Reason, risk, and reward: Models for libraries and other stakeholders in an evolving scholarly publishing ecosystem

Scholarly publishing, and scholarly communication more generally, are based on patterns established over many decades and even centuries. Some of these patterns are clearly valuable and intimately related to core values of the academy, but others were based on the exigencies of the past, and new opportunities have brought into question whether it makes sense to persist in supporting old models. New technologies and new publishing models raise the question of how we should fund and operate scholarly publishing and scholarly communication in the future, moving away from a scarcity model based on the exchange of physical goods that restricts access to scholarly literature unless a market-based exchange takes place. This essay describes emerging models that attempt to shift scholarly communication to a more open-access and mission-based approach and that try to retain control of scholarship by academics and the institutions and scholarly societies that support them. It explores changing practices for funding scholarly journals and changing services provided by academic libraries, changes instituted with the end goal of providing more access to more readers, stimulating new scholarship, and removing inefficiencies from a system ready for change. © 2014 by the American Anthropological Association.

CD4 enumeration technologies: a systematic review of test performance for determining eligibility for antiretroviral therapy.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of CD4+ T-lymphocytes (CD4) is a crucial parameter in the management of HIV patients, particularly in determining eligibility to initiate antiretroviral treatment (ART). A number of technologies exist for CD4 enumeration, with considerable variation in cost, complexity, and operational requirements. We conducted a systematic review of the performance of technologies for CD4 enumeration. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Studies were identified by searching electronic databases MEDLINE and EMBASE using a pre-defined search strategy. Data on test accuracy and precision included bias and limits of agreement with a reference standard, and misclassification probabilities around CD4 thresholds of 200 and 350 cells/μl over a clinically relevant range. The secondary outcome measure was test imprecision, expressed as % coefficient of variation. Thirty-two studies evaluating 15 CD4 technologies were included, of which less than half presented data on bias and misclassification compared to the same reference technology. At CD4 counts <350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -35.2 to +13.1 cells/μl while at counts >350 cells/μl, bias ranged from -70.7 to +47 cells/μl, compared to the BD FACSCount as a reference technology. Misclassification around the threshold of 350 cells/μl ranged from 1-29% for upward classification, resulting in under-treatment, and 7-68% for downward classification resulting in overtreatment. Less than half of these studies reported within laboratory precision or reproducibility of the CD4 values obtained. CONCLUSIONS: A wide range of bias and percent misclassification around treatment thresholds were reported on the CD4 enumeration technologies included in this review, with few studies reporting assay precision. The lack of standardised methodology on test evaluation, including the use of different reference standards, is a barrier to assessing relative assay performance and could hinder the introduction of new point-of-care assays in countries where they are most needed.

Apparent treatment-resistant hypertension and chronic kidney disease: another cardiovascular-renal syndrome?

To identify patients at increased risk of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, apparent treatment-resistant hypertension (aTRH) is defined as having a blood pressure above goal despite the use of 3 or more antihypertensive therapies of different classes at maximally tolerated doses, ideally including a diuretic. Recent epidemiologic studies in selected populations estimated the prevalence of aTRH as 10% to 15% among patients with hypertension and that aTRH is associated with elevated risk of CV and renal outcomes. Additionally, aTRH and CKD are associated. Although the pathogenesis of aTRH is multifactorial, the kidney is believed to play a significant role. Increased volume expansion, aldosterone concentration, mineralocorticoid receptor activity, arterial stiffness, and sympathetic nervous system activity are central to the pathogenesis of aTRH and are targets of therapies. Although diuretics form the basis of therapy in aTRH, pathophysiologic and clinical data suggest an important role for aldosterone antagonism. Interventional techniques, such as renal denervation and carotid baroreceptor activation, modulate the sympathetic nervous system and are currently in phase III trials for the treatment of aTRH. These technologies are as yet unproven and have not been investigated in relationship to CV outcomes or in patients with CKD.