Author Correction:In-plane selective area InSb–Al nanowire quantum networks (Communications Physics, (2020), 3, 1, (59), 10.1038/s42005-020-0324-4)

The Data availability statement of this article has been modified to add the accession link to the raw data. The old Data availability statement read “Materials and data that support the findings of this research are available within the paper. All data are available from the corresponding author upon request”. This has been replaced by “Materials and data that support the findings of this research are available within the paper. The raw data have been deposited at https://zenodo.org/record/4589484#.YEoEOy1Y7Sd”. This has been corrected in both the HTML and PDF version of the article.</p

Bayesian D-Optimal Choice Designs for Mixtures

__Abstract__ \n \nConsumer products and services can often be described as mixtures of ingredients. Examples are the mixture of ingredients in a cocktail and the mixture of different components of waiting time (e.g., in-vehicle and out-of-vehicle travel time) in a transportation setting. Choice experiments may help to determine how the respondents\' choice of a product or service is affected by the combination of ingredients. In such studies, individuals are confronted with sets of hypothetical products or services and they are asked to choose the most preferred product or service from each set. \n \nHowever, there are no studies on the optimal design of choice experiments involving mixtures. We propose a method for generating an optimal design for such choice experiments. To this end, we first introduce mixture models in the choice context and next present an algorithm to construct optimal experimental designs, assuming the multinomial logit model is used to analyze the choice data. To overcome the problem that the optimal designs depend on the unknown parameter values, we adopt a Bayesian D-optimal design approach. We also consider locally D-optimal designs and compare the performance of the resulting designs to those produced by a utility-neutral (UN) approach in which designs are based on the assumption that individuals are indifferent between all choice alternatives. We demonstrate that our designs are quite different and in general perform better than the UN designs

Six Novel Susceptibility Loci for Early-Onset Androgenetic Alopecia and Their Unexpected Association with Common Diseases

Androgenetic alopecia (AGA) is a highly heritable condition and the most common form of hair loss in humans. Susceptibility loci have been described on the X chromosome and chromosome 20, but these loci explain a minority of its heritable variance. We conducted a large-scale meta-analysis of seven genome-wide association studies for early-onset AGA in 12,806 individuals of European ancestry. While replicating the two AGA loci on the X chromosome and chromosome 20, six novel susceptibility loci reached genome-wide significance (p = 2.62×10−9–1.01×10−12). Unexpectedly, we identified a risk allele at 17q21.31 that was recently associated with Parkinson's disease (PD) at a genome-wide significant level. We then tested the association between early-onset AGA and the risk of PD in a cross-sectional analysis of 568 PD cases and 7,664 controls. Early-onset AGA cases had significantly increased odds of subsequent PD (OR = 1.28, 95% confidence interval: 1.06–1.55, p = 8.9×10−3). Further, the AGA susceptibility alleles at the 17q21.31 locus are on the H1 haplotype, which is under negative selection in Europeans and has been linked to decreased fertility. Combining the risk alleles of six novel and two established susceptibility loci, we created a genotype risk score and tested its association with AGA in an additional sample. Individuals in the highest risk quartile of a genotype score had an approximately six-fold increased risk of early-onset AGA [odds ratio (OR) = 5.78, p = 1.4×10−88]. Our results highlight unexpected associations between early-onset AGA, Parkinson's disease, and decreased fertility, providing important insights into the pathophysiology of these conditions

The NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE): facilitating European and worldwide collaboration on suspect screening in high resolution mass spectrometry

