Kommunikation i paradis : Naja Marie Aidt: 'Den blomstrende have' (1993)

文学・文化篇/論

Hvorfor kom N. F. S. Grundtvig ikke i Viborg Latinskole?

Why did N. F. S. Grundtvig not go to the Grammar School in Viborg? By F. Paludan-Miiller. N. F. S. Grundtvig had three elder brothers, who all became clergymen like himself. These brothers were: 1) Otto Grundtvig (1772—1833), who entered the University in 1789 from Herlufsholm boarding-school in South Sjaelland and afterwards was a clergyman on the island of Falster and subsequently in the vicinity of Copenhagen; 2) Jacob Ulrich Hansen Grundtvig (1775—1800), who entered the University from Viborg Grammar School in 1795 and died as a clergyman in the Danish colony on the Guinea Coast; 3) Niels Christian Bang Grundtvig (1777—1803), who also entered the University from Viborg, in 1796, and also died as a clergyman on the Guinea Coast. Both these elder brothers who were nearest in age to N. F. S. Gr. were prepared as private pupils for some years by Pastor L. Feld before they were sent to the Grammar School in Viborg. N. F. S. Grundtvig, too, was taught as a private pupil, from his ninth to his fifteenth year, by Pastor Feld (who at that time was a clergyman at Thyregod in the middle of Jutland). Strangely enough, he was afterwards sent to the Latin School in Aarhus, and not to Viborg as one would naturally have expected. The reason for this may perhaps be found in the behaviour of his elder brothers as students at Viborg Grammar School, for its records show that their careers at the school were not very successful. Jacob was a stubborn character and not a very diligent student. In 1794 he and another boy attacked some of their fellow-pupils during a game of ball, and he was subsequently reprimanded in front of the whole school, and very nearly sent down. But he promised to turn over a new leaf, and remained at the school, which he left in 1795 after doing badly in his final examination. Niels also showed a lack of diligence, and, in consequence of this, was a »private pupil« during his last two years at school, which at that time meant, among other things, that the school took no responsibility for him as a student. However, he did very well in his final examination in 1796. — Presumably it was these circumstances which caused the family to decide to send the youngest brother (N. F. S. Grundtvig) to Aarhus

Danish Archaeology in the 1980's - beyond theoretical poverty?

Danish Archaeology in the 1980's - beyond theoretical poverty

Impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials:meta-epidemiological study

International audienceAbstract Objectives To study the impact of blinding on estimated treatment effects, and their variation between trials; differentiating between blinding of patients, healthcare providers, and observers; detection bias and performance bias; and types of outcome (the MetaBLIND study). Design Meta-epidemiological study. Data source Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2013-14). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Meta-analyses with both blinded and non-blinded trials on any topic. Review methods Blinding status was retrieved from trial publications and authors, and results retrieved automatically from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Bayesian hierarchical models estimated the average ratio of odds ratios (ROR), and estimated the increases in heterogeneity between trials, for non-blinded trials (or of unclear status) versus blinded trials. Secondary analyses adjusted for adequacy of concealment of allocation, attrition, and trial size, and explored the association between outcome subjectivity (high, moderate, low) and average bias. An ROR lower than 1 indicated exaggerated effect estimates in trials without blinding. Results The study included 142 meta-analyses (1153 trials). The ROR for lack of blinding of patients was 0.91 (95% credible interval 0.61 to 1.34) in 18 meta-analyses with patient reported outcomes, and 0.98 (0.69 to 1.39) in 14 meta-analyses with outcomes reported by blinded observers. The ROR for lack of blinding of healthcare providers was 1.01 (0.84 to 1.19) in 29 meta-analyses with healthcare provider decision outcomes (eg, readmissions), and 0.97 (0.64 to 1.45) in 13 meta-analyses with outcomes reported by blinded patients or observers. The ROR for lack of blinding of observers was 1.01 (0.86 to 1.18) in 46 meta-analyses with subjective observer reported outcomes, with no clear impact of degree of subjectivity. Information was insufficient to determine whether lack of blinding was associated with increased heterogeneity between trials. The ROR for trials not reported as double blind versus those that were double blind was 1.02 (0.90 to 1.13) in 74 meta-analyses. Conclusion No evidence was found for an average difference in estimated treatment effect between trials with and without blinded patients, healthcare providers, or outcome assessors. These results could reflect that blinding is less important than often believed or meta-epidemiological study limitations, such as residual confounding or imprecision. At this stage, replication of this study is suggested and blinding should remain a methodological safeguard in trials

Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials:Overview of published comments and analysis of user practice in Cochrane and non-Cochrane reviews

Appendices - Evaluation of the Cochrane tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized clinical trials. (DOCX 229 kb

En Skuespiller. Nicolai Neiiendams erindringsblade. (Selskabet for Dansk Teaterhistorie, 1991). 191 s.

-

Hanne Engberg: En kærlighedshistorie. Maria og Orla Lehmann 1843-49. 1991). 361 s.

-