Diffusive benefits of cylinders in front of a Schroeder diffuser

A numerical investigation is performed into the diffusive effects of cylinders positioned in front of a Schroeder diffuser. A regular line of cylinders is shown to offer notable improvements to diffusion from a periodic Schroeder device, provided lateral cylinder spacing is incommensurable with the Schroeder period width. Further investigation considers angular dependence and low frequency results in greater detail, as well as the effects on narrowband and modulated Schroeder devices. An optimization procedure is subsequently performed to investigate the effects of an irregular cylinder arrangement, which provides further diffusive benefits. (C) 2010 Acoustical Society of America

Volumetric diffusers : pseudorandom cylinder arrays on a periodic lattice

Most conventional diffusers take the form of a surface based treatment, and as a result can only operate in hemispherical space. Placing a diffuser in the volume of a room might provide greater efficiency by allowing scattering into the whole space. A periodic cylinder array (or sonic crystal) produces periodicity lobes and uneven scattering. Introducing defects into an array, by removing or varying the size of some of the cylinders, can enhance their diffusing abilities. This paper applies number theoretic concepts to create cylinder arrays that have more even scattering. Predictions using a Boundary Element Method are compared to measurements to verify the model, and suitable metrics are adopted to evaluate performance. Arrangements with good aperiodic autocorrelation properties tend to produce the best results. At low frequency power is controlled by object size and at high frequency diffusion is dominated by lattice spacing and structural similarity. Consequently the operational bandwidth is rather small. By using sparse arrays and varying cylinder sizes, a wider bandwidth can be achieved

Metabolic flexibility as a major predictor of spatial distribution in microbial communities

A better understand the ecology of microbes and their role in the global ecosystem could be achieved if traditional ecological theories can be applied to microbes. In ecology organisms are defined as specialists or generalists according to the breadth of their niche. Spatial distribution is often used as a proxy measure of niche breadth; generalists have broad niches and a wide spatial distribution and specialists a narrow niche and spatial distribution. Previous studies suggest that microbial distribution patterns are contrary to this idea; a microbial generalist genus (Desulfobulbus) has a limited spatial distribution while a specialist genus (Methanosaeta) has a cosmopolitan distribution. Therefore, we hypothesise that this counter-intuitive distribution within generalist and specialist microbial genera is a common microbial characteristic. Using molecular fingerprinting the distribution of four microbial genera, two generalists, Desulfobulbus and the methanogenic archaea Methanosarcina, and two specialists, Methanosaeta and the sulfate-reducing bacteria Desulfobacter were analysed in sediment samples from along a UK estuary. Detected genotypes of both generalist genera showed a distinct spatial distribution, significantly correlated with geographic distance between sites. Genotypes of both specialist genera showed no significant differential spatial distribution. These data support the hypothesis that the spatial distribution of specialist and generalist microbes does not match that seen with specialist and generalist large organisms. It may be that generalist microbes, while having a wider potential niche, are constrained, possibly by intrageneric competition, to exploit only a small part of that potential niche while specialists, with far fewer constraints to their niche, are more capable of filling their potential niche more effectively, perhaps by avoiding intrageneric competition. We suggest that these counter-intuitive distribution patterns may be a common feature of microbes in general and represent a distinct microbial principle in ecology, which is a real challenge if we are to develop a truly inclusive ecology