Background: The NORMAN Association (https://www.norman-.network.com/) initiated the NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE; https://www.norman-.network.com/nds/SLE/) in 2015, following the NORMAN collaborative trial on non-target screening of environmental water samples by mass spectrometry. Since then, this exchange of information on chemicals that are expected to occur in the environment, along with the accompanying expert knowledge and references, has become a valuable knowledge base for "suspect screening" lists. The NORMAN-SLE now serves as a FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) chemical information resource worldwide.Results: The NORMAN-SLE contains 99 separate suspect list collections (as of May 2022) from over 70 contributors around the world, totalling over 100,000 unique substances. The substance classes include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), pharmaceuticals, pesticides, natural toxins, high production volume substances covered under the European REACH regulation (EC: 1272/2008), priority contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and regulatory lists from NORMAN partners. Several lists focus on transformation products (TPs) and complex features detected in the environment with various levels of provenance and structural information. Each list is available for separate download. The merged, curated collection is also available as the NORMAN Substance Database (NORMAN SusDat). Both the NORMAN-SLE and NORMAN SusDat are integrated within the NORMAN Database System (NDS). The individual NORMAN-SLE lists receive digital object identifiers (DOIs) and traceable versioning via a Zenodo community (https:// zenodo.org/communities/norman-.sle), with a total of > 40,000 unique views, > 50,000 unique downloads and 40 citations (May 2022). NORMAN-SLE content is progressively integrated into large open chemical databases such as PubChem (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and the US EPA's CompTox Chemicals Dashboard (https://comptox. epa.gov/dashboard/), enabling further access to these lists, along with the additional functionality and calculated properties these resources offer. PubChem has also integrated significant annotation content from the NORMAN-SLE, including a classification browser (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/classification/#hid=101).Conclusions: The NORMAN-SLE offers a specialized service for hosting suspect screening lists of relevance for the environmental community in an open, FAIR manner that allows integration with other major chemical resources. These efforts foster the exchange of information between scientists and regulators, supporting the paradigm shift to the "one substance, one assessment" approach. New submissions are welcome via the contacts provided on the NORMAN-SLE website (https://www.norman-.network.com/nds/SLE/)

The NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE): Facilitating European and worldwide collaboration on suspect screening in high resolution mass spectrometry

Background: The NORMAN Association (https://www.norman-network.com/) initiated the NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE; https://www.norman-network.com/nds/SLE/) in 2015, following the NORMAN collaborative trial on non-target screening of environmental water samples by mass spectrometry. Since then, this exchange of information on chemicals that are expected to occur in the environment, along with the accompanying expert knowledge and references, has become a valuable knowledge base for “suspect screening” lists. The NORMAN-SLE now serves as a FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) chemical information resource worldwide. Results: The NORMAN-SLE contains 99 separate suspect list collections (as of May 2022) from over 70 contributors around the world, totalling over 100,000 unique substances. The substance classes include per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), pharmaceuticals, pesticides, natural toxins, high production volume substances covered under the European REACH regulation (EC: 1272/2008), priority contaminants of emerging concern (CECs) and regulatory lists from NORMAN partners. Several lists focus on transformation products (TPs) and complex features detected in the environment with various levels of provenance and structural information. Each list is available for separate download. The merged, curated collection is also available as the NORMAN Substance Database (NORMAN SusDat). Both the NORMAN-SLE and NORMAN SusDat are integrated within the NORMAN Database System (NDS). The individual NORMAN-SLE lists receive digital object identifiers (DOIs) and traceable versioning via a Zenodo community (https://zenodo.org/communities/norman-sle), with a total of > 40,000 unique views, > 50,000 unique downloads and 40 citations (May 2022). NORMAN-SLE content is progressively integrated into large open chemical databases such as PubChem (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/) and the US EPA’s CompTox Chemicals Dashboard (https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/), enabling further access to these lists, along with the additional functionality and calculated properties these resources offer. PubChem has also integrated significant annotation content from the NORMAN-SLE, including a classification browser (https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/classification/#hid=101). Conclusions: The NORMAN-SLE offers a specialized service for hosting suspect screening lists of relevance for the environmental community in an open, FAIR manner that allows integration with other major chemical resources. These efforts foster the exchange of information between scientists and regulators, supporting the paradigm shift to the “one substance, one assessment” approach. New submissions are welcome via the contacts provided on the NORMAN-SLE website (https://www.norman-network.com/nds/SLE/)

The NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE): facilitating European and worldwide collaboration on suspect screening in high resolution mass spectrometry

The NORMAN Association (https://www.norman-network.com/) initiated the NORMAN Suspect List Exchange (NORMAN-SLE; https://www.norman-network.com/nds/SLE/) in 2015, following the NORMAN collaborative trial on non-target screening of environmental water samples by mass spectrometry. Since then, this exchange of information on chemicals that are expected to occur in the environment, along with the accompanying expert knowledge and references, has become a valuable knowledge base for "suspect screening" lists. The NORMAN-SLE now serves as a FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) chemical information resource worldwide.The NORMAN-SLE project has received funding from the NORMAN Association via its joint proposal of activities. HMT and ELS are supported by the Luxembourg National Research Fund (FNR) for project A18/BM/12341006. ELS, PC, SEH, HPHA, ZW acknowledge funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101036756, project ZeroPM: Zero pollution of persistent, mobile substances. The work of EEB, TC, QL, BAS, PAT, and JZ was supported by the National Center for Biotechnology Information of the National Library of Medicine (NLM), National Institutes of Health (NIH). JOB is the recipient of an NHMRC Emerging Leadership Fellowship (EL1 2009209). KVT and JOB acknowledge the support of the Australian Research Council (DP190102476). The Queensland Alliance for Environmental Health Sciences, The University of Queensland, gratefully acknowledges the financial support of the Queensland Department of Health. NR is supported by a Miguel Servet contract (CP19/00060) from the Instituto de Salud Carlos III, co-financed by the European Union through Fondo Europeo de Desarrollo Regional (FEDER). MM and TR gratefully acknowledge financial support by the German Ministry for Education and Research (BMBF, Bonn) through the project “Persistente mobile organische Chemikalien in der aquatischen Umwelt (PROTECT)” (FKz: 02WRS1495 A/B/E). LiB acknowledges funding through a Research Foundation Flanders (FWO) fellowship (11G1821N). JAP and JMcL acknowledge financial support from the NIH for CCSCompendium (S50 CCSCOMPEND) via grants NIH NIGMS R01GM092218 and NIH NCI 1R03CA222452-01, as well as the Vanderbilt Chemical Biology Interface training program (5T32GM065086-16), plus use of resources of the Center for Innovative Technology (CIT) at Vanderbilt University. TJ was (partly) supported by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), project number 15747. UFZ (TS, MaK, WB) received funding from SOLUTIONS project (European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration under Grant Agreement No. 603437). TS, MaK, WB, JPA, RCHV, JJV, JeM and MHL acknowledge HBM4EU (European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the grant agreement no. 733032). TS acknowledges funding from NFDI4Chem—Chemistry Consortium in the NFDI (supported by the DFG under project number 441958208). TS, MaK, WB and EMLJ acknowledge NaToxAq (European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant Agreement No. 722493). S36 and S63 (HPHA, SEH, MN, IS) were funded by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU) Project No. (FKZ) 3716 67 416 0, updates to S36 (HPHA, SEH, MN, IS) by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection (BMUV) Project No. (FKZ) 3719 65 408 0. MiK acknowledges financial support from the EU Cohesion Funds within the project Monitoring and assessment of water body status (No. 310011A366 Phase III). The work related to S60 and S82 was funded by the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN), KK and JH acknowledge the input of Kathrin Fenner’s group (Eawag) in compiling transformation products from European pesticides registration dossiers. DSW and YDF were supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and Genome Canada. The work related to S49, S48 and S77 was funded by the MAVA foundation; for S77 also the Valery Foundation (KG, JaM, BG). DML acknowledges National Science Foundation Grant RUI-1306074. YL acknowledges the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 22193051 and 21906177), and the Chinese Postdoctoral Science Foundation (Grant No. 2019M650863). WLC acknowledges research project 108C002871 supported by the Environmental Protection Administration, Executive Yuan, R.O.C. Taiwan (Taiwan EPA). JG acknowledges funding from the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment. AJW was funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. LuB, AC and FH acknowledge the financial support of the Generalitat Valenciana (Research Group of Excellence, Prometeo 2019/040). KN (S89) acknowledges the PhD fellowship through Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 859891 (MSCA-ETN). Exposome-Explorer (S34) was funded by the European Commission projects EXPOsOMICS FP7-KBBE-2012 [308610]; NutriTech FP7-KBBE-2011-5 [289511]; Joint Programming Initiative FOODBALL 2014–17. CP acknowledges grant RYC2020-028901-I funded by MCIN/AEI/1.0.13039/501100011033 and “ESF investing in your future”, and August T Larsson Guest Researcher Programme from the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences. The work of ML, MaSe, SG, TL and WS creating and filling the STOFF-IDENT database (S2) mostly sponsored by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research within the RiSKWa program (funding codes 02WRS1273 and 02WRS1354). XT acknowledges The National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark. MaSch acknowledges funding by the RECETOX research infrastructure (the Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports, LM2018121), the CETOCOEN PLUS project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/15_003/0000469), and the CETOCOEN EXCELLENCE Teaming 2 project supported by the Czech ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (No CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17_043/0009632).Peer reviewe

