The One Stop Shop to Open Access Journals - DOAJ

The initiative to start the project Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) was taken in 2002 at the first Nordic Conference on Scholarly Communication (NCSC). The idea was to develop a one stop shop service which made it easier for libraries and aggregators to integrate OA-journals data in their services, for OA-publishers to get their journals visible and for readers to find OA-material. Initially Open Society Institute and SPARC funded the project which was launched in 2003 containing around 300 journals

“Advice and Consent” in Historical Perspective

In recent years, commentators have complained about what they regard as an increasingly dysfunctional confirmation process for judges and high-ranking executive officials, and the proper role for the Senate in the confirmation process has been much debated. This Article suggests that confirmations have been contentious throughout American history, and that the focus on ideological issues in today’s confirmation proceedings is not anomalous. Indeed, historically, both Republicans and Democrats have used the confirmation process to delay or oppose nominations when the President hails from a different political party, and, sometimes, even when the President comes from the same party but there are ideological objections to the nominee. That the appointments process has, at times, been difficult and contentious should come as no great surprise. The Framers of the United States Constitution intentionally created a governmental structure that was more prone to obstructionism than other comparable systems. Relying on concepts like “separation of powers,” and “checks and balances,” the Framers sought to constrain the federal government in ways that would limit the possibilities for governmental abuse. The appointments power reflects this approach. Like many other constitutional powers, it is a shared power. Although the President has the power to nominate Article III judges, as well as ambassadors and “officers,” nominees can only be confirmed with the “advice and consent” of the Senate. By placing the power to appoint in two politically elected entities, the Constitution establishes a system whereby political influences will sometimes have a major impact on the confirmation process. Although contentiousness can arise during any type of nomination, some Supreme Court nominations have been particularly bitter. Both the Senate and the American public have increasingly become aware that the courts make law and that the political and judicial attitudes of nominees matter. Under such circumstances, the Senate’s inquiry quite naturally goes beyond the simple question of whether a nominee is qualified or unqualified. However, the confirmation process is more difficult today, even for nonjudicial nominees, because of the bitter partisanship that has infected the U.S. political system

Moving Usability Testing onto the Web

Abstract: In order to remotely obtain detailed usability data by tracking user behaviors within a given web site, a server-based usability testing environment has been created. Web pages are annotated in such a way that arbitrary user actions (such as "mouse over link" or "click back button") can be selected for logging. In addition, the system allows the experiment designer to interleave interactive questions into the usability evaluation, which for instance could be triggered by a particular sequence of actions. The system works in conjunction with clustering and visualization algorithms that can be applied to the resulting log file data. A first version of the system has been used successfully to carry out a web usability evaluation

Transcriptional profiling of breast cancer metastases identifies liver metastasis-selective genes associated with adverse outcome in luminal A primary breast cancer.

The complete molecular basis of the organ-specificity of metastasis is elusive. This study aimed to provide an independent characterization of the transcriptional landscape of breast cancer metastases with the specific objective to identify liver metastasis-selective genes of prognostic importance following primary tumor diagnosis

Severe male infertility after failed ICSI treatment-a phenomenological study of men's experiences

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Male-factor infertility underlies approximately 30% of infertility in couples seeking treatment; of which 10% is due to azoospermia. The development of assisted reproductive technology (ART), enabling the use of epididymal or testicular sperm for fertilization of the partner's oocytes, has made biological fatherhood possible for men with obstructive azoospermia. There is limited knowledge of men's experience of their own infertility. The aim of this study was to describe men's experiences of obstructive azoospermia infertility.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Eight men with obstructive azoospermia, who had terminated Swedish public health system ART treatment two years previously without subsequent childbirth, were interviewed using a descriptive phenomenological method.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The essence of the phenomenon is expressed with a metaphor: climbing a mountain step by step with the aim of reaching the top, i.e. having a child and thus a family with a child. Four constituents are included (1) inadequacy followed by a feeling of redress (2) marginalisation, (3) chivalry (4) extension of life and starting a family as driving forces.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Knowledge of men's experiences of their own infertility is important as a supporting measure to increase the quality of care of infertile couples. By adopting this facet of gender perspective in fertility treatment guidelines, care can hopefully be optimized.</p

