Monolith formation and ring-stain suppression in low-pressure evaporation of poly(ethylene oxide) droplets

When droplets of dilute suspensions are left to evaporate the final dry residue is typically the familiar coffee-ring stain, with nearly all material deposited at the initial triple line (Deegan et al, Nature, vol. 389, 1997, pp. 827-829). However, aqueous poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO) droplets only form coffee-ring stains for a very narrow range of the experimental parameters molecular weight, concentration and drying rate. Instead, over a wide range of values they form either a flat disk or a very distinctive tall central monolith via a four-stage deposition process which includes a remarkable bootstrap-building step. To predict which deposit will form, we present a quantitative model comparing the effects of advective build-up at the triple line to diffusive flux and use this to calculate a dimensionless number χ. By experimentally varying concentration and flux (using a low-pressure drying chamber), the prediction is tested over nearly two orders of magnitude in both variables and shown to be in good agreement with the boundary between disks and monoliths at χ ≈ 1.6

Detection of hard faults in combinational logic circuits

ABSTRACT: Previous Work in identifying hard to test faults (HFs) -- The effect of reconvergent fanout and redundancy -- Testability measures (TMs)Using of ATPGs to detect HFs -- Previous use of cost in Testability analysis -- Review of automatic test pattern generation (ATPG) -- Fault modelling -- Single versus multiple path sensitization -- The four ATPG phases of deterministic gate level test generation -- Random test pattern generation and hybrid methods -- Review of the fan algorithm -- Backtrack reduction methods and the importance of heuristics -- Mixed graph -- binary decision diagram (GBDD) circuit model -- A review of graph techniques -- A review of binary decisions diagrams (BDDs) techniques -- gBDD -- graph binary decision diagrams -- Detection of hard faults using HUB -- Introduction to budgetary constraints -- The HUB algorithm -- Important HUB attributes -- Circuits characteristics of used for results -- Comparison of gBDD -- ATPG related results -- Fault simulation related results -- Hard fault detection

THE EXPERIENCE OF CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE PATIENTS: THE RESULTS OF THE 2017 UK RENAL REGISTRY / KIDNEY CARE UK CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE PATIENT REPORTED EXPERIENCE MEASURE

© 2018 The Author(s). This an open access work distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.PURPOSE: The UK Renal Registry (UKRR) and Kidney Care UK’s (KCUK) Chronic Kidney Disease Patient Reported Experience Measure (CKDPREM) was developed by patients, academics and clinicians in 2016. The CKDPREM was designed to provide clinical directors with information about their services from the user perspective, inform quality improvement initiatives and contribute to research. Following a pilot of over 8,000 patients in 2016, and subsequent validation, the UKRR surveyed renal units in 2017 using the revised CKDPREM; this abstract reports the results. METHODS: CKDPREM consists of 50 items across 13 domains covering patient experience of their renal unit, kidney disease and treatment. There are six demographic questions including age, sex, ethnicity and modality. The CKDPREM was distributed to all renal units in England and Wales in July 2017, with accompanying survey guidance and support provided to invite outpatient, pre-dialysis, dialysis and transplant renal patients to complete the CKDPREM online or in hard copy format. The survey was provided online in Welsh, Gujarati and Urdu as well as in English. Patients participated anonymously, returning hard copy CKDPREMs to their unit in return boxes or directly to the UKRR by post. Experience was scored on a scale of 1 (negative) to 7 (positive), and the mean score for all questions was estimated for each respondent. Analysis was conducted at individual unit and aggregate centre level (aggregate being the main hospital and all of its satellite units). Unit and centre means were estimated across respondents for that unit or centre. Patient characteristics were evaluated by comparing mean scores, and via regression models.RESULTS11,027 analysable responses to the CKDPREM were received from 56 centres incorporating 231 units in total. Demographically, respondents represented the patient population as a whole, although there were relatively low numbers of respondents in the pre-dialysis (15%) and transplant (14%) groups. Patient experience was high (6.3 out of 7) but with significant variation between centres. The largest variation was seen in Fluid and Diet (20%), Sharing Decisions (21%), Needling (29%, a new domain) and Transport (52%). More consistent experience was reported by patients for Access to the Team (11%), Privacy and Dignity (13%), and Scheduling and Planning (10%), however the mean difference between the best and worst centre remains greater than 10%. Patient characteristics contributed little to variation; only differences smaller than 10% (.7) of the scale range were seen (men and women, age, type or location of treatment, and ethnicity). Variation was instead explained by differences between centres, with ranges of mean scores from .73 (Scheduling and Planning) to 3.7 (Transport). CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the CKDPREM increased in 2017 compared to 2016, suggesting that post-validation changes made to the 2016 version of the CKDPREM have worked well. The outcome of the 2017 CKDPREM offers significant insight into renal patient experience. Importantly, the biggest factor driving variation in patient experience is the treating centre, and not patient characteristics. Sharing Decisions and Transport are consistently identified as areas with large variation (in both 2016 and 2017) and Scheduling and Planning with the lowest variation. UKRR and KCUK will continue to run the CKDPREM on an annual basis from late spring 2018 and also be making a short form version available.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Comparison of mortality with home hemodialysis and center hemodialysis: A national study

