Contaduría pública: su importancia en la toma de decisiones empresariales

La Contaduría Pública es aquel estudio basado en analizar todo lo relacionado con el seguimiento financiero de instituciones públicas, ya sean escuelas, hospitales, cárceles, entre otras, en este artículo se expondrá la relevancia de la Contaduría Pública, referentes que apoyan su necesidad para la toma de decisiones y cómo se percibe en la actualidad, metodológicamente se hizo buscando bases de datos e investigaciones, por lo que el artículo es de carácter cualitativo, enmarcado en la epistemología de las ciencias sociales, específicamente la económica y con énfasis en la Contaduría, por lo que se encontró que cuando se trata de realizar tratos o negocios con otras entidades, sirve la profesión del Contador Público para la toma de decisiones es lo que va a determinar si trae rentabilidad, éxitos o en su defecto perdidas a las empresas

CHLSOC: the Chilean Soil Organic Carbon database, a multi-institutional collaborative effort

A critical aspect of predicting soil organic carbon (SOC) concentrations is the lack of available soil information; where information on soil characteristics is available, it is usually focused on regions of high agricultural interest. To date, in Chile, a large proportion of the SOC data have been collected in areas of intensive agricultural or forestry use; however, vast areas beyond these forms of land use have few or no soil data available. Here we present a new SOC database for the country, which is the result of an unprecedented national effort under the framework of the Global Soil Partnership. This partnership has helped build the largest database of SOC to date in Chile, named the Chilean Soil Organic Carbon database (CHLSOC), comprising 13 612 data points compiled from numerous sources, including unpublished and difficult-to-access data. The database will allow users to fill spatial gaps where no SOC estimates were publicly available previously. Presented values of SOC range from 6 x 10(-5) % to 83.3 %, reflecting the variety of ecosystems that exist in Chile. The database has the potential to inform and test current models that predict SOC stocks and dynamics at larger spatial scales, thus enabling benefits from the richness of geochemical, topographic and climatic variability in Chile.Comision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT) CONICYT FONDECYT 11160372 Convenio CONAF-UDeC 2015 Perturbaciones Araucaria ERANet-LAC joint program ELAC2014/DCC-0092 Comision Nacional de Investigacion Cientifica y Tecnologica (CONICYT) CONICYT FONDECYT 1161492 Global Soil Partnership - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) South America Soil Partnership - Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO

Diagnosis and antimicrobial treatment of invasive infections due to multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Guidelines of the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology

<p>The spread of multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae related to the production of extended-spectrum β-lactamases and carbapenemases is a serious public health problem worldwide. Microbiological diagnosis and therapy of these infections are challenging and controversial. Clinically relevant questions were selected and the literature was reviewed for each of them. The information from the selected articles was extracted and recommendations were provided and graded according to the strength of the recommendations and quality of the evidence. The document was opened to comments from the members from the Spanish Society of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, which were considered for inclusion in the final version. Evidence-based recommendations are provided for the use of microbiological techniques for the detection of extended-spectrum β-lactamases and carbapenemases in Enterobacteriaceae, and for antibiotic therapy for invasive/severe infections caused by these organisms. The absence of randomised controlled trials is noteworthy; thus, recommendations are mainly based on observational studies (that have important methodological limitations), pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics models, and data from animal studies. Additionally, areas for future research were identified.</p&gt

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health