95 research outputs found
Applications with Discrete and Continuous Models: Harvesting and Contact Tracing
Harvest plays an important role in management decisions, from fisheries to pest control. Discrete models enable us to explore the importance of timing of management decisions including the order of events of particular actions. We derive novel mechanistic models featuring explicit within season harvest timing and level. Our models feature explicit discrete density independent birth pulses, continuous density dependent mortality, and density independent harvest level at a within season harvest time. We explore optimization of within-season harvest level and timing through optimal control of these population models. With a fixed harvest level, harvest timing is taken as the control. Then with fixed timing, the harvest level is implemented as the control. Finally, both harvest timing and level are used as controls. We maximize an objective functional which includes management goals of maximizing yield, maximizing stock, and minimizing costs associated with both harvest intensity and harvest timing.
The 2014-2016 West African outbreak of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) was the largest and most deadly to date. Contact tracing, following up those who may have been infected through contact with an infected individual to prevent secondary spread, plays a vital role in controlling such outbreaks. However, there were many complications and challenges to contact tracing efforts during the 2014-2016 outbreak. We present a system of ordinary differential equations to model contact tracing in Sierra Leone during the outbreak. Using data on cumulative cases and deaths we estimate most of the parameters in our model. We include the novel features of counting the total number of people being traced and tying this directly to the number of tracers doing this work. We explore the role contact tracing played in eventually ending the outbreak and examine the potential impact of improved contact tracing on the death toll
Functional Specialization of Cellulose Synthase Isoforms in a Moss Shows Parallels with Seed Plants
The secondary cell walls of tracheary elements and fibers are rich in cellulose microfibrils that are helically oriented and laterally aggregated. Support cells within the leaf midribs of mosses deposit cellulose-rich secondary cell walls, but their biosynthesis and microfibril organization have not been examined. Although the Cellulose Synthase (CESA) gene families of mosses and seed plants diversified independently, CESA knockout analysis in the moss Physcomitrella patens revealed parallels with Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) in CESA functional specialization, with roles for both subfunctionalization and neofunctionalization. The similarities include regulatory uncoupling of the CESAs that synthesize primary and secondary cell walls, a requirement for two or more functionally distinct CESA isoforms for secondary cell wall synthesis, interchangeability of some primary and secondary CESAs, and some CESA redundancy. The cellulose-deficient midribs of ppcesa3/8 knockouts provided negative controls for the structural characterization of stereid secondary cell walls in wild type P. patens. Sum frequency generation spectra collected from midribs were consistent with cellulose microfibril aggregation, and polarization microscopy revealed helical microfibril orientation only in wild type leaves. Thus, stereid secondary walls are structurally distinct from primary cell walls, and they share structural characteristics with the secondary walls of tracheary elements and fibers. We propose a mechanism for the convergent evolution of secondary walls in which the deposition of aggregated and helically oriented microfibrils is coupled to rapid and highly localized cellulose synthesis enabled by regulatory uncoupling from primary wall synthesis
Rationale, design and methods of the Study of Work and Pain (SWAP): a cluster randomised controlled trial testing the addition of a vocational advice service to best current primary care for patients with musculoskeletal pain (ISRCTN 52269669)
Background
Musculoskeletal pain is a major contributor to short and long term work absence. Patients
seek care from their general practitioner (GP) and yet GPs often feel ill-equipped to deal with
work issues. Providing a vocational case management service in primary care, to support
patients with musculoskeletal problems to remain at or return to work, is one potential
solution but requires robust evaluation to test clinical and cost-effectiveness.
Methods/Design
This protocol describes a cluster randomised controlled trial, with linked qualitative
interviews, to investigate the effect of introducing a vocational advice service into general
practice, to provide a structured approach to managing work related issues in primary care
patients with musculoskeletal pain who are absent from work or struggling to remain in work.
General practices (n = 6) will be randomised to offer best current care or best current care
plus a vocational advice service. Adults of working age who are absent from or struggling to
remain in work due to a musculoskeletal pain problem will be invited to participate and 330
participants will be recruited. Data collection will be through patient completed
questionnaires at baseline, 4 and 12 months. The primary outcome is self-reported work
absence at 4 months. Incremental cost-utility analysis will be undertaken to calculate the cost
per additional QALY gained and incremental net benefits. A linked interview study will
explore the experiences of the vocational advice service from the perspectives of GPs, nurse
practitioners (NPs), patients and vocational advisors.
Discussion
This paper presents the rationale, design, and methods of the Study of Work And Pain
(SWAP) trial. The results of this trial will provide evidence to inform primary care practice
and guide the development of services to provide support for musculoskeletal pain patients
with work-related issues.
