A Method to Discover Digital Collaborative Conversations in Business Collaborations

Many companies have a suite of digital tools, such as Enterprise Social Networks, conferencing and document sharing software, and email, to facilitate collaboration among employees. During, or at the end of a collaboration, documents are often produced. People who were not involved in the initial collaboration often have difficulties understanding parts of its content because they are lacking the overall context. We argue there is valuable contextual and collaborative knowledge contained in these tools (content and use) that can be used to understand the document. Our goal is to rebuild the conversations that took place over a messaging service and their links with a digital conferencing tool during document production. The novelty in our approach is to combine several conversation-threading methods to identify interesting links between distinct conversations. Specifically we combine header-field information with social, temporal and semantic proximities. Our findings suggest the messaging service and conferencing tool are used in a complementary way. The primary results confirm that combining different conversation threading approaches is efficient to detect and construct conversation threads from distinct digital conversations concerning the same document

Extraction de connaissances à partir de l’usage des outils professionnels de communication et de collaboration

National audienceLa multiplication des outils de communication et de collaboration (média sociaux, e-mail, conférence à distance, etc.) a entraîné ces dernières années une explosion du volume de données non-structurées. Or, ces données (contenus et usages des outils) recèlent une connaissance explicite et tacite de valeur, souvent inexploitée. Cette connaissance apporte un contexte essentiel pour comprendre les documents de référence existants – plus structurés – qui ont été produits de manière collaborative, permettant à tout employé de donner un sens à leur contenu et favoriser ainsi la collaboration. Après avoir décrit différentes classifications de connaissances, les outils de communication et de collaboration sont catégorisés sur la base de travaux précédents dans le domaine du travail collaboratif, puis au travers de théories sur les médias. Une approche bottom-up est proposée pour extraire la connaissance en utilisant des méthodes quantitatives et des méthodes qualitatives (i.e. des entretiens, questionnaires, pop-ups, fichiers de traces, etc.). Cette connaissance sera utilisée dans le but de développer un modèle qui servira de base pour des collaborations plus efficaces et plus efficientes

Patient-Reported Outcomes in First-Line Antiretroviral Therapy: Results From NEAT001/ANRS143 Trial Comparing Darunavir/Ritonavir in Combination With Tenofovir/Emtricitabine or Raltegravir

Background: There are few data comparing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in randomized trials of initial antiretroviral therapy. We present results from a substudy of the NEAT001/ ANRS143 trial. Methods: The randomized trial compared first-line DRV/r 800/100 mg once daily plus RAL 400 mg twice daily and DRV/r plus TDF/ FTC 245/200 mg once daily. Changes in PROs were assessed with 3 questionnaires: EuroQoL 5 domains (EQ-5D), Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, and HIV Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire. Major depressive disorder (MDD) was defined as CES-D $16. General estimating equations were used to model change over 96 weeks in PROs from baseline. Results: Of the 805 participants, 797 (99substudy. Baseline PRO data were similar for the 2 randomized groups. Health status improved over time with a mean increase in EQ-5D visual analogue scale (VAS) of 8.0 by W96 [95to 9.4; P, 0.001], and no statistically significant differences between groups (difference of 0.3 on VAS score (95global P value$ 0.05 for all domains over follow-up). There was no significant difference between groups on CES-D [difference of 20.1 (95% CI: 21.3 to 1.1); P = 0.9], or MDD during follow-up, adjusted for baseline MDD (odds ratio = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.18; P = 0.9). RAL + DRV/r group had lower level of convenience (P = 0.03) and fitted less well into patients’ lifestyle (P = 0.007) than the TDF/FTC + DRV/r regimen, and was associated with lower treatment satisfaction [median score: 53 RAL + DRV/r vs 55 TDF/FTC + DRV/r (P = 0.001)]. Conclusion: PROs improved after starting antiretroviral therapy, with no statistically significant difference between groups. The lower satisfaction with RAL + DRV/r may be explained by twicedaily administration

Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics of ritonavir-boosted darunavir in the presence of raltegravir or tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine in HIV-infected adults and the relationship with virological response : a sub-study of the NEAT001/ANRS143 randomized trial

OBJECTIVES: NEAT001/ANRS143 demonstrated non-inferiority of once-daily darunavir/ritonavir (800/100 mg) + twice-daily raltegravir (400 mg) versus darunavir/ritonavir + tenofovir disoproxil fumarate/emtricitabine (245/200 mg once daily) in treatment-naive patients. We investigated the population pharmacokinetics of darunavir, ritonavir, tenofovir and emtricitabine and relationships with demographics, genetic polymorphisms and virological failure. METHODS: Non-linear mixed-effects models (NONMEM v. 7.3) were applied to determine pharmacokinetic parameters and assess demographic covariates and relationships with SNPs (SLCO3A1, SLCO1B1, NR1I2, NR1I3, CYP3A5*3, CYP3A4*22, ABCC2, ABCC10, ABCG2 and SCL47A1). The relationship between model-predicted darunavir AUC0-24 and C24 with time to virological failure was evaluated by Cox regression. RESULTS: Of 805 enrolled, 716, 720, 347 and 361 were included in the darunavir, ritonavir, tenofovir and emtricitabine models, respectively (11% female, 83% Caucasian). No significant effect of patient demographics or SNPs was observed for darunavir or tenofovir apparent oral clearance (CL/F); coadministration of raltegravir did not influence darunavir or ritonavir CL/F. Ritonavir CL/F decreased by 23% in NR1I2 63396C>T carriers and emtricitabine CL/F was linearly associated with creatinine clearance (P < 0.001). No significant relationship was demonstrated between darunavir AUC0-24 or C24 and time to virological failure [HR (95% CI): 2.28 (0.53-9.80), P = 0.269; and 1.82 (0.61-5.41), P = 0.279, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Darunavir concentrations were unaltered in the presence of raltegravir and not associated with virological failure. Polymorphisms investigated had little impact on study-drug pharmacokinetics. Darunavir/ritonavir + raltegravir may be an appropriate option for patients experiencing NRTI-associated toxicity