINDINGS: 2869 patient were included, 68% (n=1946) male with a median age of 49 years (range 2-96). All severities of TBI (mild, moderate and severe) were included for analysis with majority (n=1946, 68%) having a mild injury (GCS 13-15). Patients with severe diffuse injury (Marshall III/IV) showed significantly higher levels of all measured biomarkers, with the exception of NFL, than patients with focal mass lesions (Marshall grades V/VI). Patients with either DAI+IVH or SDH+IPH+tSAH, had significantly higher biomarker concentrations than patients with EDH. Higher biomarker concentrations were associated with greater volume of IPH (GFAP, S100B, t-tau;adj r2 range:0·48-0·49; p<0·05), oedema (GFAP, NFL, NSE, t-tau, UCH-L1;adj r2 range:0·44-0·44; p<0·01), IVH (S100B;adj r2 range:0.48-0.49; p<0.05), Unsupervised k-means biomarker clustering revealed two clusters explaining 83·9% of variance, with phenotyping characteristics related to clinical injury severity. INTERPRETATION: Interpretation: Biomarker concentration within 24 hours of TBI is primarily related to severity of injury and intracranial disease burden, rather than pathoanatomical type of injury. FUNDING: CENTER-TBI is funded by the European Union 7th Framework programme (EC grant 602150)

Relationship of admission blood proteomic biomarkers levels to lesion type and lesion burden in traumatic brain injury: A CENTER-TBI study.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to understand the relationship between serum biomarker concentration and lesion type and volume found on computed tomography (CT) following all severities of TBI. METHODS: Concentrations of six serum biomarkers (GFAP, NFL, NSE, S100B, t-tau and UCH-L1) were measured in samples obtained <24 hours post-injury from 2869 patients with all severities of TBI, enrolled in the CENTER-TBI prospective cohort study (NCT02210221). Imaging phenotypes were defined as intraparenchymal haemorrhage (IPH), oedema, subdural haematoma (SDH), extradural haematoma (EDH), traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage (tSAH), diffuse axonal injury (DAI), and intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH). Multivariable polynomial regression was performed to examine the association between biomarker levels and both distinct lesion types and lesion volumes. Hierarchical clustering was used to explore imaging phenotypes; and principal component analysis and k-means clustering of acute biomarker concentrations to explore patterns of biomarker clustering. FINDINGS: 2869 patient were included, 68% (n=1946) male with a median age of 49 years (range 2-96). All severities of TBI (mild, moderate and severe) were included for analysis with majority (n=1946, 68%) having a mild injury (GCS 13-15). Patients with severe diffuse injury (Marshall III/IV) showed significantly higher levels of all measured biomarkers, with the exception of NFL, than patients with focal mass lesions (Marshall grades V/VI). Patients with either DAI+IVH or SDH+IPH+tSAH, had significantly higher biomarker concentrations than patients with EDH. Higher biomarker concentrations were associated with greater volume of IPH (GFAP, S100B, t-tau;adj r2 range:0·48-0·49; p<0·05), oedema (GFAP, NFL, NSE, t-tau, UCH-L1;adj r2 range:0·44-0·44; p<0·01), IVH (S100B;adj r2 range:0.48-0.49; p<0.05), Unsupervised k-means biomarker clustering revealed two clusters explaining 83·9% of variance, with phenotyping characteristics related to clinical injury severity. INTERPRETATION: Interpretation: Biomarker concentration within 24 hours of TBI is primarily related to severity of injury and intracranial disease burden, rather than pathoanatomical type of injury. FUNDING: CENTER-TBI is funded by the European Union 7th Framework programme (EC grant 602150)

Pathological Computed Tomography Features Associated with Adverse Outcomes after Mild Traumatic Brain Injury:A TRACK-TBI Study with External Validation in CENTER-TBI