Occupational advice for Patients undergoing Arthroplasty of the Lower limb: An intervention development and feasibility study (The OPAL Study)

Background Hip and knee replacements are regularly performed for patients who work. There is little evidence about these patients’ needs and the factors influencing their return to work. There is a paucity of guidance to help patients return to work after surgery and a need for structured occupational advice to enable them to return to work safely and effectively. Objective(s) To develop an occupational advice intervention to support early recovery to usual activities including work which is tailored to the requirements of patients undergoing hip and knee replacements. To test the acceptability, practicality and feasibility of this intervention within current care frameworks Design An intervention mapping (IM) approach was used to develop the intervention. The research methods employed were: rapid evidence synthesis; qualitative interviews with patients and stakeholders; prospective cohort study; survey of clinical practice; modified Delphi consensus process. The developed intervention was implemented and assessed during the final feasibility stage of the IM process. Setting Orthopaedic departments within NHS secondary care. Participants Patients in work, and intending to return to work following primary elective hip and knee replacement surgery; healthcare professionals and employers. Interventions Occupational advice intervention. Main outcome measures Development of an occupational advice intervention. Fidelity of the developed intervention when delivered in a clinical setting. Patient and clinician perspectives of the intervention. Preliminary assessments of intervention effectiveness and cost. Results A cohort study (154 patients), 110 stakeholder interviews, survey of practice (152 respondents) and evidence synthesis provided the necessary information to develop the intervention. The intervention included information resources, personalized return to work plan and co-ordination from the healthcare team to support the delivery of 13 patient and 20 staff performance objectives (POs). To support delivery, a range of tools (e.g. occupational checklists, patient workbooks, employer information), roles (e.g. return-to-work coordinator) and training resources were created. Feasibility was assessed in 21 of the 26 patients recruited from 3 NHS trusts. Adherence with the defined performance objectives was 75% for patient POs and 74% for staff POs. The intervention was generally well received although the short timeframe available for implementation and concurrent research evaluation led to some confusion amongst patients and those delivering the intervention regarding its purpose and the roles and responsibilities of key staff. Limitations Implementation and uptake of the intervention was not standardized and was limited by the study timeframe. Evaluation of the intervention involved a small number of patients which limited the ability to assess it. Conclusions The developed occupational advice intervention supports best practice. Evaluation demonstrated good rates of adherence against defined performance objectives. However, a number of operational and implementation issues require further attention Future work The intervention warrants a randomised controlled trial to assess its clinical and cost effectiveness to improve rates and timing of sustained return to work after surgery. This research should include the development of a robust implementation strategy to ensure adoption is sustained. Funding This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme (project number 15/28/02) Trial Registrations International Standard Randomised Controlled Trials Number Trial ID: ISRCTN27426982 International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO) Registration: CRD4201604523