13 resultados para planning report

em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça


Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Description of project activities and accountancy report.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Renal cancer represents accounts for approximately 3% of all adult malignancies with a rising incidence. Incidental diagnosis is mostly based upon ultrasound (US). US and Computed tomography (CT) are the standard imaging modalities for detecting renal cell cancer (RCC). Differentiation between malignant and benign renal tumors is of utmost importance. Contrast enhanced ultrasound (CUS) seems to be a promising new diagnostic option for diagnosis and preoperative treatment planning for patients with renal cancer. It is an additional examination to baseline ultrasound and CT. We report a case of a 37-year-old woman with a papillary renal cell cancer in which CUS helped to differentiate dignity of the tumor. CUS is an additional examination to baseline ultrasound and CT. It is a less invasive technique than contrast enhanced CT and shows even slight tumor blood flow. In addition it may allow a more rapid diagnosis, because of its bedside availability.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The objective of this report is to summarize the results on survival and complication rates of different designs of fixed dental prostheses (FDP) published in a series of systematic reviews. Moreover, the various parameters for survival and risk assessment are to be used in attempt to perform treatment planning on the basis of scientific evidence. Three electronic searches complemented by manual searching were conducted to identify prospective and retrospective cohort studies on FDP and implant-supported single crowns (SC) with a mean follow-up time of at least 5 years. Patients had to have been examined clinically at the follow-up visit. Failure and complication rates were analyzed using random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5- and 10-year survival proportions. Meta-analysis of the studies included indicated an estimated 5-year survival of conventional tooth-supported FDP of 93.8%, cantilever FDP of 91.4%, solely implant-supported FDP of 95.2%, combined tooth-implant-supported FDP of 95.5% and implant-supported SC of 94.5% as well as resin-bonded bridges 87.7%. Moreover, after 10 years of function the estimated survival decreased to 89.2% for conventional FDP, to 80.3% for cantilever FDP, to 86.7% for implant-supported FDP, to 77.8% for combined tooth-implant-supported FDP, to 89.4% for implant-supported SC and to 65% for resin-bonded bridges. When planning prosthetic rehabilitations, conventional end-abutment tooth-supported FDP, solely implant-supported FDP or implant-supported SC should be the first treatment option. Only as a second option, because of reasons such as financial aspects patient-centered preferences or anatomical structures cantilever tooth-supported FDP, combined tooth-implant-supported FDP or resin-bonded bridges should be chosen.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Offset printing is a common method to produce large amounts of printed matter. We consider a real-world offset printing process that is used to imprint customer-specific designs on napkin pouches. The production equipment used gives rise to various technological constraints. The planning problem consists of allocating designs to printing-plate slots such that the given customer demand for each design is fulfilled, all technological and organizational constraints are met and the total overproduction and setup costs are minimized. We formulate this planning problem as a mixed-binary linear program, and we develop a multi-pass matching-based savings heuristic. We report computational results for a set of problem instances devised from real-world data.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The present document has been elaborated in the context of the ERA-ARD project “The Agricultural Research for Development (ARD) dimension of the European Research Area (ERA) “. It is based on work done within Task 3.2 to identify a set of common or compatible methodologies for ARD planning, monitoring and evaluation and impact assessment. This set should serve as a guide for the management of joint ARD activities that are presently developed within the framework of the ERA-ARD project.

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND Information about the impact of cancer treatments on patients' quality of life (QoL) is of paramount importance to patients and treating oncologists. Cancer trials that do not specify QoL as an outcome or fail to report collected QoL data, omit crucial information for decision making. To estimate the magnitude of these problems, we investigated how frequently QoL outcomes were specified in protocols of cancer trials and subsequently reported. DESIGN Retrospective cohort study of RCT protocols approved by six research ethics committees in Switzerland, Germany, and Canada between 2000 and 2003. We compared protocols to corresponding publications, which were identified through literature searches and investigator surveys. RESULTS Of the 173 cancer trials, 90 (52%) specified QoL outcomes in their protocol, 2 (1%) as primary and 88 (51%) as secondary outcome. Of the 173 trials, 35 (20%) reported QoL outcomes in a corresponding publication (4 modified from the protocol), 18 (10%) were published but failed to report QoL outcomes in the primary or a secondary publication, and 37 (21%) were not published at all. Of the 83 (48%) trials that did not specify QoL outcomes in their protocol, none subsequently reported QoL outcomes. Failure to report pre-specified QoL outcomes was not associated with industry sponsorship (versus non-industry), sample size, and multicentre (versus single centre) status but possibly with trial discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS About half of cancer trials specified QoL outcomes in their protocols. However, only 20% reported any QoL data in associated publications. Highly relevant information for decision making is often unavailable to patients, oncologists, and health policymakers.