Evaluation of techniques for on-farm monitoring of percolation and irrigation system performance

Efficient use of water in agricultural production involves accurate assessment and control of the quantity and spatial uniformity of excess percolation. Passive Capillary Samplers (PCAPS), which sample water from the vadose zone have shown potential to provide superior estimates of soil water flux compared to alternative methods. In a four-year study, 42 PCAPS installed in 21 commercial agricultural fields in Lane County, OR, USA were monitored monthly to evaluate their operational characteristics and ability to estimate soil solution flux. The PCAPS showed little evidence of technical failure, with only two of the 42 installed samplers found to operate inefficiently. Installation of 10 of the 42 samplers in locations susceptible to high or perched water tables resulted in submersion of the samplers, rendering them inoperable. On average, the PCAPS measured soil water flux 25% greater than that obtained from a water balance estimate. This discrepancy was attributed to a possible inaccuracy in water balance evapotranspiration estimates, along with a violation of the PCAPS design assumptions which suggests over-sampling would occur in the presence of high water tables. Analysis of the PCAPS collection ability indicates that to estimate the mean yearly recharge at each site with a 30% bound on the mean at the 0.05 confidence level, eight PCAPS are required. This number corresponds closely to the results of Brandi-Dohrn et al. (1996a) and is thought to be due to intrinsic variability of percolation. Spatial uniformity in irrigation water application is essential to reducing excess percolation. Twelve sprinkler irrigation systems used under commercial crop production in Lane County, OR were evaluated for equipment wear and performance. Field measurements of sprinkler nozzle size and discharge rate were recorded for each system and used to estimate water application patterns. New sprinkler nozzles were installed on six of the 12 irrigation systems to compare potential application rate and uniformity with existing system performance. Despite reducing the coefficient of variation in discharge between sprinklers from 10% to 2%, little increase in water application uniformity was attained by replacing the nozzles. A 13% decrease in mean water application rate was documented when new nozzles replaced worn parts. The over-application due to worn or mismatched nozzles gives rise to the potential for increased surface redistribution and deep percolation, resulting in water and nutrient losses

Effect of alirocumab on lipids and lipoproteins in individuals with metabolic syndrome without diabetes: Pooled data from 10 phase 3 trials.

AimsThis analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitor, in patients with or without metabolic syndrome (MetS) using pooled data from 10 phase 3 ODYSSEY trials.Materials and methodsData from 4983 randomized patients (1940 with MetS; 1642 with diabetes excluded) were assessed in subgroups by MetS status. Efficacy data were analysed in 4 pools per study design: 2 placebo-controlled pools (1 using alirocumab 150 mg every 2 weeks [Q2W], 1 using 75/150 mg Q2W) with background statin, and 2 ezetimibe-controlled pools (both alirocumab 75/150 mg Q2W), 1 with and 1 without background statin. Alirocumab 75/150 mg indicates possible dose increase from 75 to 150 mg at Week 12 based on Week 8 LDL-C.ResultsLDL-C percentage reduction from baseline at Week 24 with alirocumab was 63.9% (MetS) and 56.8% (non-MetS) in the pool of alirocumab 150 mg Q2W, and 42.2% to 52.2% (MetS) and 45.0% to 52.6% (non-MetS) in 3 pools using 75/150 mg Q2W. Levels of other lipid and lipoprotein parameters were also improved with alirocumab treatment, including apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), lipoprotein(a) and HDL-C. Overall, the percentage change at Week 24 in LDL-C and other lipids and lipoproteins did not vary by MetS status. Adverse event rates were generally similar between treatment groups, regardless of MetS status; injection-site reactions occurred more frequently in alirocumab vs control groups.ConclusionsAcross study pools, alirocumab-associated reductions in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, and non-HDL-C were significant vs control, and did not vary by MetS status

Statin use and adverse effects among adults \u3e 75 years of age: Insights from the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry

Background: Current statin use and symptoms among older adults in routine community practice have not been well characterized since the release of the 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline. Methods and results: We compared statin use and dosing between adults \u3e75 and ≤75 years old who were eligible for primary or secondary prevention statin use without considering guideline-recommended age criteria. The patients were treated at 138 US practices in the Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management (PALM) registry in 2015. Patient surveys also evaluated reported symptoms while taking statins. Multivariable logistic regression models examined the association between older age and statin use and dosing. Among 6717 people enrolled, 1704 (25%) were \u3e75 years old. For primary prevention, use of any statin or high-dose statin did not vary by age group: any statin, 62.6% in those \u3e75 years old versus 63.1% in those ≤75 years old (P=0.83); high-dose statin, 10.2% versus 12.3% in the same groups (P=0.14). For secondary prevention, older patients were slightly less likely to receive any statin (80.1% versus 84.2% [P=0.003]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.01 [P=0.06]), but were much less likely to receive a high-intensity statin (23.5% versus 36.2% [PP=0.0001]). Among current statin users, older patients were slightly less likely to report any symptoms (41.3% versus 46.6%; P=0.003) or myalgias (27.3% versus 33.3%; Conclusions: Overall use of statins was similar for primary prevention in those aged \u3e75 years versus younger patients, yet older patients were less likely to receive high-intensity statins for secondary prevention. Statins appear to be similarly tolerated in older and younger adult

Patient-reported reasons for declining or discontinuing statin therapy: Insights from the PALM registry

Background: Many adults eligible for statin therapy for cardiovascular disease prevention are untreated. Our objective was to investigate patient‐reported reasons for statin underutilization, including noninitiation, refusal, and discontinuation.Methods and Results: This study included the 5693 adults recommended for statin therapy in the PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry. Patient surveys evaluated statin experience, reasons for declining or discontinuing statins, and beliefs about statins and cardiovascular disease risk. Overall, 1511 of 5693 adults (26.5%) were not on treatment. Of those not on a statin, 894 (59.2%) reported never being offered a statin, 153 (10.1%) declined a statin, and 464 (30.7%) had discontinued therapy. Women (relative risk: 1.22), black adults (relative risk: 1.48), and those without insurance (relative risk: 1.38) were most likely to report never being offered a statin. Fear of side effects and perceived side effects were the most common reasons cited for declining or discontinuing a statin. Compared with statin users, those who declined or discontinued statins were less likely to believe statins are safe (70.4% of current users vs. 36.9% of those who declined and 37.4% of those who discontinued) or effective (86.3%, 67.4%, and 69.1%, respectively). Willingness to take a statin was high; 67.7% of those never offered and 59.7% of patients who discontinued a statin would consider initiating or retrying a statin.Conclusions: More than half of patients eligible for statin therapy but not on treatment reported never being offered one by their doctor. Concern about side effects was the leading reason for statin refusal or discontinuation. Many patients were willing to reconsider statin therapy if offered

Effect of Alirocumab on Lipoprotein(a) Over ≥1.5 Years (from the Phase 3 ODYSSEY Program)

Elevated lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is independently associated with increased cardiovascular risk. However, treatment options for elevated Lp(a) are limited. Alirocumab, a monoclonal antibody to proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) by up to 62% from baseline in phase 3 studies, with adverse event rates similar between alirocumab and controls. We evaluated the effect of alirocumab on serum Lp(a) using pooled data from the phase 3 ODYSSEY program: 4,915 patients with hypercholesterolemia from 10 phase 3 studies were included. Eight studies evaluated alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (Q2W), with possible increase to 150 mg Q2W at week 12 depending on LDL-C at week 8 (75/150 mg Q2W); the other 2 studies evaluated alirocumab 150-mg Q2W from the outset. Comparators were placebo or ezetimibe. Eight studies were conducted on a background of statins, and 2 studies were carried out with no statins. Alirocumab was associated with significant reductions in Lp(a), regardless of starting dose and use of concomitant statins. At week 24, reductions from baseline were 23% to 27% with alirocumab 75/150-mg Q2W and 29% with alirocumab 150-mg Q2W (all comparisons p <0.0001 vs controls). Reductions were sustained over 78 to 104 weeks. Lp(a) reductions with alirocumab were independent of race, gender, presence of familial hypercholesterolemia, baseline Lp(a), and LDL-C concentrations, or use of statins. In conclusion, in addition to marked reduction in LDL-C, alirocumab leads to a significant and sustained lowering of Lp(a)

Women on Boards of Philippine Publicly Traded Firms: Does Gender Diversity Affect Corporate Risk-Taking Behavior?

