Algorithmic Randomness and Capacity of Closed Sets

We investigate the connection between measure, capacity and algorithmic randomness for the space of closed sets. For any computable measure m, a computable capacity T may be defined by letting T(Q) be the measure of the family of closed sets K which have nonempty intersection with Q. We prove an effective version of Choquet's capacity theorem by showing that every computable capacity may be obtained from a computable measure in this way. We establish conditions on the measure m that characterize when the capacity of an m-random closed set equals zero. This includes new results in classical probability theory as well as results for algorithmic randomness. For certain computable measures, we construct effectively closed sets with positive capacity and with Lebesgue measure zero. We show that for computable measures, a real q is upper semi-computable if and only if there is an effectively closed set with capacity q

Lines Missing Every Random Point

We prove that there is, in every direction in Euclidean space, a line that misses every computably random point. We also prove that there exist, in every direction in Euclidean space, arbitrarily long line segments missing every double exponential time random point.Comment: Added a section: "Betting in Doubly Exponential Time.

Expression of Streptococcus pneumoniae Bacteriocins Is Induced by Antibiotics via Regulatory Interplay with the Competence System

Pneumococcal bacteriocins (pneumocins) are antibacterial toxins that mediate intra-species competition within the human host. However, the triggers of pneumocin expression are poorly understood. Using RNA-sequencing, we mapped the regulon of the pneumocin cluster (blp) of Streptococcus pneumoniae D39. Furthermore, by analogy with pneumococcal competence, we show that several antibiotics activate the blp-genes. Using real-time gene expression measurements we show that while the promoter driving expression of the two-component regulatory system blpR/H is constitutive, the remaining blp-promoters that control pneumocin expression, immunity and the inducer peptide BlpC, are pH-dependent and induced in the late exponential phase. Intriguingly, competence for genetic transformation, mediated by the paralogous ComD/E two-component quorum system, is induced by the same environmental cues. To test for interplay between these regulatory systems, we quantified the regulatory response to the addition of synthetic BlpC and competence-stimulating peptide (CSP). Supporting the idea of such interplay, we found that immediately upon addition of CSP, the blp-promoters were activated in a comD/E-dependent manner. After a delay, blp-expression was highly induced and was strictly dependent on blpRH and blpC. This raised the question of the mechanism of BlpC export, since bioinformatic analysis showed that the genes encoding the putative exporter for BlpC, blpAB, are not intact in strain D39 and most other strains. By contrast, all sequenced pneumococcal strains contain intact comAB genes, encoding the transport system for CSP. Consistent with the idea that comAB mediate BlpC export, we finally show that high-level expression of the blp-genes requires comAB. Together, our results demonstrate that regulation of pneumocin expression is intertwined with competence, explaining why certain antibiotics induce blp-expression. Antibiotic-induced pneumocin expression might therefore have unpredictable consequences on pneumococcal colonization dynamics by activating genes that mediate intra-specific interference competition

Ears of the Armadillo: Global Health Research and Neglected Diseases in Texas

Neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) have\ud been recently identified as significant public\ud health problems in Texas and elsewhere in\ud the American South. A one-day forum on the\ud landscape of research and development and\ud the hidden burden of NTDs in Texas\ud explored the next steps to coordinate advocacy,\ud public health, and research into a\ud cogent health policy framework for the\ud American NTDs. It also highlighted how\ud U.S.-funded global health research can serve\ud to combat these health disparities in the\ud United States, in addition to benefiting\ud communities abroad

Predictive factors of developing diabetes mellitus in women with gestational diabetes.

