Change Patterns in Use: A Critical Evaluation

Process model quality has been an area of considerable research efforts. In this context, the correctness-by-construction principle of change patterns provides promising perspectives. However, using change patterns for model creation imposes a more structured way of modeling. While the process of process modeling (PPM) based on change primitives has been investigated, little is known about this process based on change patterns. To obtain a better understanding of the PPM when using change patterns, the arising challenges, and the subjective perceptions of process designers, we conduct an exploratory study. The results indicate that process designers face little problems as long as control-flow is simple, but have considerable problems with the usage of change patterns when complex, nested models have to be created. Finally, we outline how effective tool support for change patterns should be realized.This research is supported by Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P23699-N23.Weber, B.; Pinggera, J.; Torres Bosch, MV.; Reichert, M. (2013). Change Patterns in Use: A Critical Evaluation. En Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling, BPMDS 2013. Springer Verlag. 261-276. https://doi.org/11007/978-3-642-38484-4_19S26127

Comparison of contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy to conventional systematic biology: Impact on Gleason score

Purpose: Prostate cancer grading with Gleason score is an important prognostic factor. This prospective randomized study compares ultrasound systematic biopsy vs contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy for the impact on Gleason score findings. Materials and Methods: We examined 690 men (mean age 56 years, range 41 to 77) with a serum total prostate specific antigen of 1.25 ng/ml or greater, a free-to-total prostate specific antigen ratio less than 18% and/or a suspicious digital rectal examination. Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsies with a limited number of cores (5 or less) were performed in hypervascular areas of the peripheral zone during administration of the ultrasound contrast agent SonovueTM(Bracco, Milano, Italy). Ten systematic biopsies were obtained in a standard spatial distribution. Cancer detection rates and Gleason score were compared. Results: Prostate cancer was identified in 221 of 690 subjects (32%) with a mean prostate specific antigen of 4.6 ng/ml (range 1.4 to 35.0). Prostate cancer was detected in 180 of 690 subjects (26%) with contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy and in 166 of 690 patients (24%) with systematic ultrasound biopsy. The Gleason score of all 180 cancers detected on contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy was 6 or higher (mean 6.8). The Gleason score of all 166 cancers detected on systematic biopsy ranged from 4 to 6 and mean Gleason score was 5.4. Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy detected significantly higher Gleason scores compared to systematic biopsy (Wilcoxon rank sum test p \u3c0.003). Conclusions: Contrast enhanced color Doppler targeted biopsy detected cancers with higher Gleason scores and more cancer than systematic biopsy. Therefore, contrast enhanced color Doppler seems to be helpful in the grading of prostate cancer, which is important for defining prognosis and deciding treatment

The genetic study of three population microisolates in South Tyrol (MICROS): study design and epidemiological perspectives

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>There is increasing evidence of the important role that small, isolated populations could play in finding genes involved in the etiology of diseases. For historical and political reasons, South Tyrol, the northern most Italian region, includes several villages of small dimensions which remained isolated over the centuries.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The MICROS study is a population-based survey on three small, isolated villages, characterized by: old settlement; small number of founders; high endogamy rates; slow/null population expansion. During the stage-1 (2002/03) genealogical data, screening questionnaires, clinical measurements, blood and urine samples, and DNA were collected for 1175 adult volunteers. Stage-2, concerning trait diagnoses, linkage analysis and association studies, is ongoing. The selection of the traits is being driven by expert clinicians. Preliminary, descriptive statistics were obtained. Power simulations for finding linkage on a quantitative trait locus (QTL) were undertaken.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Starting from participants, genealogies were reconstructed for 50,037 subjects, going back to the early 1600s. Within the last five generations, subjects were clustered in one pedigree of 7049 subjects plus 178 smaller pedigrees (3 to 85 subjects each). A significant probability of familial clustering was assessed for many traits, especially among the cardiovascular, neurological and respiratory traits. Simulations showed that the MICROS pedigree has a substantial power to detect a LOD score ≥ 3 when the QTL specific heritability is ≥ 20%.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The MICROS study is an extensive, ongoing, two-stage survey aimed at characterizing the genetic epidemiology of Mendelian and complex diseases. Our approach, involving different scientific disciplines, is an advantageous strategy to define and to study population isolates. The isolation of the Alpine populations, together with the extensive data collected so far, make the MICROS study a powerful resource for the study of diseases in many fields of medicine. Recent successes and simulation studies give us confidence that our pedigrees can be valuable both in finding new candidates loci and to confirm existing candidate genes.</p

Controversy and consensus on indications for sperm DNA fragmentation testing in male infertility: a global survey, current guidelines, and expert recommendations.

PURPOSE: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) testing was recently added to the sixth edition of the World Health Organization laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. Many conditions and risk factors have been associated with elevated SDF; therefore, it is important to identify the population of infertile men who might benefit from this test. The purpose of this study was to investigate global practices related to indications for SDF testing, compare the relevant professional society guideline recommendations, and provide expert recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicians managing male infertility were invited to take part in a global online survey on SDF clinical practices. This was conducted following the CHERRIES checklist criteria. The responses were compared to professional society guideline recommendations related to SDF and the appropriate available evidence. Expert recommendations on indications for SDF testing were then formulated, and the Delphi method was used to reach consensus. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 436 experts from 55 countries. Almost 75% of respondents test for SDF in all or some men with unexplained or idiopathic infertility, 39% order it routinely in the work-up of recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), and 62.2% investigate SDF in smokers. While 47% of reproductive urologists test SDF to support the decision for varicocele repair surgery when conventional semen parameters are normal, significantly fewer general urologists (23%; p=0.008) do the same. Nearly 70% would assess SDF before assisted reproductive technologies (ART), either always or for certain conditions. Recurrent ART failure is a common indication for SDF testing. Very few society recommendations were found regarding SDF testing. CONCLUSIONS: This article presents the largest global survey on the indications for SDF testing in infertile men, and demonstrates diverse practices. Furthermore, it highlights the paucity of professional society guideline recommendations. Expert recommendations are proposed to help guide clinicians

