Open Culture Data: otwarcie danych GLAM od podstaw

Open Culture Data started as a grassroot movement at the end of 2011, with the aim to open up data in the cultural sector and stimulate (creative) re-use. In this context, we organised a hackathon, which resulted in the creation of 13 Open Culture Data apps. After this successful first half year, a solid network of cultural heritage professionals, copyright and open data experts and developers was formed. In April 2012, an Open Culture Data masterclass started in which 17 institutions got practical, technical and legal advice on how to open data for re-use. Furthermore, we organised an app competition and three hackathons, in which developers were stimulated to re-use Open Cultural Datasets in new and innovative ways. These activities resulted in 27 more apps and 34 open datasets. In this paper we share lessons-learned that will inform heritage institutions with real-life quantitative and qualitative experiences, best practices and guidelines from their peers for opening up data and the ways in which this data is reused. Since the open culture data field is still relatively young, this is highly relevant information needed to stimulate others to join the open data movement. To this end, we are already taking steps to cross the borders and let Europe know about the initiative, on both a practical and a policy level.Open Culture Data (dane otwartej kultury) to ruch, który zaczął rozwijać się pod koniec 2011 r. od obywatelskiej inicjatywy, mającej na celu otwarcie danych w sektorze kultury oraz rozbudzenie zainteresowania (twórczego) ich ponownym wykorzystaniem. W tych okolicznościach, zorganizowaliśmy maraton dla programistów (hackathon), w wyniku którego powstało 13 aplikacji Open Culture Data. Po tym pomyślnym pierwszym półroczu uformowała się trwała społeczność osób zawodowo związanych ze sferą dziedzictwa kulturowego, praw autorskich oraz specjalistów od otwartych danych i programistów. W kwietniu 2012 r. rozpoczął się kurs mistrzowski Open Culture Data, podczas którego 17 instytucji zdobyło praktyczną, techniczną i prawniczą wiedzę, jak otwierać dane w celu ich ponownego wykorzystania. Ponadto, zorganizowaliśmy konkurs na aplikacje oraz trzy maratony programistyczne, podczas których poproszono programistów o ponowne użycie zbioru danych otwartej kultury (Open Culture Dataset) w sposób nowatorski i innowacyjny. W wyniku tych działań powstało 27 kolejnych aplikacji oraz 34 otwarte zbiory danych. W niniejszym artykule chcemy podzielić się z instytucjami dziedzictwa kulturowego wiedzą zdobytą podczas rzeczywistych jakościowych i ilościowych doświadczeń, dobrych praktyk oraz wytycznych z otwierania danych i sposobów na ich ponowne wykorzystanie przez siostrzane instytucje. Póki dziedzina otwartych danych kultury jest stosunkowo świeża, ma to bardzo istotne znaczenie dla wzbudzania w innych chęci przyłączenia się do ruchu otwartych danych. Dlatego też, czynimy pierwsze kroki, by przekroczyć granice i rozpowszechnić tę inicjatywę w Europie zarówno pod względem praktycznym, jak i strategicznym

Two-year clinical follow-up enhances the diagnosis of early-stage hip osteoarthritis:data from check cohort

OBJECTIVE: To provide a set of diagnostic criteria for early-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA) in primary care, using signs and symptoms monitored over 2 years in individuals with hip pain and/or stiffness. Additionally, the study aimed to see whether these factors were additive to factors based on baseline signs and symptoms only. METHODS: Data of the 543 persons with 735 symptomatic hips were collected from the prospective Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee cohort study. Using data from 5 to 10 years of follow-up, 24 experts (13 general practitioners, 11 secondary care physicians (6 rheumatologists and 5 orthopaedic surgeons)) inspected individuals' medical data on the presence of clinically relevant hip OA. Their diagnoses are used as reference standards. Backward selection method was used to provide models using the factors from baseline to 2 years of follow-up. Additionally, new models were combined with previously published models, using same selection method. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated after each removal of factors in the final combined models. RESULTS: Radiographic factors and high-sensitive C reactive protein did not end up in any model with change factors only. AUC value (SD) of the final obtained model of change factors was 0.70 (0.01). Adding newly defined factors to previously published models significantly (p&lt;0.0001) increased the AUC value to 0.75 (0.01). CONCLUSION: Final diagnostic criteria, consisting only of the factors obtained through history taking and physical examination, were able to detect early-stage hip OA associated with clinically relevant hip OA 5-10 years later, with 'moderate' precision.</p

