A Human-Centered Approach for Designing Decision Support Systems

The choice to include the human in the decision process affects four key areas of system design: problem representation, system analysis and design, solution technique selection, and interface requirements specification. I introduce a design methodology that captures the necessary choices associated with each of these areas. In particular I show how this methodology is applied to the design of an actual decision Support system for satellite operations scheduling. Supporting the user\u27s ability to monitor the actions of the system and to guide the decision process of the system are two key considerations in the successful design of a decision support system. Both of these points rely on the correct specification of human-computer interaction points. Traditional, computer-centered system design approaches do not do this well, if at all, and are insufficient for the design of decision support systems. These approaches typically leave the definition of human-computer interaction points till after the component and system level designs are complete. This is too late however since the component and system level design decisions can impose inflexible constraints on the choice of the human-computer interaction points. This often leads to the design of human-computer interaction points that are only good enough. These approaches result in ill-conceived problem representations and poor user-system interaction points because the system lacks the underlying architecture to support these constructs efficiently. Decision support systems require a new, human-centered design approach rather than the traditional computer-centered approaches

An APRI+ALBI Based Multivariable Model as Preoperative Predictor for Posthepatectomy Liver Failure.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND Clinically significant posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF B+C) remains the main cause of mortality after major hepatic resection. This study aimed to establish an APRI+ALBI, aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio (APRI) combined with albumin-bilirubin grade (ALBI), based multivariable model (MVM) to predict PHLF and compare its performance to indocyanine green clearance (ICG-R15 or ICG-PDR) and albumin-ICG evaluation (ALICE). METHODS 12,056 patients from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database were used to generate a MVM to predict PHLF B+C. The model was determined using stepwise backwards elimination. Performance of the model was tested using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis and validated in an international cohort of 2,525 patients. In 620 patients, the APRI+ALBI MVM, trained in the NSQIP cohort, was compared with MVM's based on other liver function tests (ICG clearance, ALICE) by comparing the areas under the curve (AUC). RESULTS A MVM including APRI+ALBI, age, sex, tumor type and extent of resection was found to predict PHLF B+C with an AUC of 0.77, with comparable performance in the validation cohort (AUC 0.74). In direct comparison with other MVM's based on more expensive and time-consuming liver function tests (ICG clearance, ALICE), the APRI+ALBI MVM demonstrated equal predictive potential for PHLF B+C. A smartphone application for calculation of the APRI+ALBI MVM was designed. CONCLUSION Risk assessment via the APRI+ALBI MVM for PHLF B+C increases preoperative predictive accuracy and represents an universally available and cost-effective risk assessment prior to hepatectomy, facilitated by a freely available smartphone app

European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020

The European Position Paper on Rhinosinusitis and Nasal Polyps 2020 is the update of similar evidence based position papers published in 2005 and 2007 and 2012. The core objective of the EPOS2020 guideline is to provide revised, up-to-date and clear evidence-based recommendations and integrated care pathways in ARS and CRS. EPOS2020 provides an update on the literature published and studies undertaken in the eight years since the EPOS2012 position paper was published and addresses areas not extensively covered in EPOS2012 such as paediatric CRS and sinus surgery. EPOS2020 also involves new stakeholders, including pharmacists and patients, and addresses new target users who have become more involved in the management and treatment of rhinosinusitis since the publication of the last EPOS document, including pharmacists, nurses, specialised care givers and indeed patients themselves, who employ increasing self-management of their condition using over the counter treatments. The document provides suggestions for future research in this area and offers updated guidance for definitions and outcome measurements in research in different settings. EPOS2020 contains chapters on definitions and classification where we have defined a large number of terms and indicated preferred terms. A new classification of CRS into primary and secondary CRS and further division into localized and diffuse disease, based on anatomic distribution is proposed. There are extensive chapters on epidemiology and predisposing factors, inflammatory mechanisms, (differential) diagnosis of facial pain, allergic rhinitis, genetics, cystic fibrosis, aspirin exacerbated respiratory disease, immunodeficiencies, allergic fungal rhinosinusitis and the relationship between upper and lower airways. The chapters on paediatric acute and chronic rhinosinusitis are totally rewritten. All available evidence for the management of acute rhinosinusitis and chronic rhinosinusitis with or without nasal polyps in adults and children is systematically reviewed and integrated care pathways based on the evidence are proposed. Despite considerable increases in the amount of quality publications in recent years, a large number of practical clinical questions remain. It was agreed that the best way to address these was to conduct a Delphi exercise. The results have been integrated into the respective sections. Last but not least, advice for patients and pharmacists and a new list of research needs are included.Peer reviewe

