Determinants and impact of suboptimal asthma control in Europe : The INTERNATIONAL CROSS-SECTIONAL AND LONGITUDINAL ASSESSMENT ON ASTHMA CONTROL (LIAISON) study

Acknowledgements We are grateful to THERAmetrics for the study management, data collection and analysis. The authors would like to thank the following investigators for their contribution (>30 patients enrolled): F. Fohler, A.G. Haider, J. Hesse-Tonsa, J. Messner, W. Pohl (Austria); G. Joos, J.L. Halloy, R. Peche, H. Simonis, P. Van den Brande (Belgium); B. Bugnas, J.M. Chavaillon, P. Debove, S. Dury, L. Mathieu, O. Lagrange, A. Prudhomme, S. Verdier (France); A. Benedix, O. Kestermann, A. Deimling, G. Eckhardt, M. Gernhold, V. Grimm-Sachs, M. Hoefer, G. Hoheisel, C. Stolpe, C. Schilder, M. John, J. Uerscheln, K.H. Zeisler (Germany); A. Chaniotou, P. Demertzis, V. Filaditaki-Loverdou, A. Gaga, E. Georgatou-Papageorgiou, S. Michailidis, G. Pavkalou, M. Toumpis (Greece); K. Csicsari, K. Hajdu, M. Póczi, M. Kukuly, T. Kecskes, C. Hangonyi, J. Schlezak, E. Takács, M. Szabo,G. Szabó, C. Szabo (Hungary); G.W. Canonica, W. Castellani, A. Cirillo, M.P. Foschino Barbaro, M. Gjomarkaj, G. Guerra, G. Idotta, D. Legnani, M. Lo Schiavo, R. Maselli, F. Mazza, S. Nutini, P. Paggiaro, A. Pietra, O. Resta, S. Salis, N.A. Scichilone, M.C. Zappa, A. Zedda (Italy); M. Goosens, R. Heller, K. Mansour, C. Meek, J. van den Berg (The Netherlands); A. Antczak, M. Faber, D. Madra-Rogacka, G. Mincewicz, M. Michnar, D. Olejniczak, G. Pulka, Z. Sankowski, K. Kowal, I. Krupa-Borek, B. Kubicka Kozik, K. Kuczynska, P. Kuna, A. Kwasniewski, M. Wozniak (Poland); F. Casas Maldonado, C. Cisneros, J. de Miguel Díez, L.M. Entrenas Costa, B. Garcìa-Cosio, M.V. Gonzales, L. Lores, M. Luengo, C. Martinez, C. Melero, I. Mir, X. Munoz, A. Pacheco, V. Plaza, J. Serra, J. Serrano, J.G. Soto Campos (Spain); T. Bekci, R. Demir, N. Dursunoglu, D. Ediger, A. Ekici, O. Goksel, H. Gunen, I.K. Oguzulgen, Z.F. Ozseker, (Turkey); L. Barnes, T. Hall, S. Montgomerie, J. Purohit, J. Ryan (United Kingdom). The authors would also like to thank P. Galletti (THERAMetrics S.p.A., Sesto San Giovanni, Italy) and K. Stockmeyer (THERAMetrics GmbH, Essen, Germany) for providing editorial assistance in the preparation of this manuscript. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Vaginal progesterone prophylaxis for preterm birth (the OPPTIMUM study) : a multicentre, randomised, double-blind trial

Acknowledgments We thank the members of the Trial Steering and Data Monitoring Committee and all the people who helped in the conduct of the study (including the OPPTIMUM collaborative group and other clinicians listed in the appendix). We are grateful to Paul Piette (Besins Healthcare Corporate, Brussels, Belgium) and Besins Healthcare for their kind donation of active and placebo drug for use in the study, and to staff of the pharmacy and research and development departments of the participating hospitals. We are also grateful to the many people who helped in this study but who we have been unable to name, and in particular all the women (and their babies) who participated in OPPTIMUM. OPPTIMUM was funded by the Efficacy and Mechanism Evaluation (EME) Programme, a Medical Research Council (MRC) and National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) partnership, award number G0700452, revised to 09/800/27. The EME Programme is funded by the MRC and NIHR, with contributions from the Chief Scientist Office in Scotland and National Institute for Social Care and Research in Wales. The views expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the MRC, National Health Service, NIHR, or the Department of Health. The funder had no involvement in data collection, analysis or interpretation, and no role in the writing of this manuscript or the decision to submit for publication.

Urinary incontinence persisting after childbirth : extent, delivery history, and effects in a 12-year longitudinal cohort study

© 2015 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Funded by •Wellbeing of Women/Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists •Health Research Council of New Zealand

Urinary incontinence persisting after childbirth : extent, delivery history, and effects in a 12-year longitudinal cohort study

© 2015 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Funded by •Wellbeing of Women/Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists •Health Research Council of New Zealand

Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of the human papillomavirus 16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine in women older than 25 years : 7-year follow-up of the phase 3, double-blind, randomised controlled VIVIANE study

Acknowledgments The VIVIANE study was funded and coordinated by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA, which also covered all costs associated with development and publication of this report. We thank all study participants and their families. We gratefully acknowledge the work of the central and local study coordinators, and staff members of the sites who participated in this study. Writing support services were provided by Mary Greenacre (An Sgriobhadair, Isle of Barra, UK), on behalf of GSK Vaccines; editing and publication coordination services were provided by Jérôme Leemans (Keyrus Biopharma, Lasne, Belgium), Stéphanie Delval (XPE Pharma and Science, Wavre, Belgium), and Matthieu Depuydt (Business Decision Life Sciences, Brussels, Belgium), on behalf of GSK Vaccines

Monitoring ocular hypertension, how much and how often? : A cost-effectiveness perspective

Peer reviewed

Why do health economists promote technology adoption rather than the search for efficiency? A proposal for a change in our approach to economic evaluation in health care

Acknowledgments Financial Support: HERU and HSRU receive a core grant from the Chief Scientist’s Office of the Scottish Government Health and Social Care Directorates, and the Centre for Clinical epidemiology & Evaluation is funded by Vancouver Coastal Health Authority. The model used for the illustrative case study in this paper was developed as part of a NHS Technology Assessment Review, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment Program (project number 09/146/01). The views and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Scottish Government, NHS, Vancouver Coastal Health, NIHR HTA Program or the Department of Health. The authors wish to thank Kathleen Boyd and members of the audience at the UK Health Economists Study Group, for comments received on an earlier version of this paper. We also wish to thank Cynthia Fraser (University of Aberdeen) for literature searches undertaken to inform the manuscript, and Mohsen Sadatsafavi (University of British Columbia) for comments on an earlier draft

The effectiveness of early lens extraction for the treatment of primary angle-closure glaucoma : a randomized controlled trial (EAGLE)

Medical Research Council (ref G0701604) and administered by the NIHR-EME (ref 09-800-26)