Evaluation of the Diagnostic Performance of American College of Rheumatology, EULAR, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence Criteria Against Clinically Relevant Knee Osteoarthritis: Data From the CHECK Cohort

Objective: Our objective was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the EULAR, American College of Rheumatology (ACR), and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) criteria by using clinical experts’ diagnosis of clinically relevant knee osteoarthritis (OA) as the outcome of interest. Methods: In a previous study, we recruited clinical experts to evaluate longitudinal (5-, 8-, and 10-year follow-up) clinical and radiographic data of symptomatic knees from the Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee (CHECK) study for the presence or absence of clinically relevant OA. In the current study, ACR, EULAR, and NICE criteria were applied to the same 5-, 8-, and 10-year follow-up data; then a knee was diagnosed with OA if fulfilling the criteria at one of the three time points (F1), two of the time points (F2), or at all three time points (F3). Using clinically relevant OA as the reference standard, the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for the three criteria were assessed. Results: A total of 539 participants for a total of 833 examined knees were included. Thirty-six percent of knees were diagnosed with clinically relevant OA by experts. Sixty-seven percent to 74% of the knees received the same diagnosis (OA or non-OA) by the three criteria sets for the different definitions (F1 to F3). EULAR consistently (F1 through F3) had the highest specificity, and NICE consistently had the highest sensitivity. Conclusion: The diagnoses only moderately overlapped among the three criteria sets. The EULAR criteria seemed to be more suitable for study enrollment (when aimed at recruiting clinically relevant OA knees), given the highest specificities. The NICE criteria, given the highest sensitivities, could be more useful for an initial diagnosis in clinical practice

Two-year clinical follow-up enhances the diagnosis of early-stage hip osteoarthritis: data from check cohort

OBJECTIVE: To provide a set of diagnostic criteria for early-stage hip osteoarthritis (OA) in primary care, using signs and symptoms monitored over 2 years in individuals with hip pain and/or stiffness. Additionally, the study aimed to see whether these factors were additive to factors based on baseline signs and symptoms only. METHODS: Data of the 543 persons with 735 symptomatic hips were collected from the prospective Cohort Hip and Cohort Knee cohort study. Using data from 5 to 10 years of follow-up, 24 experts (13 general practitioners, 11 secondary care physicians (6 rheumatologists and 5 orthopaedic surgeons)) inspected individuals' medical data on the presence of clinically relevant hip OA. Their diagnoses are used as reference standards. Backward selection method was used to provide models using the factors from baseline to 2 years of follow-up. Additionally, new models were combined with previously published models, using same selection method. Area under the curve (AUC) was calculated after each removal of factors in the final combined models. RESULTS: Radiographic factors and high-sensitive C reactive protein did not end up in any model with change factors only. AUC value (SD) of the final obtained model of change factors was 0.70 (0.01). Adding newly defined factors to previously published models significantly (p<0.0001) increased the AUC value to 0.75 (0.01). CONCLUSION: Final diagnostic criteria, consisting only of the factors obtained through history taking and physical examination, were able to detect early-stage hip OA associated with clinically relevant hip OA 5-10 years later, with 'moderate' precision

