Battalion leadership in the Essex Scottish Regiment and the 4th Canadian Infantry Brigade during the Second World War

This thesis project began with the general idea of examining leadership at the battalion level in the Canadian Army during the First World War. After having been brought to my attention some time later, the Essex Scottish Regiment during the Second World War piqued my interest. This unit received the highest number of casualties of any Canadian unit throughout the Second World War, yet I had not heard or read anything significant about it. I had read gallant histories of the Royal Hamilton Light Infantry and the Black Watch, of the Regina Rifles and the Calgary Highlanders; none of these units, however, had experienced either the level of casualties or the level of historiographical poverty that the Essex had. Indeed, the Essex Scots had a head start on most other Canadian units by the beginning of the Normandy Campaign, in terms of casualties, since they had landed on the main beaches of Dieppe with their sister battalions the Royal Hamilton Light Infantry (RHLI or Rileys) and the Royal Regiment of Canada (RRC or Royals), who landed at Puys. I found myself asking what it was about the Essex Scots that made them lose so many men. Why was it that this particular regiment, that had so often been committed to battle alongside its more successful sister battalions, suffered more than another? What factors can account for the varied battlefield performance of the three regiments that constituted the 4th Canadian Infantry Brigade? Was it leadership, circumstance, luck, or something else? Consequently, the original idea of examining leadership at the battalion level became subsumed in this myriad of possibilities

Management of asymptomatic, well-differentiated PNETs: results of the Delphi consensus process of the Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.

BACKGROUND: Variation in the management of PNETs exist due to the limited high-level evidence to guide clinical practice. The aim of this work is to generate consensus guidelines with a Delphi process for managing PNETs. METHODS: A panel of experts reviewed the surgical literature and scored a set of clinical case statements using a web-based survey to identify areas of agreement and disagreement. Results of the survey were discussed after each round of review. This cycle was repeated until no further likelihood of reaching consensus existed. RESULTS: Twenty-two case statements related to surgical indications, preoperative biopsy, extent of resection, type of surgery, and tumor location were scored. Using a pre-defined definition of consensus, the panel achieved consensus on the following: i) resection is not recommended forlesions; ii) resection is recommended for lesions greater than 2 cm; iii) lymph node dissection is recommended for radiographically-suspicious nodes with splenectomy for distal lesions; iv) tumor enucleation and central pancreatectomy are acceptable when technically feasible. No consensus was reached regarding issues of preoperative biopsy or 1-2 cm tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Using a structured, validated system for identifying consensus, an expert panel identified areas of agreement regarding critical management decisions for patients with PNET. Issues without consensus warrant additional clinical investigation