Importance: A head computed tomography (CT) with positive results for acute intracranial hemorrhage is the gold-standard diagnostic biomarker for acute traumatic brain injury (TBI). In moderate to severe TBI (Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] scores 3-12), some CT features have been shown to be associated with outcomes. In mild TBI (mTBI; GCS scores 13-15), distribution and co-occurrence of pathological CT features and their prognostic importance are not well understood. Objective: To identify pathological CT features associated with adverse outcomes after mTBI. Design, Setting, and Participants: The longitudinal, observational Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury (TRACK-TBI) study enrolled patients with TBI, including those 17 years and older with GCS scores of 13 to 15 who presented to emergency departments at 18 US level 1 trauma centers between February 26, 2014, and August 8, 2018, and underwent head CT imaging within 24 hours of TBI. Evaluations of CT imaging used TBI Common Data Elements. Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOSE) scores were assessed at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months postinjury. External validation of results was performed via the Collaborative European NeuroTrauma Effectiveness Research in Traumatic Brain Injury (CENTER-TBI) study. Data analyses were completed from February 2020 to February 2021. Exposures: Acute nonpenetrating head trauma. Main Outcomes and Measures: Frequency, co-occurrence, and clustering of CT features; incomplete recovery (GOSE scores <8 vs 8); and an unfavorable outcome (GOSE scores <5 vs ≥5) at 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months. Results: In 1935 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 41.5 [17.6] years; 1286 men [66.5%]) in the TRACK-TBI cohort and 2594 patients with mTBI (mean [SD] age, 51.8 [20.3] years; 1658 men [63.9%]) in an external validation cohort, hierarchical cluster analysis identified 3 major clusters of CT features: contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma; intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage; and epidural hematoma. Contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma features were associated with incomplete recovery (odds ratios [ORs] for GOSE scores <8 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.39-2.33]; CENTER-TBI, 2.73 [95% CI, 2.18-3.41]) and greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes (ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year: TRACK-TBI, 3.23 [95% CI, 1.59-6.58]; CENTER-TBI, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.13-2.49]) out to 12 months after injury, but epidural hematoma was not. Intraventricular and/or petechial hemorrhage was associated with greater degrees of unfavorable outcomes up to 12 months after injury (eg, OR for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in TRACK-TBI: 3.47 [95% CI, 1.66-7.26]). Some CT features were more strongly associated with outcomes than previously validated variables (eg, ORs for GOSE scores <5 at 1 year in TRACK-TBI: neuropsychiatric history, 1.43 [95% CI.98-2.10] vs contusion, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and/or subdural hematoma, 3.23 [95% CI 1.59-6.58]). Findings were externally validated in 2594 patients with mTBI enrolled in the CENTER-TBI study. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, pathological CT features carried different prognostic implications after mTBI to 1 year postinjury. Some patterns of injury were associated with worse outcomes than others. These results support that patients with mTBI and these CT features need TBI-specific education and systematic follow-up

Impaired executive function in male MDMA ("ecsatsy") users.

Rationale: Long-term users of ecstasy have shown impaired performance on a multitude of cognitive abilities (most notably memory, attention, executive function). Research into the pattern of MDMA effects on executive functions remains fragmented, however. Objectives: To determine more systematically what aspects of executive function are affected by a history of MDMA use, by using a model that divides executive functions into cognitive flexibility, information updating and monitoring, and inhibition of pre-potent responses. Methods: MDMA users and controls who abstained from ecstasy and other substances for at least 2 weeks were tested with a computerized cognitive test battery to assess their abilities on tasks that measure the three submodalities of executive function, and their combined contribution on two more complex executive tasks. Because of sex-differential effects of MDMA reported in the literature, data from males and females were analyzed separately. Results: Male MDMA users performed significantly worse on the tasks that tap on cognitive flexibility and on the combined executive function tasks; no differences were found on the other cognitive tasks. Female users showed no impairments on any of the tasks. Conclusions: The present data suggest that a history of MDMA use selectively impairs executive function. In male users, cognitive flexibility was impaired and increased perseverative behavior was observed. The inability to adjust behavior rapidly and flexibly may have repercussions for daily life activities

Integrating methods for ecosystem service assessment: Experiences from real world situations

The Ecosystem Services (ES) concept highlights the varied contributions the environment provides to humans and there are a wide range of methods/tools available to assess ES. However, in real-world decision contexts a single tool is rarely sufficient and methods must be combined to meet practitioner needs. Here, results from the OpenNESS project are presented to illustrate the methods selected to meet the needs of 24 real-world case studies and better understand why and how methods are combined to meet practical needs. Results showed that within the cases methods were combined to: i) address a range of ES; ii) assess both supply and demand of ES; iii) assess a range of value types; iv) reach different stake-holder groups v) cover weaknesses in other methods used and vi) to meet specific decision context needs. Methods were linked in a variety of ways: i) as input-output chains of methods; ii) through learning; iii) through method development and iv) through comparison/triangulation of results. The paper synthesises these case study-based experiences to provide insight to others working in practical contexts as to where, and in what contexts, different methods can be combined and how this can add value to case study analyses. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V.Peer reviewe

Integrated assessment and valuation of ecosystem services - Guidelines and experiences

EU FP7 OpenNESS project deliverable D33 & D4

Stakeholders' perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept : Results from 27 case studies

The ecosystem service (ES) concept is becoming mainstream in policy and planning, but operational influence on practice is seldom reported. Here, we report the practitioners' perspectives on the practical implementation of the ES concept in 27 case studies. A standardised anonymous survey (n = 246), was used, focusing on the science-practice interaction process, perceived impact and expected use of the case study assessments. Operationalisation of the concept was shown to achieve a gradual change in practices: 13% of the case studies reported a change in action (e.g. management or policy change), and a further 40% anticipated that a change would result from the work. To a large extent the impact was attributed to a well conducted science-practice interaction process (>70%). The main reported advantages of the concept included: increased concept awareness and communication; enhanced participation and collaboration; production of comprehensive science-based knowledge; and production of spatially referenced knowledge for input to planning (91% indicated they had acquired new knowledge). The limitations were mostly case-specific and centred on methodology, data, and challenges with result implementation. The survey highlighted the crucial role of communication, participation and collaboration across different stakeholders, to implement the ES concept and enhance the democratisation of nature and landscape planning. (C) 2017 Published by Elsevier B.V.Peer reviewe

Effects of Climate and Atmospheric Nitrogen Deposition on Early to Mid-Term Stage Litter Decomposition Across Biomes

open263siWe acknowledge support by the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, funded by the German Research Foundation (FZT 118), Scientific Grant Agency VEGA(GrantNo.2/0101/18), as well as by the European Research Council under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program (Grant Agreement No. 677232)Litter decomposition is a key process for carbon and nutrient cycling in terrestrial ecosystems and is mainly controlled by environmental conditions, substrate quantity and quality as well as microbial community abundance and composition. In particular, the effects of climate and atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition on litter decomposition and its temporal dynamics are of significant importance, since their effects might change over the course of the decomposition process. Within the TeaComposition initiative, we incubated Green and Rooibos teas at 524 sites across nine biomes. We assessed how macroclimate and atmospheric inorganic N deposition under current and predicted scenarios (RCP 2.6, RCP 8.5) might affect litter mass loss measured after 3 and 12 months. Our study shows that the early to mid-term mass loss at the global scale was affected predominantly by litter quality (explaining 73% and 62% of the total variance after 3 and 12 months, respectively) followed by climate and N deposition. The effects of climate were not litter-specific and became increasingly significant as decomposition progressed, with MAP explaining 2% and MAT 4% of the variation after 12 months of incubation. The effect of N deposition was litter-specific, and significant only for 12-month decomposition of Rooibos tea at the global scale. However, in the temperate biome where atmospheric N deposition rates are relatively high, the 12-month mass loss of Green and Rooibos teas decreased significantly with increasing N deposition, explaining 9.5% and 1.1% of the variance, respectively. The expected changes in macroclimate and N deposition at the global scale by the end of this century are estimated to increase the 12-month mass loss of easily decomposable litter by 1.1-3.5% and of the more stable substrates by 3.8-10.6%, relative to current mass loss. In contrast, expected changes in atmospheric N deposition will decrease the mid-term mass loss of high-quality litter by 1.4-2.2% and that of low-quality litter by 0.9-1.5% in the temperate biome. Our results suggest that projected increases in N deposition may have the capacity to dampen the climate-driven increases in litter decomposition depending on the biome and decomposition stage of substrate.openKwon T.; Shibata H.; Kepfer-Rojas S.; Schmidt I.K.; Larsen K.S.; Beier C.; Berg B.; Verheyen K.; Lamarque J.-F.; Hagedorn F.; Eisenhauer N.; Djukic I.; Caliman A.; Paquette A.; Gutierrez-Giron A.; Petraglia A.; Augustaitis A.; Saillard A.; Ruiz-Fernandez A.C.; Sousa A.I.; Lillebo A.I.; Da Rocha Gripp A.; Lamprecht A.; Bohner A.; Francez A.-J.; Malyshev A.; Andric A.; Stanisci A.; Zolles A.; Avila A.; Virkkala A.