BACKGROUND: To investigate which factors during gestational diabetes pregnancies correlate with the risk of developing impaired glucose tolerance or diabetes 1 year postpartum and to compare this risk in women with gestational diabetes and women with a normal oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy. METHODS: Of 315 women with gestational diabetes, defined as a 2-hr blood glucose value of at least 9.0 mmol/l at a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test, who delivered in Lund 1991-99, 229 (73%) performed a new test 1 year postpartum. We compared maternal and fetal factors during pregnancy with the test value at follow up. A control group of 153 women with a 2-hr test value below 7.8 mmol/l during pregnancy were invited to a new test 1 year postpartum and 60 (39%) accepted. RESULTS: At 1 year follow up, 31% of the women with gestational diabetes but only one of the 60 controls showed pathologic glucose tolerance and one had developed diabetes. The following factors in women with gestational diabetes were identified as predicting impaired glucose tolerance or diabetes at 1 year follow up: maternal age over 40 and--in a multiple regression analysis, independent of each other--a high 2-hr value at oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy and insulin treatment during pregnancy. CONCLUSION: The risk of developing manifest diabetes after gestational diabetes may be high enough to justify a general screening or diagnostic procedure in all pregnant women to identify women with gestational diabetes and a postpartum follow up program for them. This study did not identify any particular factor during pregnancy with enough precision to predict a later progression to diabetes

Measuring perinatal complications: methodologic issues related to gestational age

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Perinatal outcomes differ by week of gestational age. However, it appears that how measures to examine these outcomes vary among various studies. The current paper explores how perinatal complications are reported and how they might differ when different denominators, numerators, and comparison groups are utilized.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>One issue that can clearly affect absolute rates and trends is how groups of women are categorized by their gestational age. Since most perinatal outcomes can only occur in women and neonates who have delivered, using the number of pregnancies delivered (PD) as the denominator of outcomes is appropriate. However, for an outcome such as antepartum stillbirth, all women who are pregnant at a particular gestational age are at risk. Thus, the denominator should include all ongoing pregnancies (OP). When gestational age is used by week this means using both deliveries during a particular week plus those women who deliver beyond the particular week of gestation in the denominator. Researchers should be careful to make sure they are utilizing the appropriate measure of perinatal complications so they do not report findings that would be misleading to clinicians, patients, and policy makers.</p

Subsequent Pregnancy After Gestational Diabetes Mellitus: Frequency and risk factors for recurrence in Korean women

OBJECTIVE—The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of recurrent gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to find risk factors that can predict the recurrence of GDM in Korean women with previous GDM

"GINEXMAL RCT: Induction of labour versus expectant management in gestational diabetes pregnancies"

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Gestational Diabetes (GDM) is one of the most common complications of pregnancies affecting around 7% of women. This clinical condition is associated with an increased risk of developing fetal macrosomia and is related to a higher incidence of caesarean section in comparison to the general population. Strong evidence indicating the best management between induction of labour at term and expectant monitoring are missing.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>Pregnant women with singleton pregnancy in vertex presentation previously diagnosed with gestational diabetes will be asked to participate in a multicenter open-label randomized controlled trial between 38+0 and 39+0 gestational weeks. Women will be recruited in the third trimester in the Outpatient clinic or in the Day Assessment Unit according to local protocols. Women who opt to take part will be randomized according to induction of labour or expectant management for spontaneous delivery. Patients allocated to the induction group will be admitted to the obstetric ward and offered induction of labour via use of prostaglandins, Foley catheter or oxytocin (depending on clinical conditions). Women assigned to the expectant arm will be sent to their domicile where they will be followed up until delivery, through maternal and fetal wellbeing monitoring twice weekly. The primary study outcome is the Caesarean section (C-section) rate, whilst secondary measurement4s are maternal and neonatal outcomes. A total sample of 1760 women (880 each arm) will be recruited to identify a relative difference between the two arms equal to 20% in favour of induction, with concerns to C-section rate. Data will be collected until mothers and newborns discharge from the hospital. Analysis of the outcome measures will be carried out by intention to treat.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The present trial will provide evidence as to whether or not, in women affected by gestational diabetes, induction of labour between 38+0 and 39+0 weeks is an effective management to ameliorate maternal and neonatal outcomes. The primary objective is to determine whether caesarean section rate could be reduced among women undergoing induction of labour, in comparison to patients allocated to expectant monitoring. The secondary objective consists of the assessment and comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes in the two study arms.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The study protocol has been registered in the ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System, identification number <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01058772">NCT01058772</a>.</p