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field

31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

Sedative Load in Community-Dwelling Older Adults with Mild-Moderate Alzheimer's Disease: Longitudinal Relationships with Adverse Events, Delirium and Falls

Background Older adults are frequently prescribed medications with sedative effects, which are associated with numerous adverse consequences. However, the prevalence and longitudinal associations of sedative medication use in community-dwelling older adults with mild-moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD) has not been explored to date. Objectives Our objective was to assess the prevalence of sedative medication use in community-dwelling older adults with mild-moderate AD and examine the longitudinal association between sedative medication use and adverse events (AEs). Methods The association between baseline sedative load (SL) and AEs, unscheduled healthcare utilisation, delirium and falls was assessed in older adults with mild-moderate AD over 18 months using secondary analysis of NILVAD trial data (collected from 2014 to 2016). Baseline medication use was assessed, and the SL model was applied to each participant's medication individually. The SL model classifies medications into one of four categories: (1) primary sedatives, (2) medications with a sedating component or prominent side effect, (3) medications with sedation as a potential adverse reaction and (4) all other medications with no known sedative side effects. Medications in group 1 were assigned an SL score of 2, those in group 2 were assigned an SL score of 1, and those in categories 3 and 4 an SL score of 0. SL scores for each medication participants were taking were summed and the total SL calculated as an arithmetic sum of individual medications score. A total SL score &gt;= 3 was classed as high. Statistical analysis was conducted using Poisson regression and mixed-effects linear regression, with adjustment for important clinical covariates. We also assessed the impact of SL on dementia progression and cognitive decline. Results Over half (55.7% [284/510]) of those with mild-moderate AD (age 72.8 +/- 8.3 years, 61.9% female) were prescribed a regular medication with sedation as a primary effect or prominent side effect, with 22.2% (113/510) having a high SL (&gt;= 3). The most common medications contributing to SL were antidepressants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics and hypnotics. Over 18 months, increasing baseline SL was associated with incident AEs (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11-1.19;p&lt; 0.001), serious AEs (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.11-1.36;p&lt; 0.001) and unscheduled general practitioner visits (IRR 1.23; 95% CI 1.13-1.34;p&lt; 0.001). Further, increasing SL was associated with a greater likelihood of incident delirium (IRR 1.30; 95% CI 1.11-1.53;p&lt; 0.001) and falls (IRR 1.20; 95% CI 1.03-1.42;p= 0.02). Associations persisted after robust covariate adjustment. SL was not associated with accelerated cognitive decline or AD progression. Conclusions In the current study, over half of older adults with mild-moderate AD were prescribed at least one drug with a sedative effect, and a significant minority had a high SL. Increasing baseline SL was associated with a greater likelihood of incident AEs, delirium and falls, highlighting the need for optimal prescribing in this potentially vulnerable cohort

Antidepressant Use and Orthostatic Hypotension in Older Adults Living with Mild-to-Moderate Alzheimer Disease

Objectives: Antidepressant use is often reported as a risk factor for Orthostatic Hypotension (OH), however this relationship has never been explored in those with mild/moderate Alzheimer Disease (AD), who may represent a particularly vulnerable cohort. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from the NILVAD study. Participants with mild-moderate AD were recruited from 23 centres in 9 countries. Systolic and Diastolic Blood Pressure (SBP/DBP) was recorded in the seated position and after both 1 &amp; 5 minutes of standing. OH was defined as a drop of 6520 mmHg SBP/ 65 10 mmHg DBP. We examined the relationship between antidepressant use, orthostatic BP drop and the presence of OH, controlling for important covariates. Results: Of 509 participants (72.9 \ub1 8.3 years, 61.9% female), two-fifths (39.1%; 199/509) were prescribed a regular antidepressant. Antidepressant use was associated with a significantly greater SBP and DBP drop at 5 minutes (\u3b2: 1.83, 0.16-3.50, P = 0.03 for SBP; \u3b2: 1.13, 0.02-2.25, P &lt; 0.05 for DBP). Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor (SSRI) use was associated with a significantly greater likelihood of OH (OR 2.0, 1.1-3.6, P = 0.02). Both findings persisted following robust covariate adjustment. Conclusions: In older adults with AD, antidepressants were associated with a significantly greater SBP/DBP drop at 5 minutes. SSRI use in particular may be a risk factor for OH. This emphasises the need to screen older antidepressant users, and particularly those with AD, for ongoing orthostatic symptoms in order to reduce the risk of falls in this vulnerable cohort. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved