71 research outputs found
The state of theory in three premier advertising journals : a research note
Despite its importance, little is known about the prevalence of theory in the literature on advertising research. Utilising a content analysis of the three premier advertising journals over an 11-year period, it is found that only 17% of articles have made explicit use of theory. Psychology is the discipline from which the greatest number of articles drew their theoretical frameworks, followed by sociology and economics – indeed, theories from marketing and advertising are in the minority. Limitations are noted and implications of the results are discussed.peer-reviewe
Novel Approach to Estimate Osteoarthritis Progression:Use of the Reliable Change Index in the Evaluation of Joint Space Loss
OBJECTIVE: Osteoarthritis-related changes in joint space measurements over time are small and sensitive to measurement error. The Reliable Change Index (RCI) determines whether the magnitude of change observed in an individual can be attributed to true change. This study aimed to examine the RCI as a novel approach to estimating osteoarthritis progression.METHODS: Data were from 167 men and 392 women with knee osteoarthritis (diagnosed using the American College of Rheumatology criteria) randomized to the placebo arm of the 3-year Strontium Ranelate Efficacy in Knee Osteoarthritis trial (SEKOIA) and assessed annually. The RCI was used to determine whether the magnitude of change in joint space width (JSW) on radiographs between study years was likely to be true or due to measurement error.RESULTS: Between consecutive years, 57-69% of participants had an apparent decrease (change <0) in JSW, while 31-43% of participants had annual changes indicating improvement in JSW. The RCI identified JSW decreases in only 6.0% of patients between baseline and year 1, and in 4.5% of patients between the remaining study years. The apparent increases in JSW were almost eliminated between baseline and year 1, and between years 1 and 2 only 1.3% of patients had a significant increase, dropping to 0.9% between years 2 and 3.CONCLUSION: The RCI provides a method to identify change in JSW, removing many apparent changes that are likely to be due to measurement error. This method appears to be useful for assessing change in JSW from radiographs in clinical and research settings.</p
Understanding SDBD Actuators: An Experimental Study on Plasma Characteristics
The working mechanisms of surface dielectric barrier discharge (SDBD) plasma actuators foreseen as aerodynamic control devices is investigated experimentally on a common platform, referred to as the NATO-AVT-RTO-190 test case. A better understanding of the working principle and characteristics of SDBD paves the way for more efficient and safe use of plasma actuators in aerodynamic applications. In this study, a characterisation of the plasma is done by current measurements, fast-camera plasma imaging and force measurements. Furthermore, more advanced plasma characteristics such as reduced electric field and excited species population are found by Optical Emission Spectroscopy. The collective goal of this research is to contribute to a database which can also be used for numerical verification and validation by varying the key parameters such as frequency and voltage
International differences in self-reported health measures in 33 major metropolitan areas in Europe.
The increasing concentration of populations into large conurbations in recent decades has not been matched by international health assessments, which remain largely focused at the country level. We aimed to demonstrate the use of routine survey data to compare the health of large metropolitan centres across Europe and determine the extent to which differences are due to socio-economic factors
UK clinical guideline for the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis
The National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) has revised the UK guideline for the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50Â years and older. Accredited by NICE, this guideline is relevant for all healthcare professionals involved in osteoporosis management.
INTRODUCTION
The UK National Osteoporosis Guideline Group (NOGG) first produced a guideline on the prevention and treatment of osteoporosis in 2008, with updates in 2013 and 2017. This paper presents a major update of the guideline, the scope of which is to review the assessment and management of osteoporosis and the prevention of fragility fractures in postmenopausal women, and men age 50Â years and older.
METHODS
Where available, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and randomised controlled trials were used to provide the evidence base. Conclusions and recommendations were systematically graded according to the strength of the available evidence.
RESULTS
Review of the evidence and recommendations are provided for the diagnosis of osteoporosis, fracture-risk assessment and intervention thresholds, management of vertebral fractures, non-pharmacological and pharmacological treatments, including duration and monitoring of anti-resorptive therapy, glucocorticoid-induced osteoporosis, and models of care for fracture prevention. Recommendations are made for training; service leads and commissioners of healthcare; and for review criteria for audit and quality improvement.
CONCLUSION
The guideline, which has received accreditation from the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE), provides a comprehensive overview of the assessment and management of osteoporosis for all healthcare professionals involved in its management. This position paper has been endorsed by the International Osteoporosis Foundation and by the European Society for the Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis, Osteoarthritis and Musculoskeletal Diseases
Novel Associations between Common Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Risk-Predicting Mammographic Density Measures.
Mammographic density measures adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI) are heritable predictors of breast cancer risk, but few mammographic density-associated genetic variants have been identified. Using data for 10,727 women from two international consortia, we estimated associations between 77 common breast cancer susceptibility variants and absolute dense area, percent dense area and absolute nondense area adjusted for study, age, and BMI using mixed linear modeling. We found strong support for established associations between rs10995190 (in the region of ZNF365), rs2046210 (ESR1), and rs3817198 (LSP1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas (all P < 10(-5)). Of 41 recently discovered breast cancer susceptibility variants, associations were found between rs1432679 (EBF1), rs17817449 (MIR1972-2: FTO), rs12710696 (2p24.1), and rs3757318 (ESR1) and adjusted absolute and percent dense areas, respectively. There were associations between rs6001930 (MKL1) and both adjusted absolute dense and nondense areas, and between rs17356907 (NTN4) and adjusted absolute nondense area. Trends in all but two associations were consistent with those for breast cancer risk. Results suggested that 18% of breast cancer susceptibility variants were associated with at least one mammographic density measure. Genetic variants at multiple loci were associated with both breast cancer risk and the mammographic density measures. Further understanding of the underlying mechanisms at these loci could help identify etiologic pathways implicated in how mammographic density predicts breast cancer risk.ABCFS: The Australian Breast Cancer Family Registry (ABCFR; 1992-1995) was supported by
the Australian NHMRC, the New South Wales Cancer Council, and the Victorian Health
Promotion Foundation (Australia), and by grant UM1CA164920 from the USA National
Cancer Institute. The Genetic Epidemiology Laboratory at the University of Melbourne has
also received generous support from Mr B. Hovey and Dr and Mrs R.W. Brown to whom we
are most grateful. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or
policies of the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast
Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density
5
Cancer Family Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or
organizations imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR.
BBCC: This study was funded in part by the ELAN-Program of the University Hospital
Erlangen; Katharina Heusinger was funded by the ELAN program of the University Hospital
Erlangen. BBCC was supported in part by the ELAN program of the Medical Faculty,
University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander University Erlangen-Nuremberg.
EPIC-Norfolk: This study was funded by research programme grant funding from Cancer
Research UK and the Medical Research Council with additional support from the Stroke
Association, British Heart Foundation, Department of Health, Research into Ageing and
Academy of Medical Sciences.
MCBCS: This study was supported by Public Health Service Grants P50 CA 116201, R01 CA
128931, R01 CA 128931-S01, R01 CA 122340, CCSG P30 CA15083, from the National Cancer
Institute, National Institutes of Health, and Department of Health and Human Services.
MCCS: Melissa C. Southey is a National Health and Medical Research Council Senior
Research Fellow and a Victorian Breast Cancer Research Consortium Group Leader. The
study was supported by the Cancer Council of Victoria and by the Victorian Breast Cancer
Research Consortium.
MEC: National Cancer Institute: R37CA054281, R01CA063464, R01CA085265, R25CA090956,
R01CA132839.
MMHS: This work was supported by grants from the National Cancer Institute, National
Institutes of Health, and Department of Health and Human Services. (R01 CA128931, R01 CA
128931-S01, R01 CA97396, P50 CA116201, and Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA15083).
Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density
6
NBCS: This study has been supported with grants from Norwegian Research Council
(#183621/S10 and #175240/S10), The Norwegian Cancer Society (PK80108002,
PK60287003), and The Radium Hospital Foundation as well as S-02036 from South Eastern
Norway Regional Health Authority.
NHS: This study was supported by Public Health Service Grants CA131332, CA087969,
CA089393, CA049449, CA98233, CA128931, CA 116201, CA 122340 from the National
Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services.
OOA study was supported by CA122822 and X01 HG005954 from the NIH; Breast Cancer
Research Fund; Elizabeth C. Crosby Research Award, Gladys E. Davis Endowed Fund, and the
Office of the Vice President for Research at the University of Michigan. Genotyping services
for the OOA study were provided by the Center for Inherited Disease Research (CIDR), which
is fully funded through a federal contract from the National Institutes of Health to The Johns
Hopkins University, contract number HHSN268200782096.
OFBCR: This work was supported by grant UM1 CA164920 from the USA National Cancer
Institute. The content of this manuscript does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of
the National Cancer Institute or any of the collaborating centers in the Breast Cancer Family
Registry (BCFR), nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations
imply endorsement by the USA Government or the BCFR.
SASBAC: The SASBAC study was supported by Märit and Hans Rausing’s Initiative against
Breast Cancer, National Institutes of Health, Susan Komen Foundation and Agency for
Science, Technology and Research of Singapore (A*STAR).
Breast Cancer Susceptibility Variants and Mammographic Density
7
SIBS: SIBS was supported by program grant C1287/A10118 and project grants from Cancer
Research UK (grant numbers C1287/8459).
COGS grant: Collaborative Oncological Gene-environment Study (COGS) that enabled the
genotyping for this study. Funding for the BCAC component is provided by grants from the
EU FP7 programme (COGS) and from Cancer Research UK. Funding for the iCOGS
infrastructure came from: the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme
under grant agreement n° 223175 (HEALTH-F2-2009-223175) (COGS), Cancer Research UK
(C1287/A10118, C1287/A 10710, C12292/A11174, C1281/A12014, C5047/A8384,
C5047/A15007, C5047/A10692), the National Institutes of Health (CA128978) and Post-
Cancer GWAS initiative (1U19 CA148537, 1U19 CA148065 and 1U19 CA148112 - the GAMEON
initiative), the Department of Defence (W81XWH-10-1-0341), the Canadian Institutes of
Health Research (CIHR) for the CIHR Team in Familial Risks of Breast Cancer, Komen
Foundation for the Cure, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, and the Ovarian Cancer
Research Fund.This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available via American Association for Cancer Research at http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2015/04/10/0008-5472.CAN-14-2012.abstract
- …