The lowa farmer and world war II

World War II is the biggest fact in the Iowa farm situation. Though Iowa is far removed from air bombing and submarine torpedoing, it is on the battle front so far as economic and social effects of the war are concerned. Iowa’s commercial agriculture underwent terrific strain during and following World War I, and the pressures arising out of World War II promise to be similar, although less severe. It is the purpose of this report to estimate what some of these pressures will be. An understanding of the social and economic forces at work is necessary before plans can be made and action taken to ease the shock of war. The experience of the earlier war helps us to understand these forces, but that experience must be interpreted in light of the changed situation today

Our stake in commercial agriculture, rural poverty and world trade

The nation is still in the midst of an unprecedented upward trend in prosperity and economic growth. It has already attained a level of national and per capita income which would have seemed unattainable only three decades ago. But the end is not yet iri sight and American society has defined substantiative future goals accordingly. These are goals in general which suggest opportunity for all individuals and groups to share equitably in participation and gain from this advance. If they are to be attained, these goals also require an appraisal of the nation' s policies in respect to their contribution to or restraint on attainment over the next decade.</p

Initiation of continuous renal replacement therapy versus intermittent hemodialysis in critically ill patients with severe acute kidney injury: a secondary analysis of STARRT-AKI trial

Background: There is controversy regarding the optimal renal-replacement therapy (RRT) modality for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI). Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the STandard versus Accelerated Renal Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial to compare outcomes among patients who initiated RRT with either continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) or intermittent hemodialysis (IHD). We generated a propensity score for the likelihood of receiving CRRT and used inverse probability of treatment with overlap-weighting to address baseline inter-group differences. The primary outcome was a composite of death or RRT dependence at 90-days after randomization. Results: We identified 1590 trial participants who initially received CRRT and 606 who initially received IHD. The composite outcome of death or RRT dependence at 90-days occurred in 823 (51.8%) patients who commenced CRRT and 329 (54.3%) patients who commenced IHD (unadjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75-1.09). After balancing baseline characteristics with overlap weighting, initial receipt of CRRT was associated with a lower risk of death or RRT dependence at 90-days compared with initial receipt of IHD (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.66-0.99). This association was predominantly driven by a lower risk of RRT dependence at 90-days (OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.39-0.94). Conclusions: In critically ill patients with severe AKI, initiation of CRRT, as compared to IHD, was associated with a significant reduction in the composite outcome of death or RRT dependence at 90-days

A Bayesian reanalysis of the Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial

Background Timing of initiation of kidney-replacement therapy (KRT) in critically ill patients remains controversial. The Standard versus Accelerated Initiation of Renal-Replacement Therapy in Acute Kidney Injury (STARRT-AKI) trial compared two strategies of KRT initiation (accelerated versus standard) in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury and found neutral results for 90-day all-cause mortality. Probabilistic exploration of the trial endpoints may enable greater understanding of the trial findings. We aimed to perform a reanalysis using a Bayesian framework. Methods We performed a secondary analysis of all 2927 patients randomized in multi-national STARRT-AKI trial, performed at 168 centers in 15 countries. The primary endpoint, 90-day all-cause mortality, was evaluated using hierarchical Bayesian logistic regression. A spectrum of priors includes optimistic, neutral, and pessimistic priors, along with priors informed from earlier clinical trials. Secondary endpoints (KRT-free days and hospital-free days) were assessed using zero–one inflated beta regression. Results The posterior probability of benefit comparing an accelerated versus a standard KRT initiation strategy for the primary endpoint suggested no important difference, regardless of the prior used (absolute difference of 0.13% [95% credible interval [CrI] − 3.30%; 3.40%], − 0.39% [95% CrI − 3.46%; 3.00%], and 0.64% [95% CrI − 2.53%; 3.88%] for neutral, optimistic, and pessimistic priors, respectively). There was a very low probability that the effect size was equal or larger than a consensus-defined minimal clinically important difference. Patients allocated to the accelerated strategy had a lower number of KRT-free days (median absolute difference of − 3.55 days [95% CrI − 6.38; − 0.48]), with a probability that the accelerated strategy was associated with more KRT-free days of 0.008. Hospital-free days were similar between strategies, with the accelerated strategy having a median absolute difference of 0.48 more hospital-free days (95% CrI − 1.87; 2.72) compared with the standard strategy and the probability that the accelerated strategy had more hospital-free days was 0.66. Conclusions In a Bayesian reanalysis of the STARRT-AKI trial, we found very low probability that an accelerated strategy has clinically important benefits compared with the standard strategy. Patients receiving the accelerated strategy probably have fewer days alive and KRT-free. These findings do not support the adoption of an accelerated strategy of KRT initiation