Models of Star-Planet Magnetic Interaction

Magnetic interactions between a planet and its environment are known to lead to phenomena such as aurorae and shocks in the solar system. The large number of close-in exoplanets that were discovered triggered a renewed interest in magnetic interactions in star-planet systems. Multiple other magnetic effects were then unveiled, such as planet inflation or heating, planet migration, planetary material escape, and even modification of the host star properties. We review here the recent efforts in modelling and understanding magnetic interactions between stars and planets in the context of compact systems. We first provide simple estimates of the effects of magnetic interactions and then detail analytical and numerical models for different representative scenarii. We finally lay out a series of future developments that are needed today to better understand and constrain these fascinating interactions.Comment: 23 pages, 10 figures, accepted as a chapter in the Handbook of Exoplanet

Traumatic fracture of central venous catheter resulting in potential migration of distal fragment: a case report

We report a surgical retrieval of an indwelling portion of a traumatic rupture of the Central venous catheter following hair cutting by a confused patient secondary to Postoperative cognitive dysfunction. He had a dynamic compression screw for fixation of fractured neck of femur after previously failed surgical procedure. The second procedure was complicated with major blood loss, which required central venous and arterial line insertion for intra-operative and post-operative management. The patient was discharged to the ward following an uneventful stay on intensive care. While on the ward, he decided to trim his hair and in the process he inadvertently cut through the right internal jugular catheter. Complications and management resulting from embolisation of central line are reviewed

Understanding the dynamics of Toll-like Receptor 5 response to flagellin and its regulation by estradiol

© 2017 The Author(s). Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are major players of the innate immune system. Once activated, they trigger a signalling cascade that leads to NF-ΰ B translocation from the cytoplasm to the nucleus. Single cell analysis shows that NF-ΰ B signalling dynamics are a critical determinant of transcriptional regulation. Moreover, the outcome of innate immune response is also affected by the cross-talk between TLRs and estrogen signalling. Here, we characterized the dynamics of TLR5 signalling, responsible for the recognition of flagellated bacteria, and those changes induced by estradiol in its signalling at the single cell level. TLR5 activation in MCF7 cells induced a single and sustained NF-k B translocation into the nucleus that resulted in high NF-k B transcription activity. The overall magnitude of NF-k B transcription activity was not influenced by the duration of the stimulus. No significant changes are observed in the dynamics of NF-k B translocation to the nucleus when MCF7 cells are incubated with estradiol. However, estradiol significantly decreased NF-k B transcriptional activity while increasing TLR5-mediated AP-1 transcription. The effect of estradiol on transcriptional activity was dependent on the estrogen receptor activated. This fine tuning seems to occur mainly in the nucleus at the transcription level rather than affecting the translocation of the NF-k B transcription factor

A collaborative comparison of Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) standard setting methods at Australian medical schools

Background: A key issue underpinning the usefulness of the OSCE assessment to medical education is standard-setting, but the majority of standard-setting methods remain challenging for performance assessment because they produce varying passing marks. Several studies have compared standard setting methods; however, most of these studies are limited by their experimental scope, or use data on examinee performance at a single OSCE station or from a single medical school. This collaborative study between ten Australian medical schools investigated the effect of standard-setting methods on OSCE cut scores and failure rates. Methods: This research used 5,256 examinee scores from seven shared OSCE stations to calculate cut scores and failure rates using two different compromise standard-setting methods, namely the Borderline Regression and Cohen's methods. Results: The results of this study indicate that Cohen's method yields similar outcomes to the Borderline Regression method, particularly for large examinee cohort sizes. However, with lower examinee numbers on a station, the Borderline Regression method resulted in higher cut scores and larger difference margins in the failure rates. Conclusion: Cohen's method yields similar outcomes as the Borderline Regression method and its application for benchmarking purposes and in resource-limited settings is justifiable, particularly with large examinee numbers

Does publication bias inflate the apparent efficacy of psychological treatment for major depressive disorder? A systematic review and meta-analysis of US national institutes of health-funded trials

Background The efficacy of antidepressant medication has been shown empirically to be overestimated due to publication bias, but this has only been inferred statistically with regard to psychological treatment for depression. We assessed directly the extent of study publication bias in trials examining the efficacy of psychological treatment for depression. Methods and Findings We identified US National Institutes of Health grants awarded to fund randomized clinical trials comparing psychological treatment to control conditions or other treatments in patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder for the period 1972–2008, and we determined whether those grants led to publications. For studies that were not published, data were requested from investigators and included in the meta-analyses. Thirteen (23.6%) of the 55 funded grants that began trials did not result in publications, and two others never started. Among comparisons to control conditions, adding unpublished studies (Hedges’ g = 0.20; CI95% -0.11~0.51; k = 6) to published studies (g = 0.52; 0.37~0.68; k = 20) reduced the psychotherapy effect size point estimate (g = 0.39; 0.08~0.70) by 25%. Moreover, these findings may overestimate the "true" effect of psychological treatment for depression as outcome reporting bias could not be examined quantitatively. Conclusion The efficacy of psychological interventions for depression has been overestimated in the published literature, just as it has been for pharmacotherapy. Both are efficacious but not to the extent that the published literature would suggest. Funding agencies and journals should archive both original protocols and raw data from treatment trials to allow the detection and correction of outcome reporting bias. Clinicians, guidelines developers, and decision makers should be aware that the published literature overestimates the effects of the predominant treatments for depression

Recent ASA presidents and ‘top’ journals: observed publication patterns, alleged cartels and varying careers

It has been common for studies presented as about American sociology as a whole to rely on data compiled from leading journals (American Sociological Review [ASR] and American Journal of Sociology [AJS]), or about presidents of the American Sociological Association [ASA], to represent it. Clearly those are important, but neither can be regarded as providing a representative sample of American sociology. Recently, Stephen Turner has suggested that dominance in the ASA rests with a ‘cartel’ initially formed in graduate school, and that it favors work in a style associated with the leading journals. The adequacy of these ideas is examined in the light of available data on the last 20 years, which show that very few of the presidents were in the same graduate schools at the same time. All presidents have had distinguished academic records, but it is shown that their publication strategies have varied considerably. Some have had no ASR publications except their presidential addresses, while books and large numbers of other journals not normally mentioned in this context have figured in their contributions, as well as being more prominent in citations. It seems clear that articles in the leading journals have not been as closely tied to prestigious careers as has sometimes been suggested, and that if there is a cartel it has not included all the presidents