The challenge of high cube ISO containers for British rail freight operations

Rail freight activity in Britain has increased by almost 50% in the last ten years, with the movement of deep sea ISO containers between ports and inland terminals being a significant growth sector, with considerable further growth potential. High cube ISO containers have become more prevalent, posing a considerable challenge for rail freight operators since much of the rail network has insufficient loading gauge clearance to carry them on standard wagons. This paper investigates the extent to which rail currently handles high cube container movements to/from ports through the analysis of a representative survey of container trains in 2007. The incidence of high cube containers carried by services on gauge-cleared and non-gauge-cleared routes is identified to assess the extent to which a lack of gauge enhancement affects the movement by rail of high cube containers and to identify the impacts of the lack of gauge clearance on operating efficiency. The paper concludes with an evaluation of the likely consequences of the gauge enhancement schemes for which funding is now committed, assessing the extent to which they will reduce or remove the barriers associated with carrying high cube containers between ports and their hinterlands.

Where and how to find data on safety: what do systematic reviews of complementary therapies tell us?

Background: Successfully identifying relevant data for systematic reviews with a focus on safety may require retrieving information from a wider range of sources than for ‘effectiveness’ systematic reviews. Searching for safety data continues to prove a major challenge. Objectives: To examine search methods used in systematic reviews of safety and to investigate indexing. Methods: Systematic reviews focusing on safety of complementary therapies and related interventions were retrieved from comprehensive searches of major databases. Data was extracted on search strategies, sources used and indexing in major databases. Safety related search terms were compared against index terms available on major databases. Data extraction by one researcher using a pre-prepared template was checked for accuracy by a second researcher. Results: Screening of 2563 records resulted in 88 systematic reviews being identified. Information sources used varied with the type of intervention being addressed. Comparison of search terms with available index terms revealed additional potentially relevant terms that could be used in constructing search strategies. Seventy-nine reviews were indexed on PubMed, 84 on EMBASE, 21 on CINAHL, 15 on AMED, 6 on PsycINFO, 2 on BNI and HMIC. The mean number of generic safety-related indexing terms on PubMed records was 2.6. For EMBASE the mean number was 4.8 with at least 61 unique terms being employed. Most frequently used indexing terms and subheadings were adverse effects, side effects, drug interactions and herb-drug interactions. Use of terms specifically referring to safety varied across databases. Conclusions: Investigation of search methods revealed the range of information sources used, a list of which may prove a valuable resource for those planning to conduct systematic reviews of safety. The findings also indicated that there is potential to improve safety-related search strategies. Finally, an insight is provided into indexing of and most effective terms for finding safety studies on major databases.