Toward a model for digital tool criticism: Reflection as integrative practice

In the past decade, an increasing set of digital tools has been developed with which digital sources can be selected, analyzed, and presented. Many tools go beyond key word search and perform different types of analysis, aggregation, mapping, and linking of data selections, which transforms materials and creates new perspectives, thereby changing the way scholars interact with and perceive their materials. These tools, together with the massive amount of digital and digitized data available for humanities research, put a strain on traditional humanities research methods. Currently, there is no established method of assessing the role of digital tools in the research trajectory of humanities scholars. There is no consensus on what questions researchers should ask themselves to evaluate digital sources beyond those of traditional analogue source criticism. This article aims to contribute to a better understanding of digital tools and the discussion of how to evaluate and incorporate them in research, based on findings from a digital tool criticism workshop held at the 2017 Digital Humanities Benelux conference. The overall goal of this article is to provide insight in the actual use and practice of digital tool criticism, offer a ready-made format for a workshop on digital tool criticism, give insight in aspects that play a role in digital tool criticism, propose an elaborate model for digital tool criticism that can be used as common ground for further conversations in the field, and finally, provide recommendations for future workshops, researchers, data custodians, and tool builders

Clinical implications of food-drug interactions with small-molecule kinase inhibitors

During the past two decades, small-molecule kinase inhibitors have proven to be valuable in the treatment of solid and haematological tumours. However, because of their oral administration, the intrapatient and interpatient exposure to small-molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) is highly variable and is affected by many factors, such as concomitant use of food and herbs. Food-drug interactions are capable of altering the systemic bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of these drugs. The most important mechanisms underlying food-drug interactions are gastrointestinal drug absorption and hepatic metabolism through cytochrome P450 isoenzymes. As food-drug interactions can lead to therapy failure or severe toxicity, knowledge of these interactions is essential. This Review provides a comprehensive overview of published studies involving food-drug interactions and herb-drug interactions for all registered SMKIs up to Oct 1, 2019. We critically discuss US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) guidelines concerning food-drug interactions and offer clear recommendations for their management in clinical practice

Report on the Second Workshop on Supporting Complex Search Tasks

There is broad consensus in the field of IR that search is complex in many use cases and applications, both on the Web and in domain-specific collections, and both in our professional and in our daily life. Yet our understanding of complex search tasks, in comparison to simple look up tasks, is fragmented at best. The workshop addressed many open research questions: What are the obvious use cases and applications of complex search? What are essential features of work tasks and search tasks to take into account? And how do these evolve over time? With a multitude of information, varying from introductory to specialized, and from authoritative to speculative or opinionated, when should which sources of information be shown? How does the information seeking process evolve and what are relevant differences between different stages? With complex task and search process management, blending searching, browsing, and recommendations, and supporting exploratory search to sensemaking and analytics, UI and UX design pose an overconstrained challenge. How do we know that our approach is any good? Supporting complex search tasks requires new collaborations across the whole field of IR, and the proposed workshop brought together a diverse group of researchers to work together on one of the greatest challenges of our field. The workshop featured three main elements. First, two keynotes, one on the complexity of meaningful interactive IR evaluation by Mark Hall and one on the types of search complexity encountered in real-world applications by Jussi Karlgren. Second, a lively boaster and poster session in which seven contributed papers were presented. Third, three breakout groups discussed concrete ideas on: (1) search context and tasks, (2) search process, and (3) evaluation of complex search tasks. There was an general feeling that the discussion made progress, and built new connections between related strands of research in IR

Collaboration Patterns and Impact of Sharing at CHIIR

We studied the collaboration patterns of CHIIR authors, and found that most papers are collaborative. A core of 33% of the CHIIR researchers are directly connected and frequently co-author, and several disconnected clusters also make frequent CHIIR contributions. We also studied citation impact of the CHIIR papers and show that in relation to research design type, theoretical and empirical papers tend to receive more citations than resource papers. With regards to sharing and re-use, papers that share at least one resource tend to have significantly higher citation impact—in particular when sharing data resources and design resources. Re-using resources does not significantly increase citation impact in itself

Collaboration Patterns and Impact of Sharing at CHIIR

We studied the collaboration patterns of CHIIR authors, and found that most papers are collaborative. A core of 33% of the CHIIR researchers are directly connected and frequently co-author, and several disconnected clusters also make frequent CHIIR contributions. We also studied citation impact of the CHIIR papers and show that in relation to research design type, theoretical and empirical papers tend to receive more citations than resource papers. With regards to sharing and re-use, papers that share at least one resource tend to have significantly higher citation impact - in particular when sharing data resources and design resources. Re-using resources does not significantly increase citation impact in itself.</p

Incidence and risk factors for early hypoglycemia in very preterm infants: The hyporisk study

Purpose: To determine incidence, timing and potential risk factors associated with hypoglycemia in the first day of life in very premature infants. Methods: Retrospective cohort study including all infants born before 32 weeks of gestation between 1 July 2017 and 31 December 2020 in the Erasmus MC Sophia Children's Hospital (Rotterdam, the Netherlands). Excluded were those who died within 24 h after birth or with no glucose data available. We collected maternal and neonatal characteristics from patient files, as well as all routine glucose values for the first 24 h. Hypoglycemia was defined as blood glucose value below 2.6 mmol/L. Risk factors were selected using univariable and multivariable logistic regression with stepwise backward elimination. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was performed to examine time-to-event after birth. Results: Of 714 infants included (median gestational age 29.3 weeks, mean weight 1200 g), 137 (19%) had at least one episode of hypoglycemia, with a median time-to-event of 126 min [95%-CI 105–216]. Relevant independent risk factors for hypoglycemia included two maternal (insulin-dependent diabetes [OR 2.8; 95%-CI 1.3–6.1]; antenatal steroid administration [OR 1.7, 95%-CI 1.1–2.7]), and four neonatal factors (no IV-access in delivery room [OR 6.1, 95% CI-3.2-11.7], gestational age in weeks [OR 1.3, 95% CI-1.2–1.5], small-for-gestational-age [OR 2.6, 95%-CI 1.4–4.8], and no respiratory support (versus non-invasive support) [OR 2.3, 95%-CI 1.0–5.3]). Conclusion: Six risk factors were identified for hypoglycemia in the first 24 h of life in very preterm infants, that can be used for development of prediction models, risk-based screening and updating guidelines