-M.; Probst A.; Ouin A.; Khuroo A.A.; Verstraeten A.; Stefanski A.; Gaxiola A.; Muys B.; Gozalo B.; Ahrends B.; Yang B.; Erschbamer B.; Rodriguez Ortiz C.E.; Christiansen C.T.; Meredieu C.; Mony C.; Nock C.; Wang C.-P.; Baum C.; Rixen C.; Delire C.; Piscart C.; Andrews C.; Rebmann C.; Branquinho C.; Jan D.; Wundram D.; Vujanovic D.; Adair E.C.; Ordonez-Regil E.; Crawford E.R.; Tropina E.F.; Hornung E.; Groner E.; Lucot E.; Gacia E.; Levesque E.; Benedito E.; Davydov E.A.; Bolzan F.P.; Maestre F.T.; Maunoury-Danger F.; Kitz F.; Hofhansl F.; Hofhansl G.; De Almeida Lobo F.; Souza F.L.; Zehetner F.; Koffi F.K.; Wohlfahrt G.; Certini G.; Pinha G.D.; Gonzlez G.; Canut G.; Pauli H.; Bahamonde H.A.; Feldhaar H.; Jger H.; Serrano H.C.; Verheyden H.; Bruelheide H.; Meesenburg H.; Jungkunst H.; Jactel H.; Kurokawa H.; Yesilonis I.; Melece I.; Van Halder I.; Quiros I.G.; Fekete I.; Ostonen I.; Borovsk J.; Roales J.; Shoqeir J.H.; Jean-Christophe Lata J.; Probst J.-L.; Vijayanathan J.; Dolezal J.; Sanchez-Cabeza J.-A.; Merlet J.; Loehr J.; Von Oppen J.; Loffler J.; Benito Alonso J.L.; Cardoso-Mohedano J.-G.; Penuelas J.; Morina J.C.; Quinde J.D.; Jimnez J.J.; Alatalo J.M.; Seeber J.; Kemppinen J.; Stadler J.; Kriiska K.; Van Den Meersche K.; Fukuzawa K.; Szlavecz K.; Juhos K.; Gerhtov K.; Lajtha K.; Jennings K.; Jennings J.; Ecology P.; Hoshizaki K.; Green K.; Steinbauer K.; Pazianoto L.; Dienstbach L.; Yahdjian L.; Williams L.J.; Brigham L.; Hanna L.; Hanna H.; Rustad L.; Morillas L.; Silva Carneiro L.; Di Martino L.; Villar L.; Fernandes Tavares L.A.; Morley M.; Winkler M.; Lebouvier M.; Tomaselli M.; Schaub M.; Glushkova M.; Torres M.G.A.; De Graaff M.-A.; Pons M.-N.; Bauters M.; Mazn M.; Frenzel M.; Wagner M.; Didion M.; Hamid M.; Lopes M.; Apple M.; Weih M.; Mojses M.; Gualmini M.; Vadeboncoeur M.; Bierbaumer M.; Danger M.; Scherer-Lorenzen M.; Ruek M.; Isabellon M.; Di Musciano M.; Carbognani M.; Zhiyanski M.; Puca M.; Barna M.; Ataka M.; Luoto M.; H. Alsafaran M.; Barsoum N.; Tokuchi N.; Korboulewsky N.; Lecomte N.; Filippova N.; Hlzel N.; Ferlian O.; Romero O.; Pinto-Jr O.; Peri P.; Dan Turtureanu P.; Haase P.; Macreadie P.; Reich P.B.; Petk P.; Choler P.; Marmonier P.; Ponette Q.; Dettogni Guariento R.; Canessa R.; Kiese R.; Hewitt R.; Weigel R.; Kanka R.; Cazzolla Gatti R.; Martins R.L.; Ogaya R.; Georges R.; Gaviln R.G.; Wittlinger S.; Puijalon S.; Suzuki S.; Martin S.; Anja S.; Gogo S.; Schueler S.; Drollinger S.; Mereu S.; Wipf S.; Trevathan-Tackett S.; Stoll S.; Lfgren S.; Trogisch S.; Seitz S.; Glatzel S.; Venn S.; Dousset S.; Mori T.; Sato T.; Hishi T.; Nakaji T.; Jean-Paul T.; Camboulive T.; Spiegelberger T.; Scholten T.; Mozdzer T.J.; Kleinebecker T.; Runk T.; Ramaswiela T.; Hiura T.; Enoki T.; Ursu T.-M.; Di Cella U.M.; Hamer U.; Klaus V.; Di Cecco V.; Rego V.; Fontana V.; Piscov V.; Bretagnolle V.; Maire V.; Farjalla V.; Pascal V.; Zhou W.; Luo W.; Parker W.; Parker P.; Kominam Y.; Kotrocz Z.; Utsumi Y.Kwon T.; Shibata H.; Kepfer-Rojas S.; Schmidt I.K.; Larsen K.S.; Beier C.; Berg B.; Verheyen K.; Lamarque J.-F.; Hagedorn F.; Eisenhauer N.; Djukic I.; Caliman A.; Paquette A.; Gutierrez-Giron A.; Petraglia A.; Augustaitis A.; Saillard A.; Ruiz-Fernandez A.C.; Sousa A.I.; Lillebo A.I.; Da Rocha Gripp A.; Lamprecht A.; Bohner A.; Francez A.