Evaluation of Esophageal Motility Utilizing the Functional Lumen Imaging Probe

© 2016 by the American College of Gastroenterology. Objectives:Esophagogastric junction (EGJ) distensibility and distension-mediated peristalsis can be assessed with the functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) during a sedated upper endoscopy. We aimed to describe esophageal motility assessment using FLIP topography in patients presenting with dysphagia.Methods:In all, 145 patients (aged 18-85 years, 54% female) with dysphagia that completed up per endoscopy with a 16-cm FLIP assembly and high-resolution manometry (HRM) were included. HRM was analyzed according to the Chicago Classification of esophageal motility disorders; major esophageal motility disorders were considered "abnormal". FLIP studies were analyzed using a customized program to calculate the EGJ-distensibility index (DI) and generate FLIP topography plots to identify esophageal contractility patterns. FLIP topography was considered "abnormal" if EGJ-DI was < 2.8 mm 2 /mm Hg or contractility pattern demonstrated absent contractility or repetitive, retrograde contractions.Results:HRM was abnormal in 111 (77%) patients: 70 achalasia (19 type I, 39 type II, and 12 type III), 38 EGJ outflow obstruction, and three jackhammer esophagus. FLIP topography was abnormal in 106 (95%) of these patients, including all 70 achalasia patients. HRM was "normal" in 34 (23%) patients: five ineffective esophageal motility and 29 normal motility. In all, 17 (50%) had abnormal FLIP topography including 13 (37%) with abnormal EGJ-DI.Conclusions:FLIP topography provides a well-tolerated method for esophageal motility assessment (especially to identify achalasia) at the time of upper endoscopy. FLIP topography findings that are discordant with HRM may indicate otherwise undetected abnormalities of esophageal function, thus FLIP provides an alternative and complementary method to HRM for evaluation of non-obstructive dysphagia.Link_to_subscribed_fulltex

University–industry linkages and academic engagements: individual behaviours and firms’ barriers. Introduction to the special section

The article introduces the special section on “University–industry linkages and academic engagements: Individual behaviours and firms’ barriers”. We first revisit the latest developments of the literature and policy interest on university–industry research. We then build upon the extant literature and unpack the concept of academic engagement by further exploring the heterogeneity of UI linkages along a set of dimensions and actors involved. These are: (1) Incentives and behaviours of individual academic entrepreneurs; (2) Firms’ barriers to cooperation with public research institutions; (3) Individual behaviours, incentives and organizational bottlenecks in late developing countries. We summarize the individual contributions along these dimensions. There are overlooked individual characteristics that affect the degree of engagement of academics and scholars in cooperating with other organizations, of which gender and the non-academic background of individuals are most crucial. The notion of academic engagement should be enlarged to aspects that go beyond the commercialization or patenting of innovation, but embrace social and economic impact more at large. From the perspective of the firm, barriers to innovation might exert an effect on the likelihood to cooperate with universities and public research institutes, most especially to cope with lack of finance or access to frontier knowledge. We finally propose a research agenda that addresses the challenges ahead

Using Affiliation Networks to Study the Determinants of Multilateral Research Cooperation Some empirical evidence from EU Framework Programs in biotechnology

This paper studies multilateral cooperation networks among organizations and work on a two-mode representation to study the decision to participate in a consortium. Our objective is to explain the underlying processes that give rise to multilateral collaboration networks. Particularly, we are interested in how heterogeneity in organizations' attributes plays a part and in the geographical dimension of this formation process. We use the data on project proposals submitted to the 7th Framework Program (FP) in the area of Life sciences, Biotechnology and Biochemistry for Sustainable Non-Food. We employ exponential random graph models (p* models) (Frank and Strauss, 1986 ; Wasserman and Pattison, 1996) with node attributes (Agneessens et al., 2004), and we make use of extensions for affiliation networks (Wang et al., 2009). These models do not only enable handling variability in consortium sizes but also relax the assumption on tie/triad independence. We obtained some preliminary results indicating institutional types as a source of heterogeneity affecting participation decisions. Also, these initial results point out that organizations take their potential partners' participations in other projects into account in giving their decision ; organizations located in the core European countries tend to participate in the same project ; the tendency to preserve the composition of a consortium across projects and the tendency of organizations with the same institutional type to co-participate are not significant

Proximity Dimensions and Scientific Collaboration among Academic Institutions in Europe: The Closer, the Better?

The main objective of this paper is to examine the effect of various proximity dimensions (geographical, cognitive, institutional, organizational, social and economic) on academic scientific collaborations (SC). The data to capture SC consists of a set of co-authored articles published between 2006 and 2010 by universities located in EU-15, indexed by the Science Citation Index (SCI Expanded) of the ISI Web of Science database. We link this data to institution-level information provided by the EUMIDA dataset. Our final sample consists of 240,495 co-authored articles from 690 European universities that featured in both datasets. Additionally, we also retrieved data on regional R&D funding from Eurostat. Based on the gravital equation, we estimate several econometrics models using aggregated data from all disciplines as well as separated data for Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Life Sciences and Physics & Astronomy. Our results provide evidence on the substantial role of geographical, cognitive, institutional, social and economic distance in shaping scientific collaboration, while the effect of organizational proximity seems to be weaker. Some differences on the relevance of these factors arise at discipline level