Magnetic topology of active regions and coronal holes: implications for coronal outflows and the solar wind

During 2-18 January 2008 a pair of low-latitude opposite-polarity coronal holes (CHs) were observed on the Sun with two active regions (ARs) and the heliospheric plasma sheet located between them. We use the Hinode/EUV Imaging Spectrometer (EIS) to locate AR-related outflows and measure their velocities. Solar-Terrestrial Relations Observatory (STEREO) imaging is also employed, as are the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE) in-situ observations, to assess the resulting impacts on the solar wind (SW) properties. Magnetic-field extrapolations of the two ARs confirm that AR plasma outflows observed with EIS are co-spatial with quasi-separatrix layer locations, including the separatrix of a null point. Global potential-field source-surface modeling indicates that field lines in the vicinity of the null point extend up to the source surface, enabling a part of the EIS plasma upflows access to the SW. We find that similar upflow properties are also observed within closed-field regions that do not reach the source surface. We conclude that some of plasma upflows observed with EIS remain confined along closed coronal loops, but that a fraction of the plasma may be released into the slow SW. This suggests that ARs bordering coronal holes can contribute to the slow SW. Analyzing the in-situ data, we propose that the type of slow SW present depends on whether the AR is fully or partially enclosed by an overlying streamer. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V

Leaders, leadership and future primary care clinical research

Background: A strong and self confident primary care workforce can deliver the highest quality care and outcomes equitably and cost effectively. To meet the increasing demands being made of it, primary care needs its own thriving research culture and knowledge base. Methods: Review of recent developments supporting primary care clinical research. Results: Primary care research has benefited from a small group of passionate leaders and significant investment in recent decades in some countries. Emerging from this has been innovation in research design and focus, although less is known of the effect on research output. Conclusion: Primary care research is now well placed to lead a broad re-vitalisation of academic medicine, answering questions of relevance to practitioners, patients, communities and Government. Key areas for future primary care research leaders to focus on include exposing undergraduates early to primary care research, integrating this early exposure with doctoral and postdoctoral research career support, further expanding cross disciplinary approaches, and developing useful measures of output for future primary care research investment

Atomistic characterization of the active-site solvation dynamics of a model photocatalyst

The interactions between the reactive excited state of molecular photocatalysts and surrounding solvent dictate reaction mechanisms and pathways, but are not readily accessible to conventional optical spectroscopic techniques. Here we report an investigation of the structural and solvation dynamics following excitation of a model photocatalytic molecular system [Ir-2(dimen)(4)](2+), where dimen is para-diisocyanomenthane. The time-dependent structural changes in this model photocatalyst, as well as the changes in the solvation shell structure, have been measured with ultrafast diffuse X-ray scattering and simulated with Born-Oppenheimer Molecular Dynamics. Both methods provide direct access to the solute-solvent pair distribution function, enabling the solvation dynamics around the catalytically active iridium sites to be robustly characterized. Our results provide evidence for the coordination of the iridium atoms by the acetonitrile solvent and demonstrate the viability of using diffuse X-ray scattering at free-electron laser sources for studying the dynamics of photocatalysis.1

Reporting of Adverse Events in Published and Unpublished Studies of Health Care Interventions : A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review to assess whether we can quantify the underreporting of adverse events (AEs) in the published medical literature documenting the results of clinical trials as compared with other nonpublished sources, and whether we can measure the impact this underreporting has on systematic reviews of adverse events. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Studies were identified from 15 databases (including MEDLINE and Embase) and by handsearching, reference checking, internet searches, and contacting experts. The last database searches were conducted in July 2016. There were 28 methodological evaluations that met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 9 studies compared the proportion of trials reporting adverse events by publication status. The median percentage of published documents with adverse events information was 46% compared to 95% in the corresponding unpublished documents. There was a similar pattern with unmatched studies, for which 43% of published studies contained adverse events information compared to 83% of unpublished studies. A total of 11 studies compared the numbers of adverse events in matched published and unpublished documents. The percentage of adverse events that would have been missed had each analysis relied only on the published versions varied between 43% and 100%, with a median of 64%. Within these 11 studies, 24 comparisons of named adverse events such as death, suicide, or respiratory adverse events were undertaken. In 18 of the 24 comparisons, the number of named adverse events was higher in unpublished than published documents. Additionally, 2 other studies demonstrated that there are substantially more types of adverse events reported in matched unpublished than published documents. There were 20 meta-analyses that reported the odds ratios (ORs) and/or risk ratios (RRs) for adverse events with and without unpublished data. Inclusion of unpublished data increased the precision of the pooled estimates (narrower 95% confidence intervals) in 15 of the 20 pooled analyses, but did not markedly change the direction or statistical significance of the risk in most cases. The main limitations of this review are that the included case examples represent only a small number amongst thousands of meta-analyses of harms and that the included studies may suffer from publication bias, whereby substantial differences between published and unpublished data are more likely to be published. CONCLUSIONS: There is strong evidence that much of the information on adverse events remains unpublished and that the number and range of adverse events is higher in unpublished than in published versions of the same study. The inclusion of unpublished data can also reduce the imprecision of pooled effect estimates during meta-analysis of adverse events

Implementation of a program for type 2 diabetes based on the Chronic Care Model in a hospital-centered health care system: "the Belgian experience"

Background: Most research publications on Chronic Care Model (CCM) implementation originate from organizations or countries with a well-structured primary health care system. Information about efforts made in countries with a less well-organized primary health care system is scarce. In 2003, the Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance commissioned a pilot study to explore how care for type 2 diabetes patients could be organized in a more efficient way in the Belgian healthcare setting, a setting where the organisational framework for chronic care is mainly hospital-centered. Methods: Process evaluation of an action research project (2003-2007) guided by the CCM in a well-defined geographical area with 76,826 inhabitants and an estimated number of 2,300 type 2 diabetes patients. In consultation with the region a program for type 2 diabetes patients was developed. The degree of implementation of the CCM in the region was assessed using the Assessment of Chronic Illness Care survey (ACIC). A multimethod approach was used to evaluate the implementation process. The resulting data were triangulated in order to identify the main facilitators and barriers encountered during the implementation process. Results: The overall ACIC score improved from 1.45 (limited support) at the start of the study to 5.5 (basic support) at the end of the study. The establishment of a local steering group and the appointment of a program manager were crucial steps in strengthening primary care. The willingness of a group of well-trained and motivated care providers to invest in quality improvement was an important facilitator. Important barriers were the complexity of the intervention, the lack of quality data, inadequate information technology support, the lack of commitment procedures and the uncertainty about sustainable funding. Conclusion: Guided by the CCM, this study highlights the opportunities and the bottlenecks for adapting chronic care delivery in a primary care system with limited structure. The study succeeded in achieving a considerable improvement of the overall support for diabetes patients but further improvement requires a shift towards system thinking among policy makers. Currently primary care providers lack the opportunities to take up full responsibility for chronic care