Development and validation of a new clinical decision support tool to optimize screening for retinopathy of prematurity

Background/Aims Prematurely born infants undergo costly, stressful eye examinations to uncover the small fraction with retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) that needs treatment to prevent blindness. The aim was to develop a prediction tool (DIGIROP-Screen) with 100% sensitivity and high specificity to safely reduce screening of those infants not needing treatment. DIGIROP-Screen was compared with four other ROP models based on longitudinal weights. Methods Data, including infants born at 24–30 weeks of gestational age (GA), for DIGIROP-Screen development (DevGroup, N=6991) originate from the Swedish National Registry for ROP. Three international cohorts comprised the external validation groups (ValGroups, N=1241). Multivariable logistic regressions, over postnatal ages (PNAs) 6–14 weeks, were validated. Predictors were birth characteristics, status and age at first diagnosed ROP and essential interactions. Results ROP treatment was required in 287 (4.1%)/6991 infants in DevGroup and 49 (3.9%)/1241 in ValGroups. To allow 100% sensitivity in DevGroup, specificity at birth was 53.1% and cumulatively 60.5% at PNA 8 weeks. Applying the same cut-offs in ValGroups, specificities were similar (46.3% and 53.5%). One infant with severe malformations in ValGroups was incorrectly classified as not needing screening. For all other infants, at PNA 6–14 weeks, sensitivity was 100%. In other published models, sensitivity ranged from 88.5% to 100% and specificity ranged from 9.6% to 45.2%. Conclusions DIGIROP-Screen, a clinical decision support tool using readily available birth and ROP screening data for infants born GA 24–30 weeks, in the European and North American populations tested can safely identify infants not needing ROP screening. DIGIROP-Screen had equal or higher sensitivity and specificity compared with other models. DIGIROP-Screen should be tested in any new cohort for validation and if not validated it can be modified using the same statistical approaches applied to a specific clinical setting

Elderly persons in the risk zone. Design of a multidimensional, health-promoting, randomised three-armed controlled trial for "prefrail" people of 80+ years living at home

Background The very old (80+) are often described as a "frail" group that is particularly exposed to diseases and functional disability. They are at great risk of losing the ability to manage their activities of daily living independently. A health-promoting intervention programme might prevent or delay dependence in activities of daily life and the development of functional decline. Studies have shown that those who benefit most from a health-promoting and disease-preventive programme are persons with no, or discrete, activity restrictions. The three-armed study "Elderly in the risk zone" is designed to evaluate if multi-dimensional and multi-professional educational senior meetings are more effective than preventive home visits, and if it is possible to prevent or delay deterioration if an intervention is made when the persons are not so frail. In this paper the study design, the intervention and the outcome measures as well as the baseline characteristics of the study participants are presented. Methods/Design The study is a randomised three-armed single-blind controlled trial with follow-ups 3 months, 1 and 2 years. The study group should comprise a representative sample of pre-frail 80-year old persons still living at home in two municipalities of Gothenburg. To allow for drop-outs, it was estimated that a total of about 450 persons would need to be included in the study. The participants should live in their ordinary housing and not be dependent on the municipal home help service or care. Further, they should be independent of help from another person in activities of daily living and be cognitively intact, having a score of 25 or higher as assessed with the Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). Discussion We believe that the design of the study, the randomisation procedure, outcome measurements and the study protocol meetings should ensure the quality of the study. Furthermore, the multi-dimensionality of the intervention, the involvement of both the professionals and the senior citizens in the planning of the intervention should have the potential to effectively target the heterogeneous needs of the elderly. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT0087705