Common variation in the fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 gene is not associated with endometriosis risk

BACKGROUND Endometriosis is a polygenic disease with a complex and multifactorial aetiology that affects 8-10% of women of reproductive age. Epidemiological data support a link between endometriosis and cancers of the reproductive tract. Fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) has recently been implicated in both endometrial and breast cancer. Our previous studies on endometriosis identified significant linkage to a novel susceptibility locus on chromosome 10q26 and the FGFR2 gene maps within this linkage region. We therefore hypothesized that variation in FGFR2 may contribute to the risk of endometriosis. METHODS We genotyped 13 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) densely covering a 27 kb region within intron 2 of FGFR2 including two SNPs (rs2981582 and rs1219648) significantly associated with breast cancer and a total 40 tagSNPs across 150 kb of the FGFR2 gene. SNPs were genotyped in 958 endometriosis cases and 959 unrelated controls. RESULTS We found no evidence for association between endometriosis and FGFR2 intron 2 SNPs or SNP haplotypes and no evidence for association between endometriosis and variation across the FGFR2 gene. CONCLUSIONS Common variation in the breast-cancer implicated intron 2 and other highly plausible causative candidate regions of FGFR2 do not appear to be a major contributor to endometriosis susceptibility in our large Australian sample.

Manufacturing practices and performances: A Malaysian study

The purpose of this study is to identify the most common manufacturing practices adopted by the Malaysian manufacturers, company performance factors and relationship between practices and performances. To fulfil the study objectives, 400 manufacturers were surveyed by a standard 400 questionnaire. Three research methodologies such as descriptive analysis, ANOVA and regression analysis have been employed in this study. The analysis revealed that Malaysian manufacturers focus on optimizing three critical performance factors: product development, less customer return rate and on time delivery (OTD). The most important competitive factor was found to be company reputation and design and manufacturing capacity is the least important factor. The findings also proved that manufacturing practices significantly influence company performances

Is there a physicality requirement at Common Law? : a survey of the Pre-NRDC cases discussing ‘Manufacture’

One of the fundamental issues that remains unresolved in patent law today, both in Australia and in other jurisdictions, is whether an invention must produce a physical effect or cause a physical transformation of matter to be patentable, or whether it is sufficient that an invention involves a specific practical application of an idea or principle to achieve a useful result. In short, the question is whether Australian patent law contains a physicality requirement. Despite being recently considered by the Federal Court, this is arguably an issue that has yet to be satisfactorily resolved in Australia. In its 2006 decision in Grant v Commissioner of Patents, the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia found that the patentable subject matter standard is rooted in the physical, when it held that an invention must involve a physical effect or transformation to be patent eligible. That decision, however, has been the subject of scrutiny in the academic literature. This article seeks to add to the existing literature written in response to the Grant decision by examining in detail the key common law cases decided prior to the High Court’s watershed decision in National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents, which is the undisputed authoritative statement of principle in regards to the patentable subject matter standard in Australia. This article, in conjunction with others written by the author, questions the Federal Court’s assertion in Grant that the physicality requirement it established is consistent with existing law.

Clinical factors and technological barriers as determinants for the intention to use wireless handheld technology in healthcare environment: an Indian case study

Abstract]: Traditional technology adoption models identified ‘ease of use’ and ‘usefulness’ as the dominating factors for technology adoption. However, recent studies in healthcare have established that these two factors are not always reliable on their own and other factors may influence technology adoption. To establish the identity of these additional factors, a mixed method approach was used and data were collected through interviews and a survey. The survey instrument was specifically developed for this study so that it is relevant to the Indian healthcare setting. We identified clinical management and technological barriers as the dominant factors influencing the wireless handheld technology adoption in the Indian healthcare environment. The results of this study showed that new technology models will benefit by considering the clinical influences of wireless handheld technology, in addition to known factors. The scope of this study is restricted to wireless handheld devices such as PDAs, smart phones, and handheld PCs Gururajan, Raj and Hafeez-Baig, Abdul and Gururajan, Vijaya

Factors that influence Information Systems decisions and outcomes: A summary of key themes from four case studies" (2006). ACIS 2006 Proceedings. Paper 43.

This paper reports a summary of key findings from an examination of Information Systems decision making in four organisations. The study focused on what factors influenced decision makers during the critical preimplementation phase of Information Systems projects when systems were evaluated, selected and acquired. Using data gathered from interviews and organisational documentation, a critical hermeneutic analysis was performed in order to build an understanding of how informational and contextual influences acted on decision makers. Eight broad themes of factors were identified as having influence on decision makers and outcomes.

Factors influencing health promotion activities in midlife and older Australian women with a chronic disease

Background: Chronic diseases including type 2 diabetes are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in midlife and older Australian women. There are a number of modifiable risk factors for type 2 diabetes and other chronic diseases including smoking, nutrition, physical activity and overweight and obesity. Little research has been conducted in the Australian context to explore the perceived barriers to health promotion activities in midlife and older Australian women with a chronic disease. Aims: The primary aim of this study was to explore women’s perceived barriers to health promotion activities to reduce modifiable risk factors, and the relationship of perceived barriers to smoking behaviour, fruit and vegetable intake, physical activity and body mass index. A secondary aim of this study was to investigate nurses’ perceptions of the barriers to action for women with a chronic disease, and to compare those perceptions with those of the women. Methods: The study was divided into two phases where Phase 1 was a cross sectional survey of women, aged over 45 years with type 2 diabetes who were attending Diabetes clinics in the Primary and Community Health Service of the Metro North Health Service District of Queensland Health (N = 22). The women were a subsample of women participating in a multi-model lifestyle intervention, the ‘Reducing Chronic Disease among Adult Australian Women’ project. Phase 2 of the study was a cross sectional online survey of nurses working in Primary and Community Health Service in the Metro North Health Service District of Queensland Health (N = 46). Pender’s health promotion model was used as the theoretical framework for this study. Results: Women in this study had an average total barriers score of 32.18 (SD = 9.52) which was similar to average scores reported in the literature for women with a range of physical disabilities and illnesses. The leading five barriers for this group of women were: concern about safety; too tired; not interested; lack of information about what to do; with lack of time and feeling I can’t do things correctly the equal fifth ranked barriers. In this study there was no statistically significant difference in average total barriers scores between women in the intervention group and those is the usual care group of the parent study. There was also no significant relationship between the women’s socio-demographic variables and lifestyle risk factors and their level of perceived barriers. Nurses in the study had an average total barriers score of 44.48 (SD = 6.24) which was higher than all other average scores reported in the literature. The leading five barriers that nurses perceived were an issue for women with a chronic disease were: lack of time and interferes with other responsibilities the leading barriers; embarrassment about appearance; lack of money; too tired and lack of support from family and friends. There was no significant relationship between the nurses’ sociodemographic and nursing variables and the level of perceived barriers. When comparing the results of women and nurses in the study there was a statistically significant difference in the median total barriers score between the groups (p < 0.001), where the nurses perceived the barriers to be higher (Md = 43) than the women (Md = 33). There was also a significant difference in the responses to the individual barriers items in fifteen of the eighteen items (p < 0.002). Conclusion: Although this study is limited by a small sample size, it contributes to understanding the perception of midlife and older women with a chronic disease and also the perception of nurses, about the barriers to healthy lifestyle activities that women face. The study provides some evidence that the perceptions of women and nurses may differ and argues that these differences may have significant implications for clinical practice. The study recommends a greater emphasis on assessing and managing perceived barriers to health promotion activities in health education and policy development and proposes a conceptual model for understanding perceived barriers to action.