Controversy and consensus on the management of elevated sperm DNA fragmentation in male infertility: a global survey, current guidelines, and expert recommendations

PURPOSE: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) has been associated with male infertility and poor outcomes of assisted reproductive technology (ART). The purpose of this study was to investigate global practices related to the management of elevated SDF in infertile men, summarize the relevant professional society recommendations, and provide expert recommendations for managing this condition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online global survey on clinical practices related to SDF was disseminated to reproductive clinicians, according to the CHERRIES checklist criteria. Management protocols for various conditions associated with SDF were captured and compared to the relevant recommendations in professional society guidelines and the appropriate available evidence. Expert recommendations and consensus on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF were then formulated and adapted using the Delphi method. RESULTS: A total of 436 experts from 55 different countries submitted responses. As an initial approach, 79.1% of reproductive experts recommend lifestyle modifications for infertile men with elevated SDF, and 76.9% prescribe empiric antioxidants. Regarding antioxidant duration, 39.3% recommend 4-6 months and 38.1% recommend 3 months. For men with unexplained or idiopathic infertility, and couples experiencing recurrent miscarriages associated with elevated SDF, most respondents refer to ART 6 months after failure of conservative and empiric medical management. Infertile men with clinical varicocele, normal conventional semen parameters, and elevated SDF are offered varicocele repair immediately after diagnosis by 31.4%, and after failure of antioxidants and conservative measures by 40.9%. Sperm selection techniques and testicular sperm extraction are also management options for couples undergoing ART. For most questions, heterogenous practices were demonstrated. CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents the results of a large global survey on the management of infertile men with elevated SDF and reveals a lack of consensus among clinicians. Furthermore, it demonstrates the scarcity of professional society guidelines in this regard and attempts to highlight the relevant evidence. Expert recommendations are proposed to help guide clinicians

Technical aspects and clinical limitations of sperm DNA fragmentation testing in male infertility: a global survey, current guidelines, and expert recommendations.

PURPOSE: Sperm DNA fragmentation (SDF) is a functional sperm abnormality that can impact reproductive potential, for which four assays have been described in the recently published sixth edition of the WHO laboratory manual for the examination and processing of human semen. The purpose of this study was to examine the global practices related to the use of SDF assays and investigate the barriers and limitations that clinicians face in incorporating these tests into their practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinicians managing male infertility were invited to complete an online survey on practices related to SDF diagnostic and treatment approaches. Their responses related to the technical aspects of SDF testing, current professional society guidelines, and the literature were used to generate expert recommendations via the Delphi method. Finally, challenges related to SDF that the clinicians encounter in their daily practice were captured. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 436 reproductive clinicians. Overall, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase deoxyuridine triphosphate Nick-End Labeling (TUNEL) is the most commonly used assay chosen by 28.6%, followed by the sperm chromatin structure assay (24.1%), and the sperm chromatin dispersion (19.1%). The choice of the assay was largely influenced by availability (70% of respondents). A threshold of 30% was the most selected cut-off value for elevated SDF by 33.7% of clinicians. Of respondents, 53.6% recommend SDF testing after 3 to 5 days of abstinence. Although 75.3% believe SDF testing can provide an explanation for many unknown causes of infertility, the main limiting factors selected by respondents are a lack of professional society guideline recommendations (62.7%) and an absence of globally accepted references for SDF interpretation (50.3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the largest global survey on the technical aspects of SDF testing as well as the barriers encountered by clinicians. Unified global recommendations regarding clinician implementation and standard laboratory interpretation of SDF testing are crucial

Post-Vasectomy Semen Analysis: Optimizing Laboratory Procedures and Test Interpretation through a Clinical Audit and Global Survey of Practices

Purpose: The success of vasectomy is determined by the outcome of a post-vasectomy semen analysis (PVSA). This article describes a step-by-step procedure to perform PVSA accurately, report data from patients who underwent post vasectomy semen analysis between 2015 and 2021 experience, along with results from an international online survey on clinical practice. Materials and methods: We present a detailed step-by-step protocol for performing and interpretating PVSA testing, along with recommendations for proficiency testing, competency assessment for performing PVSA, and clinical and laboratory scenarios. Moreover, we conducted an analysis of 1,114 PVSA performed at the Cleveland Clinic's Andrology Laboratory and an online survey to understand clinician responses to the PVSA results in various countries. Results: Results from our clinical experience showed that 92.1% of patients passed PVSA, with 7.9% being further tested. A total of 78 experts from 19 countries participated in the survey, and the majority reported to use time from vasectomy rather than the number of ejaculations as criterion to request PVSA. A high percentage of responders reported permitting unprotected intercourse only if PVSA samples show azoospermia while, in the presence of few non-motile sperm, the majority of responders suggested using alternative contraception, followed by another PVSA. In the presence of motile sperm, the majority of participants asked for further PVSA testing. Repeat vasectomy was mainly recommended if motile sperm were observed after multiple PVSA's. A large percentage reported to recommend a second PVSA due to the possibility of legal actions. Conclusions: Our results highlighted varying clinical practices around the globe, with controversy over the significance of non-motile sperm in the PVSA sample. Our data suggest that less stringent AUA guidelines would help improve test compliance. A large longitudinal multi-center study would clarify various doubts related to timing and interpretation of PVSA and would also help us to understand, and perhaps predict, recanalization and the potential for future failure of a vasectomy