Alien Registration- Messecar, Bessie Y. (Madawaska, Aroostook County)

https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/35409/thumbnail.jp

Book reviews

Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/43527/1/11116_2004_Article_BF00172656.pd

Cost-effectiveness of MRI compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in a high risk population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a sensitive method of breast imaging virtually uninfluenced by breast density. Because of the improved sensitivity, breast MRI is increasingly being used for detection of breast cancer among high risk young women. However, the specificity of breast MRI is variable and costs are high. The purpose of this study was to determine if breast MRI is a cost-effective approach for the detection of breast cancer among young women at high risk.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Markov model was created to compare annual breast cancer screening over 25 years with either breast MRI or mammography among young women at high risk. Data from published studies provided probabilities for the model including sensitivity and specificity of each screening strategy. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates for hospital and physician services while medication costs were obtained from the Federal Supply Scale. Utilities from the literature were applied to each health outcome in the model including a disutility for the temporary health state following breast biopsy for a false positive test result. All costs and benefits were discounted at 5% per year. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective with results reported in 2006 U.S. dollars. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in all model parameters.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Breast MRI provided 14.1 discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a discounted cost of $18,167 while mammography provided 14.0 QALYs at a cost of$4,760 over 25 years of screening. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of breast MRI compared to mammography was $179,599/QALY. In univariate analysis, breast MRI screening became <$50,000/QALY when the cost of the MRI was < $315. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MRI screening produced a net health benefit of -0.202 QALYs (95$50,000/QALY. Breast MRI screening was superior in 0%, < $50,000/QALY in 22$50,000/QALY in 34%, and inferior in 44% of trials.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although breast MRI may provide health benefits when compared to mammographic screening for some high risk women, it does not appear to be cost-effective even at willingness to pay thresholds above $120,000/QALY.</p

Occupational advice for Patients undergoing Arthroplasty of the Lower limb: An intervention development and feasibility study (The OPAL Study)

Background Hip and knee replacements are regularly performed for patients who work. There is little evidence about these patients’ needs and the factors influencing their return to work. There is a paucity of guidance to help patients return to work after surgery and a need for structured occupational advice to enable them to return to work safely and effectively. Objective(s) To develop an occupational advice intervention to support early recovery to usual activities including work which is tailored to the requirements of patients undergoing hip and knee replacements. To test the acceptability, practicality and feasibility of this intervention within current care frameworks Design An intervention mapping (IM) approach was used to develop the intervention. The research methods employed were: rapid evidence synthesis; qualitative interviews with patients and stakeholders; prospective cohort study; survey of clinical practice; modified Delphi consensus process. The developed intervention was implemented and assessed during the final feasibility stage of the IM process. Setting Orthopaedic departments within NHS secondary care. Participants Patients in work, and intending to return to work following primary elective hip and knee replacement surgery; healthcare professionals and employers. Interventions Occupational advice intervention. Main outcome measures Development of an occupational advice intervention. Fidelity of the developed intervention when delivered in a clinical setting. Patient and clinician perspectives of the intervention. Preliminary assessments of intervention effectiveness and cost. Results A cohort study (154 patients), 110 stakeholder interviews, survey of practice (152 respondents) and evidence synthesis provided the necessary information to develop the intervention. The intervention included information resources, personalized return to work plan and co-ordination from the healthcare team to support the delivery of 13 patient and 20 staff performance objectives (POs). To support delivery, a range of tools (e.g. occupational checklists, patient workbooks, employer information), roles (e.g. return-to-work coordinator) and training resources were created. Feasibility was assessed in 21 of the 26 patients recruited from 3 NHS trusts. Adherence with the defined performance objectives was 75% for patient POs and 74% for staff POs. The intervention was generally well received although the short timeframe available for implementation and concurrent research evaluation led to some confusion amongst patients and those delivering the intervention regarding its purpose and the roles and responsibilities of key staff. Limitations Implementation and uptake of the intervention was not standardized and was limited by the study timeframe. Evaluation of the intervention involved a small number of patients which limited the ability to assess it. Conclusions The developed occupational advice intervention supports best practice. Evaluation demonstrated good rates of adherence against defined performance objectives. However, a number of operational and implementation issues require further attention Future work The intervention warrants a randomised controlled trial to assess its clinical and cost effectiveness to improve rates and timing of sustained return to work after surgery. This research should include the development of a robust implementation strategy to ensure adoption is sustained. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 15/28/02) Trial Registrations International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number Trial ID: ISRCTN27426982 International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) Registration: CRD4201604523

The reading interests of high school pupils in New Mexico

This item was digitized from a paper original and/or a microfilm copy. If you need higher-resolution images for any content in this item, please contact us at [email protected]

A Still and Quiet Soul - Embracing Contentment

Schedules, stress and strife can quickly spiral out of control leaving you frustrated and exhausted. But God wants more for you. He wants you to be content

AndrewMessecar/PAMBE_Nitrides_Random_Forests: Machine learning–based investigation of optimal synthesis parameters for epitaxially–grown III–nitride semiconductors

&lt;p&gt;Release generated to cite the repository in the manuscript titled &quot;Machine learning–based investigation of optimal synthesis parameters for epitaxially–grown III–nitride semiconductors&quot;. &quot;Data&quot; directory has been updated with the revision of the &quot;GaN Lattice Disorder.csv&quot; file.&lt;/p&gt

AndrewMessecar/PAMBE_Nitrides_Random_Forests: Machine learning–based investigation of optimal synthesis parameters for epitaxially–grown III–nitride semiconductors

&lt;p&gt;Release generated to cite the repository in the manuscript titled &quot;Machine learning–based investigation of optimal synthesis parameters for epitaxially–grown III–nitride semiconductors&quot;. Additional Python 3 scripts have been added for the training and usage of random forest ensemble machine learning algorithms to predict a processing space of two axes: one of radio frequency (RF) plasma power level and the other of substrate (growth) temperature values.&lt;/p&gt

Alien Registration- Messecar, Bessie Y. (Madawaska, Aroostook County)

https://digitalmaine.com/alien_docs/35409/thumbnail.jp

Winning Every Woman\u27s War

Defeating Temptations Monday9-9:45amBSB 11