Assessment of construct validity of a virtual reality laparoscopy simulator.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess whether virtual reality (VR) can discriminate between the skills of novices and intermediate-level laparoscopic surgical trainees (construct validity), and whether the simulator assessment correlates with an expert's evaluation of performance. METHODS: Three hundred and seven (307) participants of the 19th-22nd Davos International Gastrointestinal Surgery Workshops performed the clip-and-cut task on the Xitact LS 500 VR simulator (Xitact S.A., Morges, Switzerland). According to their previous experience in laparoscopic surgery, participants were assigned to the basic course (BC) or the intermediate course (IC). Objective performance parameters recorded by the simulator were compared to the standardized assessment by the course instructors during laparoscopic pelvitrainer and conventional surgery exercises. RESULTS: IC participants performed significantly better on the VR simulator than BC participants for the task completion time as well as the economy of movement of the right instrument, not the left instrument. Participants with maximum scores in the pelvitrainer cholecystectomy task performed the VR trial significantly faster, compared to those who scored less. In the conventional surgery task, a significant difference between those who scored the maximum and those who scored less was found not only for task completion time, but also for economy of movement of the right instrument. CONCLUSIONS: VR simulation provides a valid assessment of psychomotor skills and some basic aspects of spatial skills in laparoscopic surgery. Furthermore, VR allows discrimination between trainees with different levels of experience in laparoscopic surgery establishing construct validity for the Xitact LS 500 clip-and-cut task. Virtual reality may become the gold standard to assess and monitor surgical skills in laparoscopic surgery.

FRAX® International Task Force of the 2010 Joint International Society for Clinical Densitometry & International Osteoporosis Foundation Position Development Conference.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors and femoral neck BMD and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) in conjunction with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) assembled an international panel of experts that ultimately developed joint Official Positions of the ISCD and IOF advising clinicians regarding FRAX® usage. As part of the process, the charge of the FRAX® International Task Force was to review and synthesize data regarding geographic and race/ethnic variability in hip fractures, non-hip osteoporotic fractures, and make recommendations about the use of FRAX® in ethnic groups and countries without a FRAX® calculator. This synthesis was presented to the expert panel and constitutes the data on which the subsequent Official Positions are predicated. A summary of the International Task Force composition and charge is presented here.

The Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation provisional criteria for the evaluation of response to therapy in juvenile dermatomyositis.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a provisional definition for the evaluation of response to therapy in juvenile dermatomyositis (DM) based on the Paediatric Rheumatology International Trials Organisation juvenile DM core set of variables. METHODS: Thirty-seven experienced pediatric rheumatologists from 27 countries achieved consensus on 128 difficult patient profiles as clinically improved or not improved using a stepwise approach (patient's rating, statistical analysis, definition selection). Using the physicians' consensus ratings as the "gold standard measure," chi-square, sensitivity, specificity, false-positive and-negative rates, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, and kappa agreement for candidate definitions of improvement were calculated. Definitions with kappa values >0.8 were multiplied by the face validity score to select the top definitions. RESULTS: The top definition of improvement was at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of 6 core set variables with no more than 1 of the remaining worsening by more than 30%, which cannot be muscle strength. The second-highest scoring definition was at least 20% improvement from baseline in 3 of 6 core set variables with no more than 2 of the remaining worsening by more than 25%, which cannot be muscle strength (definition P1 selected by the International Myositis Assessment and Clinical Studies group). The third is similar to the second with the maximum amount of worsening set to 30%. This indicates convergent validity of the process. CONCLUSION: We propose a provisional data-driven definition of improvement that reflects well the consensus rating of experienced clinicians, which incorporates clinically meaningful change in core set variables in a composite end point for the evaluation of global response to therapy in juvenile DM.

Toward a Statistically Robust Assessment of Social and Solidarity Economy Actors. Conceptual Development and Empirical Validation

Many definitions and debates exist about the core characteristics of social and solidarity economy (SSE) and its actors. Among others, legal forms, profit, geographical scope, and size as criteria for identifying SSE actors often reveal dissents among SSE scholars. Instead of using a dichotomous, either-in-or-out definition of SSE actors, this paper presents an assessment tool that takes into account multiple dimensions to offer a more comprehensive and nuanced view of the field. We first define the core dimensions of the assessment tool by synthesizing the multiple indicators found in the literature. We then empirically test these dimensions and their interrelatedness and seek to identify potential clusters of actors. Finally we discuss the practical implications of our model.

