Öffentlicher Raum

Als öffentlicher Raum wird die Gesamtheit aller Stadträume bezeichnet, die grundsätzlich für die Allgemeinheit zugänglich und nutzbar sind. Öffentliche Räume erfüllen wichtige ökonomische, soziale, ökologische, kulturelle sowie politische Funktionen und werden von einer Vielzahl von Akteuren gestaltet und entwickelt. Sie unterliegen dabei einem steten Funktions-, Nutzungs- und Bedeutungswandel

Die Interviews - Ergebnisse aus 20 Großstädten Deutschlands DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern"

DIE INTERVIEWS - ERGEBNISSE AUS 20 GROSSSTÄDTEN DEUTSCHLANDS DFG-FORSCHUNGSPROJEKT "STADTRÄUME IN SPANNUNGSFELDERN" Stars-Materialien (Rights reserved) (-) IssueTeil 01 Das Forschungsprojekt - Eine Kurzdokumentation des DFG-Forschungsprojektes "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( - ) IssueTeil 02 Die Fallstudien - Ergebnisse aus Leipzig, Hannover und Aachen DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( - ) IssueTeil 03 Die Interviews - Ergebnisse aus 20 Großstädten Deutschlands DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( -

Die Fallstudien - Ergebnisse aus Leipzig, Hannover und Aachen DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern"

DIE FALLSTUDIEN - ERGEBNISSE AUS LEIPZIG, HANNOVER UND AACHEN DFG-FORSCHUNGSPROJEKT "STADTRÄUME IN SPANNUNGSFELDERN" Stars-Materialien (Rights reserved) (-) IssueTeil 01 Das Forschungsprojekt - Eine Kurzdokumentation des DFG-Forschungsprojektes "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( - ) IssueTeil 02 Die Fallstudien - Ergebnisse aus Leipzig, Hannover und Aachen DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( - ) IssueTeil 03 Die Interviews - Ergebnisse aus 20 Großstädten Deutschlands DFG-Forschungsprojekt "Stadträume in Spannungsfeldern" (Rights reserved) ( -

Transit times – the link between hydrology and water quality at the catchment scale

In spite of trying to understand processes in the same spatial domain, the catchment hydrology and water quality scientific communities are relatively disconnected and so are their respective models. This is emphasized by an inadequate representation of transport processes, in both catchment-scale hydrological and water quality models. While many hydrological models at the catchment scale only account for pressure propagation and not for mass transfer, catchment scale water quality models are typically limited by overly simplistic representations of flow processes. With the objective of raising awareness for this issue and outlining potential ways forward we provide a non-technical overview of (1) the importance of hydrology-controlled transport through catchment systems as the link between hydrology and water quality; (2) the limitations of current generation catchment-scale hydrological and water quality models; (3) the concept of transit times as tools to quantify transport and (4) the benefits of transit time based formulations of solute transport for catchment-scale hydrological and water quality models. There is emerging evidence that an explicit formulation of transport processes, based on the concept of transit times has the potential to improve the understanding of the integrated system dynamics of catchments and to provide a stronger link between catchment-scale hydrological and water quality models

Efficacy of niraparib by time of surgery and postoperative residual disease status: A post hoc analysis of patients in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study

ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between surgical timing and postoperative residual disease status on the efficacy of niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer at high risk of recurrence.MethodsPost hoc analysis of the phase 3 PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 (NCT02655016) study of niraparib in patients with newly diagnosed primary advanced ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer with a complete/partial response to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed by surgical status (primary debulking surgery [PDS] vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy/interval debulking surgery [NACT/IDS]) and postoperative residual disease status (no visible residual disease [NVRD] vs visible residual disease [VRD]) in the intent-to-treat population.ResultsIn PRIMA (N = 733), 236 (32.2%) patients underwent PDS, and 481 (65.6%) received NACT/IDS before enrollment. Median PFS (niraparib vs placebo) and hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were similar in PDS (13.7 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.67 [0.47–0.96]) and NACT/IDS (14.2 vs 8.2 months; HR, 0.57 [0.44–0.73]) subgroups. In patients who received NACT/IDS and had NVRD (n = 304), the hazard ratio (95% CI) for progression was 0.65 (0.46–0.91). In patients with VRD following PDS (n = 183) or NACT/IDS (n = 149), the hazard ratios (95% CI) for progression were 0.58 (0.39–0.86) and 0.41 (0.27–0.62), respectively. PFS was not evaluable for patients with PDS and NVRD because of sample size (n = 37).ConclusionsIn this post hoc analysis, niraparib efficacy was similar across PDS and NACT/IDS subgroups. Patients who had NACT/IDS and VRD had the highest reduction in the risk of progression with niraparib maintenance.</p