LDR structural experiment definition

A study was performed to develop the definition of a structural flight experiment for a large precision segmented reflector that would utilize the Space Station. The objective of the study was to use the Large Deployable Reflector (LDR) baseline configuration for focusing on experiment definition activity which would identify the Space Station accommodation requirements and interface constraints. Results of the study defined three Space Station based experiments to demonstrate the technologies needed for an LDR type structure. The basic experiment configurations are the same as the JPL baseline except that the primary mirror truss is 10 meters in diameter instead of 20. The primary objectives of the first experiment are to construct the primary mirror support truss and to determine its structural and thermal characteristics. Addition of the optical bench, thermal shield and primary mirror segments and alignment of the optical components occur on the second experiment. The structure will then be moved to the payload pointing system for pointing, optical control and scientific optical measurement for the third experiment

Space structure (dynamics and control) theme development

A study was made to define the long-range technical objectives and goals for the Space Structure (Dynamics and Control) theme area. The approach was to evaluate ongoing and proposed technology activities such that the technology gaps and voids could be identified. After the technology needs were identified, a set of recommended experimental activities was defined including the technical objectives of each and their relationship

Baryon Magnetic Moments in Alternate 1/N_c Expansions

Recent work shows not only the necessity of a 1/N_c expansion to explain the observed mass spectrum of the lightest baryons, but also that at least two distinct large N_c expansions, in which quarks transform under either the color fundamental or the two-index antisymmetric representation of SU(N_c), work comparably well. Here we show that the baryon magnetic moments do not support this ambivalence; they strongly prefer the color-fundamental 1/N_c expansion, providing experimental evidence that nature decisively distinguishes among 1/N_c expansions for this observable.Comment: 18 pages, ReVTe

Pharmacogenetics of ophthalmic topical β-blockers

Glaucoma is the second leading cause of blindness worldwide. The primary glaucoma risk factor is elevated intraocular pressure. Topical β-blockers are affordable and widely used to lower intraocular pressure. Genetic variability has been postulated to contribute to interpersonal differences in efficacy and safety of topical β-blockers. This review summarizes clinically significant polymorphisms that have been identified in the β-adrenergic receptors (ADRB1, ADRB2 and ADRB3). The implications of polymorphisms in CYP2D6 are also discussed. Although the candidate-gene approach has facilitated significant progress in our understanding of the genetic basis of glaucoma treatment response, most drug responses involve a large number of genes, each containing multiple polymorphisms. Genome-wide association studies may yield a more comprehensive set of polymorphisms associated with glaucoma outcomes. An understanding of the genetic mechanisms associated with variability in individual responses to topical β-blockers may advance individualized treatment at a lower cost

Definition of common support equipment and space station interface requirements for IOC model technology experiments

A study was conducted to identify the common support equipment and Space Station interface requirements for the IOC (initial operating capabilities) model technology experiments. In particular, each principal investigator for the proposed model technology experiment was contacted and visited for technical understanding and support for the generation of the detailed technical backup data required for completion of this study. Based on the data generated, a strong case can be made for a dedicated technology experiment command and control work station consisting of a command keyboard, cathode ray tube, data processing and storage, and an alert/annunciator panel located in the pressurized laboratory

Stakeholder views on publication bias in health services research

Objectives: While the presence of publication bias in clinical research is well documented, little is known about its role in the reporting of health services research. This paper explores stakeholder perceptions and experiences with regard to the role of publication and related biases in quantitative research relating to the quality, accessibility and organization of health services. Methods: We present findings from semi-structured interviews with those responsible for the funding, publishing and/or conduct of quantitative health services research, primarily in the UK. Additional data collection includes interviews with health care decision makers as ‘end users’ of health services research, and a focus group with patient and service user representatives. The final sample comprised 24 interviews and eight focus group participants. Results: Many study participants felt unable to say with any degree of certainty whether publication bias represents a significant problem in quantitative health services research. Participants drew broad contrasts between externally funded and peer reviewed research on the one hand, and end user funded quality improvement projects on the other, with the latter perceived as more vulnerable to selective publication and author over-claiming. Multiple study objectives, and a general acceptance of ‘mess and noise’ in the data and its interpretation was seen to reduce the importance attached to replicable estimates of effect sizes in health services research. The relative absence of external scrutiny, either from manufacturers of interventions or health system decision makers, added to this general sense of ‘low stakes’ of health services research. As a result, while many participants advocated study pre-registration and using protocols to pre-identify outcomes, others saw this as an unwarranted imposition. Conclusions: This study finds that incentives towards publication and related bias are likely to be present, but not to the same degree as in clinical research. In health services research, these were seen as being offset by other forms of ‘novelty’ bias in the reporting and publishing of research findings

Assessment of publication bias and outcome reporting bias in systematic reviews of health services and delivery research:A meta-epidemiological study

Strategies to identify and mitigate publication bias and outcome reporting bias are frequently adopted in systematic reviews of clinical interventions but it is not clear how often these are applied in systematic reviews relating to quantitative health services and delivery research (HSDR). We examined whether these biases are mentioned and/or otherwise assessed in HSDR systematic reviews, and evaluated associating factors to inform future practice. We randomly selected 200 quantitative HSDR systematic reviews published in the English language from 2007-2017 from the Health Systems Evidence database (www.healthsystemsevidence.org). We extracted data on factors that may influence whether or not authors mention and/or assess publication bias or outcome reporting bias. We found that 43% (n = 85) of the reviews mentioned publication bias and 10% (n = 19) formally assessed it. Outcome reporting bias was mentioned and assessed in 17% (n = 34) of all the systematic reviews. Insufficient number of studies, heterogeneity and lack of pre-registered protocols were the most commonly reported impediments to assessing the biases. In multivariable logistic regression models, both mentioning and formal assessment of publication bias were associated with: inclusion of a meta-analysis; being a review of intervention rather than association studies; higher journal impact factor, and; reporting the use of systematic review guidelines. Assessment of outcome reporting bias was associated with: being an intervention review; authors reporting the use of Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE), and; inclusion of only controlled trials. Publication bias and outcome reporting bias are infrequently assessed in HSDR systematic reviews. This may reflect the inherent heterogeneity of HSDR evidence and different methodological approaches to synthesising the evidence, lack of awareness of such biases, limits of current tools and lack of pre-registered study protocols for assessing such biases. Strategies to help raise awareness of the biases, and methods to minimise their occurrence and mitigate their impacts on HSDR systematic reviews, are needed

Adam Smith and the theory of punishment

A distinctive theory of punishment plays a central role in Smith's moral and legal theory. According to this theory, we regard the punishment of a crime as deserved only to the extent that an impartial spectator would go along with the actual or supposed resentment of the victim. The first part of this paper argues that Smith's theory deserves serious consideration and relates it to other theories such as utilitarianism and more orthodox forms of retributivism. The second part considers the objection that, because Smith's theory implies that punishment is justified only when there is some person or persons who is the victim of the crime, it cannot explain the many cases where punishment is imposed purely for the public good. It is argued that Smith's theory could be extended to cover such cases. The third part defends Smith's theory against the objection that, because it relies on our natural feelings, it cannot provide an adequate moral justification of punishment