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool:Historical Development, Applications, and Future Research Directions, 2007

The Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model is a continuation of nearly 30 years of modeling efforts conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Agricultural Research Service. SWAT has gained international acceptance as a robust interdisciplinary watershed modeling tool, as evidenced by international SWAT conferences, hundreds of SWAT-related papers presented at numerous scientific meetings, and dozens of articles published in peer-reviewed journals. The model has also been adopted as part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s BASINS (Better Assessment Science Integrating Point & Nonpoint Sources) software package and is being used by many U.S. federal and state agencies, including the USDA within the Conservation Effects Assessment Project. At present, over 250 peer-reviewed, published articles have been identified that report SWAT applications, reviews of SWAT components, or other research that includes SWAT. Many of these peer-reviewed articles are summarized here according to relevant application categories such as streamflow calibration and related hydrologic analyses, climate change impacts on hydrology, pollutant load assessments, comparisons with other models, and sensitivity analyses and calibration techniques. Strengths and weaknesses of the model are presented, and recommended research needs for SWAT are provided.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2008.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an update to the original Surviving Sepsis Campaign clinical management guidelines, "Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock," published in 2004. DESIGN: Modified Delphi method with a consensus conference of 55 international experts, several subsequent meetings of subgroups and key individuals, teleconferences, and electronic-based discussion among subgroups and among the entire committee. This process was conducted independently of any industry funding. METHODS: We used the GRADE system to guide assessment of quality of evidence from high (A) to very low (D) and to determine the strength of recommendations. A strong recommendation indicates that an intervention's desirable effects clearly outweigh its undesirable effects (risk, burden, cost), or clearly do not. Weak recommendations indicate that the tradeoff between desirable and undesirable effects is less clear. The grade of strong or weak is considered of greater clinical importance than a difference in letter level of quality of evidence. In areas without complete agreement, a formal process of resolution was developed and applied. Recommendations are grouped into those directly targeting severe sepsis, recommendations targeting general care of the critically ill patient that are considered high priority in severe sepsis, and pediatric considerations. RESULTS: Key recommendations, listed by category, include: early goal-directed resuscitation of the septic patient during the first 6 hrs after recognition (1C); blood cultures prior to antibiotic therapy (1C); imaging studies performed promptly to confirm potential source of infection (1C); administration of broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy within 1 hr of diagnosis of septic shock (1B) and severe sepsis without septic shock (1D); reassessment of antibiotic therapy with microbiology and clinical data to narrow coverage, when appropriate (1C); a usual 7-10 days of antibiotic therapy guided by clinical response (1D); source control with attention to the balance of risks and benefits of the chosen method (1C); administration of either crystalloid or colloid fluid resuscitation (1B); fluid challenge to restore mean circulating filling pressure (1C); reduction in rate of fluid administration with rising filing pressures and no improvement in tissue perfusion (1D); vasopressor preference for norepinephrine or dopamine to maintain an initial target of mean arterial pressure > or = 65 mm Hg (1C); dobutamine inotropic therapy when cardiac output remains low despite fluid resuscitation and combined inotropic/vasopressor therapy (1C); stress-dose steroid therapy given only in septic shock after blood pressure is identified to be poorly responsive to fluid and vasopressor therapy (2C); recombinant activated protein C in patients with severe sepsis and clinical assessment of high risk for death (2B except 2C for post-operative patients). In the absence of tissue hypoperfusion, coronary artery disease, or acute hemorrhage, target a hemoglobin of 7-9 g/dL (1B); a low tidal volume (1B) and limitation of inspiratory plateau pressure strategy (1C) for acute lung injury (ALI)/acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS); application of at least a minimal amount of positive end-expiratory pressure in acute lung injury (1C); head of bed elevation in mechanically ventilated patients unless contraindicated (1B); avoiding routine use of pulmonary artery catheters in ALI/ARDS (1A); to decrease days of mechanical ventilation and ICU length of stay, a conservative fluid strategy for patients with established ALI/ARDS who are not in shock (1C); protocols for weaning and sedation/analgesia (1B); using either intermittent bolus sedation or continuous infusion sedation with daily interruptions or lightening (1B); avoidance of neuromuscular blockers, if at all possible (1B); institution of glycemic control (1B) targeting a blood glucose < 150 mg/dL after initial stabilization ( 2C ); equivalency of continuous veno-veno hemofiltration or intermittent hemodialysis (2B); prophylaxis for deep vein thrombosis (1A); use of stress ulcer prophylaxis to prevent upper GI bleeding using H2 blockers (1A) or proton pump inhibitors (1B); and consideration of limitation of support where appropriate (1D). Recommendations specific to pediatric severe sepsis include: greater use of physical examination therapeutic end points (2C); dopamine as the first drug of choice for hypotension (2C); steroids only in children with suspected or proven adrenal insufficiency (2C); a recommendation against the use of recombinant activated protein C in children (1B). CONCLUSION: There was strong agreement among a large cohort of international experts regarding many level 1 recommendations for the best current care of patients with severe sepsis. Evidenced-based recommendations regarding the acute management of sepsis and septic shock are the first step toward improved outcomes for this important group of critically ill patients.