On the Deformation of a Hyperelastic Tube Due to Steady Viscous Flow Within

In this chapter, we analyze the steady-state microscale fluid--structure interaction (FSI) between a generalized Newtonian fluid and a hyperelastic tube. Physiological flows, especially in hemodynamics, serve as primary examples of such FSI phenomena. The small scale of the physical system renders the flow field, under the power-law rheological model, amenable to a closed-form solution using the lubrication approximation. On the other hand, negligible shear stresses on the walls of a long vessel allow the structure to be treated as a pressure vessel. The constitutive equation for the microtube is prescribed via the strain energy functional for an incompressible, isotropic Mooney--Rivlin material. We employ both the thin- and thick-walled formulations of the pressure vessel theory, and derive the static relation between the pressure load and the deformation of the structure. We harness the latter to determine the flow rate--pressure drop relationship for non-Newtonian flow in thin- and thick-walled soft hyperelastic microtubes. Through illustrative examples, we discuss how a hyperelastic tube supports the same pressure load as a linearly elastic tube with smaller deformation, thus requiring a higher pressure drop across itself to maintain a fixed flow rate.Comment: 19 pages, 3 figures, Springer book class; v2: minor revisions, final form of invited contribution to the Springer volume entitled "Dynamical Processes in Generalized Continua and Structures" (in honour of Academician D.I. Indeitsev), eds. H. Altenbach, A. Belyaev, V. A. Eremeyev, A. Krivtsov and A. V. Porubo

Complex circular subsidence structures in tephra deposited on large blocks of ice: Varða tuff cone, Öræfajökull, Iceland

Several broadly circular structures up to 16 m in diameter, into which higher strata have sagged and locally collapsed, are present in a tephra outcrop on southwest Öræfajökull, southern Iceland. The tephra was sourced in a nearby basaltic tuff cone at Varða. The structures have not previously been described in tuff cones, and they probably formed by the melting out of large buried blocks of ice emplaced during a preceding jökulhlaup that may have been triggered by a subglacial eruption within the Öræfajökull ice cap. They are named ice-melt subsidence structures, and they are analogous to kettle holes that are commonly found in proglacial sandurs and some lahars sourced in ice-clad volcanoes. The internal structure is better exposed in the Varða examples because of an absence of fluvial infilling and reworking, and erosion of the outcrop to reveal the deeper geometry. The ice-melt subsidence structures at Varða are a proxy for buried ice. They are the only known evidence for a subglacial eruption and associated jökulhlaup that created the ice blocks. The recognition of such structures elsewhere will be useful in reconstructing more complete regional volcanic histories as well as for identifying ice-proximal settings during palaeoenvironmental investigations

Challenges and solutions to cancer-related financial toxicity according to Australian health professionals: qualitative results from a national survey

Purpose: To qualitatively explore Australian healthcare professionals’ perspectives on how to improve the care and management of cancer-related financial toxicity, including relevant practices, services, and unmet needs. Methods: We invited healthcare professionals (HCP) who currently provide care to people with cancer within their role to complete an online survey, which was distributed via the networks of Australian clinical oncology professional associations/organisations. The survey was developed by the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia’s Financial Toxicity Working Group and contained 12 open-ended items which we analysed using descriptive content analysis and NVivo software. Results: HCPs (n = 277) believed that identifying and addressing financial concerns within routine cancer care was important and most believed this to be the responsibility of all HCP involved in the patient’s care. However, financial toxicity was viewed as a “blind spot” within a medical model of healthcare, with a lack of services, resources, and training identified as barriers to care. Social workers reported assessment and advocacy were part of their role, but many reported lacking formal training and understanding of financial complexities/laws. HCPs reported positive attitudes towards transparent discussions of costs and actioning cost-reduction strategies within their control, but feelings of helplessness when they perceived no solution was available. Conclusion: Identifying financial needs and providing transparent information about cancer-related costs was viewed as a cross-disciplinary responsibility, however, a lack of training and services limited the provision of support. Increased cancer-specific financial counselling and advocacy, via dedicated roles or developing HCPs’ skills, is urgently needed within the healthcare system

Using Routinely Collected Electronic Healthcare Record Data to Investigate Fibrotic Multimorbidity in England