Trial registration
Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN52269669
Clinical course, characteristics and prognostic indicators in patients presenting with back and leg pain in primary care. The ATLAS study protocol
Low-back related leg pain with or without nerve root involvement is associated with a poor prognosis compared to low back pain (LBP) alone. Compared to the literature investigating prognostic indicators of outcome for LBP, there is limited evidence on prognostic factors for low back-related leg pain including the group with nerve root pain. This 1 year prospective consultation-based observational cohort study will describe the clinical, imaging, demographic characteristics and health economic outcomes for the whole cohort, will investigate differences and identify prognostic indicators of outcome (i.e. change in disability at 12 months), for the whole cohort and, separately, for those classified with and without nerve root pain. In addition, nested qualitative studies will provide insights on the clinical consultation and the impact of diagnosis and treatment on patients' symptom management and illness trajectory
The clinical course of low back pain: a meta-analysis comparing outcomes in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) and observational studies.
BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that the course of low back pain (LBP) symptoms in randomised clinical trials (RCTs) follows a pattern of large improvement regardless of the type of treatment. A similar pattern was independently observed in observational studies. However, there is an assumption that the clinical course of symptoms is particularly influenced in RCTs by mere participation in the trials. To test this assumption, the aim of our study was to compare the course of LBP in RCTs and observational studies. METHODS: Source of studies CENTRAL database for RCTs and MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE and hand search of systematic reviews for cohort studies. Studies include individuals aged 18 or over, and concern non-specific LBP. Trials had to concern primary care treatments. Data were extracted on pain intensity. Meta-regression analysis was used to compare the pooled within-group change in pain in RCTs with that in cohort studies calculated as the standardised mean change (SMC). RESULTS: 70 RCTs and 19 cohort studies were included, out of 1134 and 653 identified respectively. LBP symptoms followed a similar course in RCTs and cohort studies: a rapid improvement in the first 6 weeks followed by a smaller further improvement until 52 weeks. There was no statistically significant difference in pooled SMC between RCTs and cohort studies at any time point:- 6 weeks: RCTs: SMC 1.0 (95% CI 0.9 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.2 (0.7to 1.7); 13 weeks: RCTs 1.2 (1.1 to 1.3) and cohorts 1.0 (0.8 to 1.3); 27 weeks: RCTs 1.1 (1.0 to 1.2) and cohorts 1.2 (0.8 to 1.7); 52 weeks: RCTs 0.9 (0.8 to 1.0) and cohorts 1.1 (0.8 to 1.6). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical course of LBP symptoms followed a pattern that was similar in RCTs and cohort observational studies. In addition to a shared 'natural history', enrolment of LBP patients in clinical studies is likely to provoke responses that reflect the nonspecific effects of seeking and receiving care, independent of the study design
Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities
Aim: Comprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW). Location: Global. Taxon: All extant mammal species. Methods: Range maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species). Results: Range maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use. Main conclusion: Expert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control.Fil: Marsh, Charles J.. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Sica, Yanina. Yale University; Estados UnidosFil: Burguin, Connor. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: Dorman, Wendy A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Anderson, Robert C.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: del Toro Mijares, Isabel. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Vigneron, Jessica G.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Barve, Vijay. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Dombrowik, Victoria L.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Duong, Michelle. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Guralnick, Robert. University Of Florida. Florida Museum Of History; Estados UnidosFil: Hart, Julie A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Maypole, J. Krish. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: McCall, Kira. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Ranipeta, Ajay. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Schuerkmann, Anna. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Torselli, Michael A.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Lacher, Thomas. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: Wilson, Don E.. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Abba, Agustin Manuel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - La Plata. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo. Centro de Estudios ParasitolĂłgicos y de Vectores; ArgentinaFil: Aguirre, Luis F.. Universidad Mayor de San SimĂłn; BoliviaFil: Arroyo Cabrales, JoaquĂn. Instituto Nacional de AntropologĂa E Historia, Mexico; MĂ©xicoFil: AstĂșa, Diego. Universidade Federal de Pernambuco; BrasilFil: Baker, Andrew M.. Queensland University of Technology; Australia. Queensland Museum; AustraliaFil: Braulik, Gill. University of St. Andrews; Reino UnidoFil: Braun, Janet K.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Brito, Jorge. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Busher, Peter E.. Boston University; Estados UnidosFil: Burneo, Santiago F.. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: Camacho, M. Alejandra. Pontificia Universidad CatĂłlica del Ecuador; EcuadorFil: de Almeida Chiquito, Elisandra. Universidade Federal do EspĂrito Santo; BrasilFil: Cook, Joseph A.. University of New Mexico; Estados UnidosFil: CuĂ©llar Soto, Erika. Sultan Qaboos University; OmĂĄnFil: Davenport, Tim R. B.. Wildlife Conservation Society; TanzaniaFil: Denys, Christiane. MusĂ©um National d'Histoire Naturelle; FranciaFil: Dickman, Christopher R.. The University Of Sydney; AustraliaFil: Eldridge, Mark D. B.