LENDA, a Low Energy Neutron Detector Array for experiments with radioactive beams in inverse kinematics

The Low Energy Neutron Detector Array (LENDA) is a neutron time-of-flight (TOF) spectrometer developed at the National Superconducting Cyclotron Lab- oratory (NSCL) for use in inverse kinematics experiments with rare isotope beams. Its design has been motivated by the need to study the spin-isospin response of unstable nuclei using (p, n) charge-exchange reactions at intermediate energies (> 100 MeV/u). It can be used, however, for any reaction study that involves emission of low energy neutrons (150 keV - 10 MeV). The array consists of 24 plastic scintillator bars and is capable of registering the recoiling neutron energy and angle with high detection efficiency. The neutron energy is determined by the time-of-flight technique, while the position of interaction is deduced using the timing and energy information from the two photomultipliers of each bar. A simple test setup utilizing radioactive sources has been used to characterize the array. Results of test measurements are compared with simulations. A neutron energy threshold of < 150 keV, an intrinsic time (position) resolution of \sim 400 ps (\sim 6 cm) and an efficiency > 20 % for neutrons below 4 MeV have been obtained.Comment: Version accepted for publication in Nucl. Instr. Methods A. Revised text, 2 new figures added (one in section 4 and one in section 7

Implementation of Internet-based preventive interventions for depression and anxiety: role of support? The design of a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Internet-based self-help is an effective preventive intervention for highly prevalent disorders, such as depression and anxiety. It is not clear, however, whether it is necessary to offer these interventions with professional support or if they work without any guidance. In case support is necessary, it is not clear which level of support is needed. This study examines whether an internet-based self-help intervention with a coach is more effective than the same intervention without a coach in terms of clinical outcomes, drop-out and economic costs. Moreover, we will investigate which level of support by a coach is more effective compared to other levels of support.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In this randomized controlled trial, a total of 500 subjects (18 year and older) from the general population with mild to moderate depression and/or anxiety will be assigned to one of five conditions: (1) web-based problem solving through the internet (self-examination therapy) without a coach; (2) the same as 1, but with the possibility to ask help from a coach on the initiative of the respondent (on demand, by email); (3) the same as 1, but with weekly scheduled contacts initiated by a coach (once per week, by email); (4) weekly scheduled contacts initiated by a coach, but no web-based intervention; (5) information only (through the internet). The interventions will consist of five weekly lessons. Primary outcome measures are symptoms of depression and anxiety. Secondary outcome measures are drop-out from the intervention, quality of life, and economic costs. Other secondary outcome measures that may predict outcome are also studied, e.g. client satisfaction and problem-solving skills. Measures are taken at baseline (pre-test), directly after the intervention (post-test, five weeks after baseline), 3 months later, and 12 months later. Analysis will be conducted on the intention-to-treat sample.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study aims to provide more insight into the clinical effectiveness, differences in drop-out rate and costs between interventions with and without support, and in particular different levels of support. This is important to know in relation to the dissemination of internet-based self-help interventions.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Nederlands Trial Register (NTR): TC1355</p

Political leadership and the politics of performance:France, Syria and the chemical weapons crisis of 2013

This article draws upon developments in UK research on political rhetoric and political performance in order to examine the incident in 2013 when French President François Hollande committed French forces to a US-led punitive strike against Syria, after the use of chemical weapons in a Damascus suburb on 21 August. The US-led retaliation did not take place. This article analyses Hollande's declaration on 27 July and his TV appearance on 15 September. His rhetoric and style are best understood as generic to the nature of the presidential office of the Fifth Republic. The article concludes by appraising how analysis of the French case contributes to the developing literature on rhetoric, celebrity and performance

Disparities in the Operative Experience Between Female and Male General Surgery Residents: A Multi-institutional Study From the US ROPE Consortium