Official Positions for FRAX® clinical regarding international differences from Joint Official Positions Development Conference of the International Society for Clinical Densitometry and International Osteoporosis Foundation on FRAX®.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. Increased risk of fractures is the hallmark of the disease and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and economic burden. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors, femoral neck BMD, country specific mortality and fracture data and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator at the time paper was accepted for publication. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. In order to provide additional guidance to clinicians, a FRAX® International Task Force was formed to address specific questions raised by physicians in countries without FRAX® calculators and seeking to integrate FRAX® into their clinical practice. The main questions that the task force tried to answer were the following: The Task Force members conducted appropriate literature reviews and developed preliminary statements that were discussed and graded by a panel of experts at the ISCD-IOF joint conference. The statements approved by the panel of experts are discussed in the current paper.

The policy relevance of wear emissions from road transport, now and in the future : an international workshop report and consensus statement

Road transport emissions are a major contributor to ambient particulate matter concentrations and have been associated with adverse health effects. Therefore, these emissions are targeted through increasingly stringent European emission standards. These policies succeed in reducing exhaust emissions, but do not address "nonexhaust" emissions from brake wear, tire wear, road wear, and suspension in air of road dust. Is this a problem? To what extent do nonexhaust emissions contribute to ambient concentrations of PM10 or PM2.5? In the near future, wear emissions may dominate the remaining traffic-related PM10 emissions in Europe, mostly due to the steep decrease in PM exhaust emissions. This underlines the need to determine the relevance of the wear emissions as a contribution to the existing ambient PM concentrations, and the need to assess the health risks related to wear particles, which has not yet received much attention. During a workshop in 2011, available knowledge was reported and evaluated so as to draw conclusions on the relevance of traffic-related wear emissions for air quality policy development. On the basis of available evidence, which is briefly presented in this paper, it was concluded that nonexhaust emissions and in particular suspension in air of road dust are major contributors to exceedances at street locations of the PM10 air quality standards in various European cities. Furthermore, wear-related PM emissions that contain high concentrations of metals may (despite their limited contribution to the mass of nonexhaust emissions) cause significant health risks for the population, especially those living near intensely trafficked locations. To quantify the existing health risks, targeted research is required on wear emissions, their dispersion in urban areas, population exposure, and its effects on health. Such information will be crucial for environmental policymakers as an input for discussions on the need to develop control strategies.

FRAX(®) Clinical Task Force of the 2010 Joint International Society for Clinical Densitometry & International Osteoporosis Foundation Position Development Conference.

The World Health Organization fracture risk assessment tool, FRAX(®), is an advance in clinical care that can assist in clinical decision-making. However, with increasing clinical utilization, numerous questions have arisen regarding how to best estimate fracture risk in an individual patient. Recognizing the need to assist clinicians in optimal use of FRAX(®), the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) in conjunction with the International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) assembled an international panel of experts that ultimately developed joint Official Positions of the ISCD and IOF advising clinicians regarding FRAX(®) usage. As part of the process, the charge of the FRAX(®) Clinical Task Force was to review and synthesize data surrounding a number of recognized clinical risk factors including rheumatoid arthritis, smoking, alcohol, prior fracture, falls, bone turnover markers and glucocorticoid use. This synthesis was presented to the expert panel and constitutes the data on which the subsequent Official Positions are predicated. A summary of the Clinical Task Force composition and charge is presented here.