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Fernandez Duque, Eduardo. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Francis, Charles M.. Environment And Climate Change Canada; CanadĂĄFil: Frankham, Greta. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Freitas, Thales. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul; BrasilFil: Friend, J. Anthony. Conservation And Attractions; AustraliaFil: Giannini, Norberto Pedro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico - TucumĂĄn. Unidad Ejecutora Lillo; ArgentinaFil: Gursky-Doyen, Sharon. Texas A&M University; Estados UnidosFil: HacklĂ€nder, Klaus. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Hawkins, Melissa. National Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Helgen, Kristofer M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Heritage, Steven. University of Duke; Estados UnidosFil: Hinckley, Arlo. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Holden, Mary. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Holekamp, Kay E.. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Humle, Tatyana. University Of Kent; Reino UnidoFil: Ibåñez Ulargui, Carlos. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Jackson, Stephen M.. Australian Museum; AustraliaFil: Janecka, Mary. University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown; Estados Unidos. University of Pittsburgh; Estados UnidosFil: Jenkins, Paula. Natural History Museum; Reino UnidoFil: Juste, Javier. Consejo Superior de Investigaciones CientĂficas. EstaciĂłn BiolĂłgica de Doñana; EspañaFil: Leite, Yuri L. R.. Universidade Federal do EspĂrito Santo; BrasilFil: Novaes, Roberto Leonan M.. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro; BrasilFil: Lim, Burton K.. Royal Ontario Museum; CanadĂĄFil: Maisels, Fiona G.. Wildlife Conservation Society; Estados UnidosFil: Mares, Michael A.. Oklahoma State University; Estados UnidosFil: Marsh, Helene. James Cook University; AustraliaFil: Mattioli, Stefano. UniversitĂ degli Studi di Siena; ItaliaFil: Morton, F. Blake. University of Hull; Reino UnidoFil: Ojeda, Agustina Alejandra. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas. Provincia de Mendoza. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo. Instituto Argentino de Investigaciones de las Zonas Ăridas; ArgentinaFil: Ordóñez Garza, NictĂ©. Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad; EcuadorFil: Pardiñas, Ulises Francisco J.. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Centro Nacional PatagĂłnico. Instituto de Diversidad y EvoluciĂłn Austral; ArgentinaFil: Pavan, Mariana. Universidade de Sao Paulo; BrasilFil: Riley, Erin P.. San Diego State University; Estados UnidosFil: Rubenstein, Daniel I.. University of Princeton; Estados UnidosFil: Ruelas, Dennisse. Museo de Historia Natural, Lima; PerĂșFil: Schai-Braun, StĂ©phanie. Universitat Fur Bodenkultur Wien; AustriaFil: Schank, Cody J.. University of Texas at Austin; Estados UnidosFil: Shenbrot, Georgy. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Solari, Sergio. Universidad de Antioquia; ColombiaFil: Superina, Mariella. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones CientĂficas y TĂ©cnicas. Centro CientĂfico TecnolĂłgico Conicet - Mendoza. Instituto de Medicina y BiologĂa Experimental de Cuyo; ArgentinaFil: Tsang, Susan. American Museum of Natural History; Estados UnidosFil: Van Cakenberghe, Victor. Universiteit Antwerp; BĂ©lgicaFil: Veron, Geraldine. UniversitĂ© Pierre et Marie Curie; FranciaFil: Wallis, Janette. Kasokwa-kityedo Forest Project; UgandaFil: Whittaker, Danielle. Michigan State University; Estados UnidosFil: Wells, Rod. Flinders University.; AustraliaFil: Wittemyer, George. State University of Colorado - Fort Collins; Estados UnidosFil: Woinarski, John. Charles Darwin University; AustraliaFil: Upham, Nathan S.. University of Yale; Estados UnidosFil: Jetz, Walter. University of Yale; Estados Unido
Expert range maps of global mammal distributions harmonised to three taxonomic authorities
AimComprehensive, global information on species' occurrences is an essential biodiversity variable and central to a range of applications in ecology, evolution, biogeography and conservation. Expert range maps often represent a species' only available distributional information and play an increasing role in conservation assessments and macroecology. We provide global range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species harmonised to the taxonomy of the Mammal Diversity Database (MDD) mobilised from two sources, the Handbook of the Mammals of the World (HMW) and the Illustrated Checklist of the Mammals of the World (CMW).LocationGlobal.TaxonAll extant mammal species.MethodsRange maps were digitally interpreted, georeferenced, error-checked and subsequently taxonomically aligned between the HMW (6253 species), the CMW (6431 species) and the MDD taxonomies (6362 species).ResultsRange maps can be evaluated and visualised in an online map browser at Map of Life (mol.org) and accessed for individual or batch download for non-commercial use.Main conclusionExpert maps of species' global distributions are limited in their spatial detail and temporal specificity, but form a useful basis for broad-scale characterizations and model-based integration with other data. We provide georeferenced range maps for the native ranges of all extant mammal species as shapefiles, with species-level metadata and source information packaged together in geodatabase format. Across the three taxonomic sources our maps entail, there are 1784 taxonomic name differences compared to the maps currently available on the IUCN Red List website. The expert maps provided here are harmonised to the MDD taxonomic authority and linked to a community of online tools that will enable transparent future updates and version control
2017 Research & Innovation Day Program
A one day showcase of applied research, social innovation, scholarship projects and activities.https://first.fanshawec.ca/cri_cripublications/1004/thumbnail.jp
- âŠ