Towards Better Sharing of Cultural Heritage -- An Agenda for Copyright Reform

This paper is intended to act as a pillar and reference point for CC's advocacy work in copyright reform in the cultural heritage context, with a focus on issues arising in the digital environment. It may serve to support members of the CC community in their own advocacy efforts, guide policymakers in their legislative processes, and inform anyone interested in the policy issues gravitating around access and reuse of culture and cultural heritage. It will likely be adapted into a GLAM Guide for Policymakers and will be augmented with real-life examples, case studies and practical advice.It starts with an overview of copyright challenges to the legitimate activities of GLAMs, notably preservation (largely through digitization) and sharing of digital and digitized content images and data for access, use and reuse. It also notes copyright's chilling effects in the face of the GLAM sector's general risk aversion. The paper then offers insights towards effective copyright reform addressing those challenges, with a focus on the opportunities related to the digital environment. The proposals for reform aim to create legal certainty and international harmonization as well as to facilitate cross-border transactions.The paper encourages policymakers to recognize and support the pivotal roles of GLAMs in preserving and providing access to knowledge and culture to all members of society. It urges policymakers to engage with stakeholders to ensure there are clear, simple, and effective policies in place to support better sharing of cultural heritage in the public interest.The paper provides a high-level overview of the policy issues and, as a whole, it does not necessarily reflect the current situation in any specific jurisdiction.

Platelet-Rich Plasma Injections for the Treatment of Ankle Osteoarthritis

Background: Ankle osteoarthritis is debilitating and usually affects relatively young people, often as a result of previous ankle traumas, frequently occurring in sports. Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injections for ankle osteoarthritis have shown no evidence of benefit over the course of 26 weeks. Previous studies on PRP for knee osteoarthritis showed that clinically significant improvements with PRP occurred between 6 to 12 months in the absence of initial benefit. No studies have evaluated the effect of PRP from 6 to 12 months in ankle osteoarthritis. Purpose: To assess the efficacy of PRP injections in ankle osteoarthritis over the course of 52 weeks. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: In this 52-week follow-up trial, 100 patients with ankle osteoarthritis were randomized to a PRP group or placebo (saline) group. Patients received 2 intra-articular talocrural injections: at inclusion and after 6 weeks. Patient-reported outcome measures were used to assess pain, function, quality of life, and indirect costs over 52 weeks. Results: Two patients (2%) were lost to follow-up. The adjusted between-group difference for the patient-reported American Orthopaedic Foot &amp; Ankle Society score over 52 weeks was −2 points (95% CI, −5 to 2; P =.31) in favor of the placebo group. No significant between-group differences were observed for any of the secondary outcome measures. Conclusion: For patients with ankle osteoarthritis, PRP injections did not improve ankle symptoms and function over 52 weeks compared with placebo injections. Registration: NTR7261 (Netherlands Trial Register).</p

Open Culture Data position paper

Open Culture Data started as a grassroots movement at the end of 2011, with the aim to open up data in the cultural sector and stimulate (creative) reuse. In this context, we organised a hackathon, which resulted in the creation of 13 Open Culture Data apps. After this successful first half year, a solid network of cultural heritage professionals, copyright and open data experts and developers was formed. In April 2012, an Open Culture Data masterclass started in which 17 institutions get practical, technical and legal advice on how to open their data for re-use. Furthermore, we organised an app competition and three hackathons, in which developers were stimulated to re-use Open Cultural Datasets in new and innovative ways. These activities resulted in 27 more apps and 34 open datasets. In this paper we share lessons-learned, that will inform heritage institutions with real-life quantitative and qualitative experiences, best practices and guidelines of their peers with opening up data and the ways in which this data is reused. Since the open culture data field is still relatively young, this is highly relevant information needed to stimulate other to join the open data movement. To this end, we are already taking steps to cross the borders and let Europe know about the initiative, on both a practical and a policy level

Open Data Reader 2016

In deze publicatie bekijken we het gecompliceerde veld van open data, waaronder de randvoorwaarden voor het openen van data. We bekijken specifiek drie verschillende facetten van de opendatapraktijk: de juridische kaders, de technologische factoren en de beleidsvorming rondom het actief ontsluiten van data voor publieke instellingen. Welke tactieken worden nu ingezet, en wat zijn daarvan de voor- en nadelen