Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome

The sequence of the human genome encodes the genetic instructions for human physiology, as well as rich information about human evolution. In 2001, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium reported a draft sequence of the euchromatic portion of the human genome. Since then, the international collaboration has worked to convert this draft into a genome sequence with high accuracy and nearly complete coverage. Here, we report the result of this finishing process. The current genome sequence (Build 35) contains 2.85 billion nucleotides interrupted by only 341 gaps. It covers ∼99% of the euchromatic genome and is accurate to an error rate of ∼1 event per 100,000 bases. Many of the remaining euchromatic gaps are associated with segmental duplications and will require focused work with new methods. The near-complete sequence, the first for a vertebrate, greatly improves the precision of biological analyses of the human genome including studies of gene number, birth and death. Notably, the human enome seems to encode only 20,000-25,000 protein-coding genes. The genome sequence reported here should serve as a firm foundation for biomedical research in the decades ahead

Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2015: advancing efficient methodologies through community partnerships and team science

It is well documented that the majority of adults, children and families in need of evidence-based behavioral health interventionsi do not receive them [1, 2] and that few robust empirically supported methods for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) exist. The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) represents a burgeoning effort to advance the innovation and rigor of implementation research and is uniquely focused on bringing together researchers and stakeholders committed to evaluating the implementation of complex evidence-based behavioral health interventions. Through its diverse activities and membership, SIRC aims to foster the promise of implementation research to better serve the behavioral health needs of the population by identifying rigorous, relevant, and efficient strategies that successfully transfer scientific evidence to clinical knowledge for use in real world settings [3]. SIRC began as a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)-funded conference series in 2010 (previously titled the “Seattle Implementation Research Conference”; $150,000 USD for 3 conferences in 2011, 2013, and 2015) with the recognition that there were multiple researchers and stakeholdersi working in parallel on innovative implementation science projects in behavioral health, but that formal channels for communicating and collaborating with one another were relatively unavailable. There was a significant need for a forum within which implementation researchers and stakeholders could learn from one another, refine approaches to science and practice, and develop an implementation research agenda using common measures, methods, and research principles to improve both the frequency and quality with which behavioral health treatment implementation is evaluated. SIRC’s membership growth is a testament to this identified need with more than 1000 members from 2011 to the present.ii SIRC’s primary objectives are to: (1) foster communication and collaboration across diverse groups, including implementation researchers, intermediariesi, as well as community stakeholders (SIRC uses the term “EBP champions” for these groups) – and to do so across multiple career levels (e.g., students, early career faculty, established investigators); and (2) enhance and disseminate rigorous measures and methodologies for implementing EBPs and evaluating EBP implementation efforts. These objectives are well aligned with Glasgow and colleagues’ [4] five core tenets deemed critical for advancing implementation science: collaboration, efficiency and speed, rigor and relevance, improved capacity, and cumulative knowledge. SIRC advances these objectives and tenets through in-person conferences, which bring together multidisciplinary implementation researchers and those implementing evidence-based behavioral health interventions in the community to share their work and create professional connections and collaborations

“Immediate versus delayed autologous breast reconstruction in patients undergoing post-mastectomy radiation therapy: A paradigm shift”

Background: While negative impacts of radiation on breast reconstruction have been well accepted, timing of autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is still evolving. This study aims to address the dilemma of breast reconstruction timing in patients receiving PMRT. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed evaluating patients who underwent PMRT and autologous breast reconstruction. Postoperative complication and revision rates were compared. Results: Thirty-six immediate (immediate breast reconstruction [IBR]) and 89 delayed reconstructions (delayed breast reconstruction [DBR]) were included with comparable patient characteristics between groups. Overall complication rates were not significantly different, or when separately assessing for surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, fat necrosis, or substantial volume loss. No free flaps were lost in either group. Revision rates were significantly lower in the IBR group (p = 0.02). DBR resulted in appreciably larger volumes of fat grafting to the therapeutically reconstructed breast (p = 0.01) and more contralateral mastopexies (p = 0.02). No significant difference was observed in fat necrosis excision, breast reduction, or need for secondary flap reconstruction or prosthetic use for volume loss. Conclusions: IBR in the setting of PMRT does not result in higher rates of complications and requires fewer overall revisions, making it a compelling option for patients undergoing PMRT.</p

Simple graphical method for inherent occupational health assessment

The concept of inherently safer design was introduced to design a fundamentally safer process so that hazards can be avoided or minimized rather than controlled or managed. The ideology has later been extended to the environmental, but not health criteria due to its complicated underlying principles. Even though health risk methods are already established, majority are for existing plants assessment. Early consideration of health aspect starting from process design stage however, has received much less attention. This paper introduces a simple graphical method to evaluate the inherent occupational health hazards of chemical processes during the R&D stage. A survey was conducted to identify the important health parameters for the graphical method development, involving nine world inherent safety and health experts. Based on their input, process mode, material volatility, operating pressure and chemical health hazard (toxicity and adverse effect) are the significant factors affecting inherent health hazards of chemical processes. The choice of parameters was bounded by the information availability at this stage. The method was applied on six routes to methyl methacrylate and ten routes to acetic acid. The parameters were plotted for each subprocess of the alternative routes. The ‘healthiest’ route was selected based on thorough hazards assessment across all the subprocesses. The first case study reveals the tertiary butyl alcohol as the ‘healthiest’ one as it poses relatively lower, or at least comparable hazards to the other routes due to exposure and health impacts. Meanwhile the acetic acid case study indicates ethanol oxide and ethyl oxide based routes as the inherently healthier as they operate at lower operating pressure besides posing comparable hazards level for the other three parameters, compared to the other routes. The case studies show that the inherent occupational health of a chemical process can already be evaluated easily in the R&D stage with the simple graphical method proposed

Automotive Emotions: Feeling the Car.

Car cultures have social, material and, above all, affective dimensions that are overlooked in current strategies to influence car-driving decisions. Car consumption is never simply about rational economic choices, but is as much about aesthetic, emotional and sensory responses to driving, as well as patterns of kinship, sociability, habitation and work. Through a close examination of the aesthetic and especially kinaesthetic dimensions of automobility, this article locates car cultures (and their associated feelings) within a broader physical/material relational setting that includes both human bodies and car bodies, and the relations between them and the spaces through which they move (or fail to move). Drawing on both the phenomenology of car use and new approaches in the sociology of emotions, it is argued that everyday car cultures are implicated in a deep context of affective and embodied relations between people, machines and spaces of mobility and dwelling in which emotions and the senses play a key part – the emotional geographies of car use. Feelings for, of and within cars (‘automotive emotions’) come to be socially and culturally generated across three scales involved in the circulations and displacements performed by cars, roads and drivers: embodied sensibilities and kinaesthetic performances; familial and sociable practices of ‘caring’ through car use; and regional and national car cultures that form around particular systems of automobility. By showing how people feel about and in cars, and how the feel of different car cultures generates habitual forms of automobilized life and different dispositions towards driving, it is argued that we will be in a better position to re-evaluate the ethical dimensions of car consumption and the moral economies of car use