Georgie M Massen,1 Hannah R Whittaker,1 Sarah Cook,1 Gisli Jenkins,2 Richard J Allen,3,4 Louise V Wain,3,4 Iain Stewart,2 Jennifer K Quint,1 On behalf of DEMISTIFI consortiumAndrew Thorley, Anna Duckworth, Ali-Reza Mohammadi-Nejad, Aloysious Aravinthan, Anthony Harbottle, Armando Mendez Villalon, Chris Scotton, Christopher Denton, Daniel Lea, Dorothee Auer, Ebrima Joof, Eleanor Cox, Elizabeth Eves, Elizabeth Robertson, Emma Blamont, Fasihul Khan, Georgie Massen, Gina Parcesepe, Gisli Jenkins, Gordon Moran, Guruprasad Aithal, Hilary Longhurst, Iain Stewart, Jane Paxton, Jennifer Quint, Karen Piper Hanley, Kate Frost, Leo Casmino, Lisa Chakrabarti, Louise Wain, Margot Roeth, Maria Kaisar, Martin Craig, Michael Nation, Mohammad Alireza Kisomi, Mujdat Zeybel, Neil Guha, Nicholas Selby, Nick Oliver, Nick Selby, Olivia C Leavy, Penny Gowland, Philip Quinlan, Rachel Chambers, Richard Allen, Richard Hubbard, Rob Slack, Rutger Ploeg, Sam Moss, Sara Fawaz, Scott Turner, Shauntelle Quammie, Simon Johnson, Stamatios N Sotiropoulos, Stuart Astbury, Susan Francis, Tom Giles, Valerie Quinn, Wendy Adams, Xin Chen, Zhendi Gong 1School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK; 2National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; 3Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; 4NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, Mental Health and Clinical Neurosciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, United Kingdom; Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Ctr, Queens Medical Ctr, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Digital Research Service, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Department of Clinical and Biomedical Sciences, University of Exeter,Exeter, United Kingdom; Centre for Rheumatology, Royal Free Hospital and University College London, London, UK; Digital Research Service, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Mental Health & Clinical Neurosciences,School of Medicine, University ofNottingham, Nottingham, UK; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre,School of Medicine, University ofNottingham, Nottingham, UK; NIHR Nottingham Biomedical ResearchCentre, Queen’s Medical Centre,University of Nottingham, Nottingham,UK; School of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2National Public Health Laboratories; Ministry of Health and Social Welfare, Banjul, The Gambia; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, School of Physics & Astronomy, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; NIHR Nottingham BRC, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Diabetes UK, UK; Diabetes UK, UK; Scleroderma and Raynaud’s UK, UK; Glenfield Hospital, University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK; Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK; Gisli Jenkins, Margaret Turner Warwick Centre for Fibrosing Lung Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, United Kingdom; Gordon W. Moran, NIHR Nottingham BRC, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Guruprasad P. Aithal, NIHR Nottingham BRC, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Dyskeratosis Congenita (DC) Action, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; Dyskeratosis Congenita (DC) Action, UK; National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK; Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK; Patient and Public Involvement and Engagement, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Sarcoidosis UK, UK; School of Veterinary Medicine and Science, Sutton Bonington Campus, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Medical Research Council Versus Arthritis Centre for Musculoskeletal Ageing Research, Nottingham, UK; Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Center, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK ; Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, UK; Quantified Imaging, London, UK; Kidney Research UK, UK; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, Mental Health and Clinical Neurosciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham NG7 2UH, United Kingdom; NationalInstitute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Ctr, Queens Medical Ctr, Nottingham, United Kingdom; NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust & University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; NIHR Nottingham BRC, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Centre for Kidney Research and Innovation, University of Nottingham, Royal Derby Hospital Campus,Derby, UK; Department of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK; Centre for Kidney Research and Innovation, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham; Department of Non-communicable Disease Epidemiology, The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, UK; Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester,Leicester, UK; Universiy of Nottingham, Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, Nottingham, United Kingdom; The Digital Research Service, University of Nottingham, UK; Centre for Inflammation and Tissue Repair, University College London, London, UK; Department of Population Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK, 2NIHR Leicester Biomedical Research Centre, Leicester, UK; University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Galecto, Stevenage, Hertfordshire, UK; Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, and Biomedical Research Centre Oxford; Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom; University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; NIHR Nottingham BRC, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; University of Norringham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; Centre for Respiratory Research, NIHRRespiratory Biomedical Research Centre,School of Medicine, Biodiscovery Institute,University Park, University of Nottingham,Nottingham, UK; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham, UK; Nottingham Digestive Diseases Centre, Translational Medical Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; NIHR Nottingham Biomedical Research Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust and the University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK; Sir Peter Mansfield Imaging Centre, School of Physics, University of Nottingham, UK; The Digital Research Service & The Advanced Data Analysis Centre, University of Nottingham, UK; Margaret Turner Warwick Centre for Fibrosing Lung Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, United Kingdom; Action for Pulmonary Fibrosis, United Kingdom; School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, UK; School of Computer Science, University of Nottingham, UKCorrespondence: Georgie M Massen, Email [email protected]: Electronic healthcare records (EHRs) are used to document diagnoses, symptoms, tests, and prescriptions. Though not primarily collected for research purposes, owing to the size of the data as well as the depth of information collected, they have been used extensively to conduct epidemiological research. The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) is an EHR database containing representative data of the UK population with regard to age, sex, race, and social deprivation measures. Fibrotic conditions are characterised by excessive scarring, contributing towards organ dysfunction and eventual organ failure. Fibrosis is associated with ageing as well as many other factors, it is hypothesised that fibrotic conditions are caused by the same underlying pathological mechanism. We calculated the prevalence of fibrotic conditions (as defined in a previous Delphi survey of clinicians) as well as the prevalence of fibrotic multimorbidity (the proportion of people with multiple fibrotic conditions).Methods: We included a random sample of 993,370 UK adults, alive, and enrolled at a UK general practice, providing data to the CPRD Aurum database as of 1st of January 2015. Individuals had to be eligible for linkage to hospital episode statistics (HES) and ONS death registration. We calculated the point prevalence of fibrotic conditions and multi-morbid fibrosis on the 1st of January 2015. Using death records of those who died in 2015, we investigated the prevalence of fibrosis associated death. We explored the most commonly co-occurring fibrotic conditions and determined the settings in which diagnoses were commonly made (primary care, secondary care or after death).Results: The point prevalence of any fibrotic condition was 21.46%. In total, 6.00% of people had fibrotic multimorbidity. Of the people who died in 2015, 34.82% had a recording of a fibrotic condition listed on their death certificate.Conclusion: The key finding was that fibrotic multimorbidity affects approximately 1 in 16 people.Plain Language Summary: Fibrotic conditions are scarring conditions which impact the way an organ functions and eventually lead to organ failure. We studied routinely collected health data from GPs, hospitals, and death certificates to estimate the percentage of UK adults who had fibrotic diseases. We found that 1 in 5 people had at least one fibrotic disease, and we also found that 1 in 16 people had more than one fibrotic disease.Keywords: fibrosis, CPRD, electronic health records, multimorbidity, fibrotic multimorbidity, ON