-J.; Malyshev A.; Andric A.; Stanisci A.; Zolles A.; Avila A.; Virkkala A.-M.; Probst A.; Ouin A.; Khuroo A.A.; Verstraeten A.; Stefanski A.; Gaxiola A.; Muys B.; Gozalo B.; Ahrends B.; Yang B.; Erschbamer B.; Rodriguez Ortiz C.E.; Christiansen C.T.; Meredieu C.; Mony C.; Nock C.; Wang C.-P.; Baum C.; Rixen C.; Delire C.; Piscart C.; Andrews C.; Rebmann C.; Branquinho C.; Jan D.; Wundram D.; Vujanovic D.; Adair E.C.; Ordonez-Regil E.; Crawford E.R.; Tropina E.F.; Hornung E.; Groner E.; Lucot E.; Gacia E.; Levesque E.; Benedito E.; Davydov E.A.; Bolzan F.P.; Maestre F.T.; Maunoury-Danger F.; Kitz F.; Hofhansl F.; Hofhansl G.; De Almeida Lobo F.; Souza F.L.; Zehetner F.; Koffi F.K.; Wohlfahrt G.; Certini G.; Pinha G.D.; Gonzlez G.; Canut G.; Pauli H.; Bahamonde H.A.; Feldhaar H.; Jger H.; Serrano H.C.; Verheyden H.; Bruelheide H.; Meesenburg H.; Jungkunst H.; Jactel H.; Kurokawa H.; Yesilonis I.; Melece I.; Van Halder I.; Quiros I.G.; Fekete I.; Ostonen I.; Borovsk J.; Roales J.; Shoqeir J.H.; Jean-Christophe Lata J.; Probst J.-L.; Vijayanathan J.; Dolezal J.; Sanchez-Cabeza J.-A.; Merlet J.; Loehr J.; Von Oppen J.; Loffler J.; Benito Alonso J.L.; Cardoso-Mohedano J.-G.; Penuelas J.; Morina J.C.; Quinde J.D.; Jimnez J.J.; Alatalo J.M.; Seeber J.; Kemppinen J.; Stadler J.; Kriiska K.; Van Den Meersche K.; Fukuzawa K.; Szlavecz K.; Juhos K.; Gerhtov K.; Lajtha K.; Jennings K.; Jennings J.; Ecology P.; Hoshizaki K.; Green K.; Steinbauer K.; Pazianoto L.; Dienstbach L.; Yahdjian L.; Williams L.J.; Brigham L.; Hanna L.; Hanna H.; Rustad L.; Morillas L.; Silva Carneiro L.; Di Martino L.; Villar L.; Fernandes Tavares L.A.; Morley M.; Winkler M.; Lebouvier M.; Tomaselli M.; Schaub M.; Glushkova M.; Torres M.G.A.; De Graaff M.-A.; Pons M.-N.; Bauters M.; Mazn M.; Frenzel M.; Wagner M.; Didion M.; Hamid M.; Lopes M.; Apple M.; Weih M.; Mojses M.; Gualmini M.; Vadeboncoeur M.; Bierbaumer M.; Danger M.; Scherer-Lorenzen M.; Ruek M.; Isabellon M.; Di Musciano M.; Carbognani M.; Zhiyanski M.; Puca M.; Barna M.; Ataka M.; Luoto M.; H. Alsafaran M.; Barsoum N.; Tokuchi N.; Korboulewsky N.; Lecomte N.; Filippova N.; Hlzel N.; Ferlian O.; Romero O.; Pinto-Jr O.; Peri P.; Dan Turtureanu P.; Haase P.; Macreadie P.; Reich P.B.; Petk P.; Choler P.; Marmonier P.; Ponette Q.; Dettogni Guariento R.; Canessa R.; Kiese R.; Hewitt R.; Weigel R.; Kanka R.; Cazzolla Gatti R.; Martins R.L.; Ogaya R.; Georges R.; Gaviln R.G.; Wittlinger S.; Puijalon S.; Suzuki S.; Martin S.; Anja S.; Gogo S.; Schueler S.; Drollinger S.; Mereu S.; Wipf S.; Trevathan-Tackett S.; Stoll S.; Lfgren S.; Trogisch S.; Seitz S.; Glatzel S.; Venn S.; Dousset S.; Mori T.; Sato T.; Hishi T.; Nakaji T.; Jean-Paul T.; Camboulive T.; Spiegelberger T.; Scholten T.; Mozdzer T.J.; Kleinebecker T.; Runk T.; Ramaswiela T.; Hiura T.; Enoki T.; Ursu T.-M.; Di Cella U.M.; Hamer U.; Klaus V.; Di Cecco V.; Rego V.; Fontana V.; Piscov V.; Bretagnolle V.; Maire V.; Farjalla V.; Pascal V.; Zhou W.; Luo W.; Parker W.; Parker P.; Kominam Y.; Kotrocz Z.; Utsumi Y