Validation of the Mini Nutritional Assessment short-form (MNA-SF): a practical tool for identification of nutritional status.

OBJECTIVE: To validate a revision of the Mini Nutritional Assessment short-form (MNA(R)-SF) against the full MNA, a standard tool for nutritional evaluation. METHODS: A literature search identified studies that used the MNA for nutritional screening in geriatric patients. The contacted authors submitted original datasets that were merged into a single database. Various combinations of the questions on the current MNA-SF were tested using this database through combination analysis and ROC based derivation of classification thresholds. RESULTS: Twenty-seven datasets (n=6257 participants) were initially processed from which twelve were used in the current analysis on a sample of 2032 study participants (mean age 82.3y) with complete information on all MNA items. The original MNA-SF was a combination of six questions from the full MNA. A revised MNA-SF included calf circumference (CC) substituted for BMI performed equally well. A revised three-category scoring classification for this revised MNA-SF, using BMI and/or CC, had good sensitivity compared to the full MNA. CONCLUSION: The newly revised MNA-SF is a valid nutritional screening tool applicable to geriatric health care professionals with the option of using CC when BMI cannot be calculated. This revised MNA-SF increases the applicability of this rapid screening tool in clinical practice through the inclusion of a "malnourished" category.

Informing the judgments of fingerprint analysts using quality metric and statistical assessment tools

The aim of this research was to evaluate how fingerprint analysts would incorporate information from newly developed tools into their decision making processes. Specifically, we assessed effects using the following: (1) a quality tool to aid in the assessment of the clarity of the friction ridge details, (2) a statistical tool to provide likelihood ratios representing the strength of the corresponding features between compared fingerprints, and (3) consensus information from a group of trained fingerprint experts. The measured variables for the effect on examiner performance were the accuracy and reproducibility of the conclusions against the ground truth (including the impact on error rates) and the analyst accuracy and variation for feature selection and comparison.¦The results showed that participants using the consensus information from other fingerprint experts demonstrated more consistency and accuracy in minutiae selection. They also demonstrated higher accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity in the decisions reported. The quality tool also affected minutiae selection (which, in turn, had limited influence on the reported decisions); the statistical tool did not appear to influence the reported decisions.

Variability in urinary oxalate measurements between six international laboratories.

BACKGROUND: Hyperoxaluria is a major risk factor for kidney stone formation. Although urinary oxalate measurement is part of all basic stone risk assessment, there is no standardized method for this measurement. METHODS: Urine samples from 24-h urine collection covering a broad range of oxalate concentrations were aliquoted and sent, in duplicates, to six blinded international laboratories for oxalate, sodium and creatinine measurement. In a second set of experiments, ten pairs of native urine and urine spiked with 10 mg/L of oxalate were sent for oxalate measurement. Three laboratories used a commercially available oxalate oxidase kit, two laboratories used a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)-based method and one laboratory used both methods. RESULTS: Intra-laboratory reliability for oxalate measurement expressed as intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) varied between 0.808 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.427-0.948] and 0.998 (95% CI: 0.994-1.000), with lower values for HPLC-based methods. Acidification of urine samples prior to analysis led to significantly higher oxalate concentrations. ICC for inter-laboratory reliability varied between 0.745 (95% CI: 0.468-0.890) and 0.986 (95% CI: 0.967-0.995). Recovery of the 10 mg/L oxalate-spiked samples varied between 8.7 ± 2.3 and 10.7 ± 0.5 mg/L. Overall, HPLC-based methods showed more variability compared to the oxalate oxidase kit-based methods. CONCLUSIONS: Significant variability was noted in the quantification of urinary oxalate concentration by different laboratories, which may partially explain the differences of hyperoxaluria prevalence reported in the literature. Our data stress the need for a standardization of the method of oxalate measurement.