IL8 polymorphisms and overall survival in pazopanib- or sunitinib-treated patients with renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated germline single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for association with overall survival (OS) in pazopanib- or sunitinib-treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). METHODS: The discovery analysis tested 27 SNPs within 13 genes from a phase III pazopanib trial (N=241, study 1). Suggestive associations were then pursued in two independent datasets: a phase III trial (COMPARZ) comparing pazopanib vs sunitinib (N=729, study 2) and an observational study of sunitinib-treated patients (N=89, study 3). RESULTS: In study 1, four SNPs showed nominally significant association (P≤0.05) with OS; two of these SNPs (rs1126647, rs4073) in IL8 were associated (P≤0.05) with OS in study 2. Because rs1126647 and rs4073 were highly correlated, only rs1126647 was evaluated in study 3, which also showed association (P≤0.05). In the combined data, rs1126647 was associated with OS after conservative multiple-test adjustment (P=8.8 × 10(-5); variant vs reference allele hazard ratio 1.32, 95% confidence interval: 1.15-1.52), without evidence for heterogeneity of effects between studies or between pazopanib- and sunitinib-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Variant alleles of IL8 polymorphisms are associated with poorer survival outcomes in pazopanib- or sunitinib-treated patients with aRCC. These findings provide insight in aRCC prognosis and may advance our thinking in development of new therapies