OBJECTIVE: To examine differences in resident operative experience between male and female general surgery residents. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing female representation in surgery, sex and gender disparities in residency experience continue to exist. The operative volume of male and female general surgery residents has not been compared on a multi-institutional level. METHODS: Demographic characteristics and case logs were obtained for categorical general surgery graduates between 2010 and 2020 from the US Resident OPerative Experience Consortium database. Univariable, multivariable, and linear regression analyses were performed to compare differences in operative experience between male and female residents. RESULTS: There were 1343 graduates from 20 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited programs, and 476 (35%) were females. There were no differences in age, race/ethnicity, or proportion pursuing fellowship between groups. Female graduates were less likely to be high-volume residents (27% vs 36%, P \u3c 0.01). On univariable analysis, female graduates performed fewer total cases than male graduates (1140 vs 1177, P \u3c 0.01), largely due to a diminished surgeon junior experience (829 vs 863, P \u3c 0.01). On adjusted multivariable analysis, female sex was negatively associated with being a high-volume resident (OR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.56 to 0.98, P = 0.03). Over the 11-year study period, the annual total number of cases increased significantly for both groups, but female graduates (+16 cases/year) outpaced male graduates (+13 cases/year, P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Female general surgery graduates performed significantly fewer cases than male graduates. Reassuringly, this gap in operative experience may be narrowing. Further interventions are warranted to promote equitable training opportunities that support and engage female residents

Engaging the audience through videography as performance

The audience is an important part of videography, but its role tends to be seen as passive and unengaged. The audience’s experience is often guided in videography, with intended reaction made clear. Yet such an approach to the audience does not make use of the possibilities of videography for inciting active interaction and incorporating multiple interpretations. Previous research has suggested that videography has potential for interventional influence on audiences by taking on the performative turn in research. Developing more deeply the notions of performance and performativity in the context of videography, this paper proposes that one way to activate audiences, interact directly with them and engage them in meaning-making is to approach videography as performance. To provide practical suggestions for creating such performance, the paper contextualises videography as a recording medium, thus establishing its ontological position and ties to other media

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls

BACKGROUND: The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. METHODS: We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. FINDINGS: We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01–1.03), male (1.54, 1.16–2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06–3.13 and 4.19, 2.14–8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09–2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00–1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00–1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). INTERPRETATION: Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. FUNDING: PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders

Determinants of recovery from post-COVID-19 dyspnoea: analysis of UK prospective cohorts of hospitalised COVID-19 patients and community-based controls

Background The risk factors for recovery from COVID-19 dyspnoea are poorly understood. We investigated determinants of recovery from dyspnoea in adults with COVID-19 and compared these to determinants of recovery from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea. Methods We used data from two prospective cohort studies: PHOSP-COVID (patients hospitalised between March 2020 and April 2021 with COVID-19) and COVIDENCE UK (community cohort studied over the same time period). PHOSP-COVID data were collected during hospitalisation and at 5-month and 1-year follow-up visits. COVIDENCE UK data were obtained through baseline and monthly online questionnaires. Dyspnoea was measured in both cohorts with the Medical Research Council Dyspnoea Scale. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants associated with a reduction in dyspnoea between 5-month and 1-year follow-up. Findings We included 990 PHOSP-COVID and 3309 COVIDENCE UK participants. We observed higher odds of improvement between 5-month and 1-year follow-up among PHOSP-COVID participants who were younger (odds ratio 1.02 per year, 95% CI 1.01–1.03), male (1.54, 1.16–2.04), neither obese nor severely obese (1.82, 1.06–3.13 and 4.19, 2.14–8.19, respectively), had no pre-existing anxiety or depression (1.56, 1.09–2.22) or cardiovascular disease (1.33, 1.00–1.79), and shorter hospital admission (1.01 per day, 1.00–1.02). Similar associations were found in those recovering from non-COVID-19 dyspnoea, excluding age (and length of hospital admission). Interpretation Factors associated with dyspnoea recovery at 1-year post-discharge among patients hospitalised with COVID-19 were similar to those among community controls without COVID-19. Funding PHOSP-COVID is supported by a grant from the MRC-UK Research and Innovation and the Department of Health and Social Care through the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) rapid response panel to tackle COVID-19. The views expressed in the publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. COVIDENCE UK is supported by the UK Research and Innovation, the National Institute for Health Research, and Barts Charity. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funders