The idea that more women belong on corporate boards is attracting increased attention around the world. Some scholars argue that gender diversity on boards improves firm performance and induces more prudent corporate decision-making. This rationale is based on the hypothesis that women are less overconfident and are innately more risk-averse than men. Alternatively, other researchers argue that firms having more female directors are associated with greater corporate risk-taking as the profile of women making it to the board level has proven to be open to greater challenges and risks. Still another strand of literature argues that risk-aversion does not vary between homogeneously male boards and more gender-diverse boards. Thus, in this paper, we report results for our examination of the relationship between board diversity for Philippine firms on corporate risk-taking over the period 2003 to 2015. We use four alternative measures to proxy for corporate risk-taking and employ the two-step Blundell-Bond System Generalized Method of Moments estimation technique to account for endogeneity issues that may influence this relationship. Our findings show that we cannot definitively conclude that the relationship between board diversity and corporate risk-taking is negative. This suggests that the case for greater gender diversity on Philippine corporate boards should be based on fairness, social, and moral considerations, and not to try to improve the level of corporate risk-taking

What is the effect of a decision aid in potentially vulnerable parents? Insights from the head CT choice randomized trial.

ObjectiveTo test the hypotheses that use of the Head CT Choice decision aid would be similarly effective in all parent/patient dyads but parents with high (vs low) numeracy experience a greater increase in knowledge while those with low (vs high) health literacy experience a greater increase in trust.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial conducted at seven sites. One hundred seventy-two clinicians caring for 971 children at intermediate risk for clinically important traumatic brain injuries were randomized to shared decision making facilitated by the DA (n = 493) or to usual care (n = 478). We assessed for subgroup effects based on patient and parent characteristics, including socioeconomic status (health literacy, numeracy and income). We tested for interactions using regression models with indicators for arm assignment and study site.ResultsThe decision aid did not increase knowledge more in parents with high numeracy (P for interaction [Pint ] = 0.14) or physician trust more in parents with low health literacy (Pint  = 0.34). The decision aid decreased decisional conflict more in non-white parents (decisional conflict scale, -8.14, 95% CI: -12.33 to -3.95; Pint  = 0.05) and increased physician trust more in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents (trust in physician scale, OR: 8.59, 95% CI: 2.35-14.83; Pint  = 0.04).ConclusionsUse of the Head CT Choice decision aid resulted in less decisional conflict in non-white parents and greater physician trust in socioeconomically disadvantaged parents. Decision aids may be particularly effective in potentially vulnerable parents

Measurement of low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in primary and secondary prevention patients: Insights from the PALM registry

Background The 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guideline on the Treatment of Blood Cholesterol to Reduce Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Risk in Adults recommended testing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ( LDL -C) to identify untreated patients with LDL -C ≥190 mg/dL, assess lipid-lowering therapy adherence, and consider nonstatin therapy. We sought to determine whether clinician lipid testing practices were consistent with these guidelines. Methods and Results The PALM (Patient and Provider Assessment of Lipid Management) registry enrolled primary and secondary prevention patients from 140 US cardiology, endocrinology, and primary care offices in 2015 and captured demographic data, lipid treatment history, and the highest LDL -C level in the past 2 years. Core laboratory lipid levels were drawn at enrollment. Among 7627 patients, 2787 (36.5%) had no LDL -C levels measured in the 2 years before enrollment. Patients without chart-documented LDL -C levels were more often women, nonwhite, uninsured, and non-college graduates (all P\u3c0.01). Patients without prior lipid testing were less likely to receive statin treatment (72.6% versus 76.0%; P=0.0034), a high-intensity statin (21.5% versus 24.3%; P=0.016), nonstatin lipid-lowering therapy (24.8% versus 27.3%; P=0.037), and had higher core laboratory LDL -C levels at enrollment (median 97 versus 92 mg/dL; P\u3c0.0001) than patients with prior LDL -C testing. Of 166 individuals with core laboratory LDL -C levels ≥190 mg/dL, 36.1% had no LDL -C measurement in the prior 2 years, and 57.2% were not on a statin at the time of enrollment. Conclusions In routine clinical practice, LDL -C testing is associated with higher-intensity lipid-lowering treatment and lower achieved LDL -C level