Comparison of mortality with home hemodialysis and center hemodialysis: A national study. We sought to determine whether lower mortality rates reported with hemodialysis (HD) at home compared to hemodialysis in dialysis centers (center HD) could be explained by patient selection. Data are from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) Special Study Of Case Mix Severity, a random national sample of 4,892 patients who started renal replacement therapy in 1986 to 1987. Intent-to-treat analyses compared mortality between home HD (N =70) and center HD patients (N = 3,102) using the Cox proportional hazards model. Home HD patients were younger and had a lower frequency of comorbid conditions. The unadjusted relative risk (RR) of death for home HD patients compared to center HD was 0.37 (P < 0.001). The RR adjusted for age, sex, race and diabetes, was 44% lower in home HD patients (RR = 0.56, P = 0.02). When additionally adjusted for comorbid conditions, this RR increased marginally (RR = 0.58, P = 0.03). A different analysis using national USRDS data from 1986/7 and without comorbid adjustment showed patients with training for self care hemodialysis at home or in a center (N = 418) had a lower mortality risk (RR = 0.78, P = 0.001) than center HD patients (N = 43,122). Statistical adjustment for comorbid conditions in addition to age, sex, race, and diabetes explains only a small amount of the lower mortality with home HD

Veritas & Vanitas: A Journal of Creative Nonfiction

A journal of creative nonfiction produced by students at the Marion campus of The Ohio State University with contributions from the students and faculty at the Marion campus of The Ohio State University and Marion Technical College

A life in progress: motion and emotion in the autobiography of Robert M. La Follette

This article is a study of a La Follette’s Autobiography, the autobiography of the leading Wisconsin progressive Robert M. La Follette, which was published serially in 1911 and, in book form, in 1913. Rather than focusing, as have other historians, on which parts of La Follette’s account are accurate and can therefore be trusted, it explains instead why and how this major autobiography was conceived and written. The article shows that the autobiography was the product of a sustained, complex, and often fraught series of collaborations among La Follette’s family, friends, and political allies, and in the process illuminates the importance of affective ties as well as political ambition and commitment in bringing the project to fruition. In the world of progressive reform, it argues, personal and political experiences were inseparable

Rapid design and manufacture tools in architecture

The continuing development of rapid prototyping technologies and the introduction of concept modelling technologies means that their use is expanding into a greater range of applications. The primary aim of this paper is to give the reader an overview of the current state of the art in layered manufacturing (LM) technology and its applicability in the field of architecture. The paper reports on the findings of a benchmarking study, conducted by the Rapid Design and Manufacturing (RDM) Group in Glasgow [G.J. Ryder, A. McGown, W. Ion, G. Green, D. Harrison, B. Wood, Rapid prototyping feasibility report, Rapid Prototyping Group, Glasgow School of Art, 1998.], which identified that the applicability of LM technologies in any application can be governed by a series of critical process and application specific issues. A further survey carried out by the RDM group investigated current model making practice, current 3D CAD use and current use of LM technologies within the field of architecture. The findings are then compared with the capabilities of LM technologies. Future research needs in this area are identified and briefly outlined

The dose of hemodialysis and patient mortality

The dose of hemodialysis and patient mortality. The relationship between the delivered dose of hemodialysis and patient mortality remains somewhat controversial. Several observational studies have shown improved patient survival with higher levels of delivered dialysis dose. However, several other unmeasured variables, changes in patient mix or medical management may have impacted on this reported difference in mortality. The current study of a U.S. national sample of 2,311 patients from 347 dialysis units estimates the relationship of delivered hemodialysis dose to mortality, with a statistical adjustment for an extensive list of comorbidity/risk factors. Additionally this study investigated the existence of a dose beyond which more dialysis does not appear to lower mortality. We estimated patient survival using proportional hazards regression techniques, adjusting for 21 patient comorbidity/risk factors with stratification for nine Census regions. The patient sample was 2,311 Medicare hemodialysis patients treated with bicarbonate dialysate as of 12/31/90 who had end-stage renal disease for at least one year. Patient follow-up ranged between 1.5 and 2.4 years. The measurement of delivered therapy was based on two alternative measures of intradialytic urea reduction, the urea reduction ratio (URR) and Kt/V (with adjustment for urea generation and ultrafiltration). Hemodialysis patient mortality showed a strong and robust inverse correlation with delivered hemodialysis dose whether measured by Kt/V or by URR. Mortality risk was lower by 7% (P = 0.001) with each 0.1 higher level of delivered Kt/V. (Expressed in terms of URR, mortality was lower by 11% with each 5 percentage point higher URR; P = 0.001). Above a URR of 70% or a Kt/V of 1.3 these data did not provide statistical evidence of further reductions in mortality. In conclusion, the delivered dose of hemodialysis therapy is an important predictor of patient mortality. In a population of dialysis patients with a very high mortality rate, it appears that increasing the level of delivered therapy offers a practical and efficient means of lowering the mortality rate. The level of hemodialysis dose measured by URR or Kt/V beyond which the mortality rate does not continue to decrease, though not well defined with this study, appears to be above current levels of typical treatment of hemodialysis patients in the U.S