892 resultados para Trials (Assault and battery)


Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective To review critically the statistical methods used for health economic evaluations in randomised controlled trials where an estimate of cost is available for each patient in the study.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

While much attention has been paid to the experiences of the female victims of male-perpetrated sexual assault, relatively little attention has been paid to the experiences of female-on-female sexual assault. However, female-on-female sexual assault can and does occur within lesbian and queer communities. What literature there is on the topic demonstrates that gender stereotypes, as well as stereotypes about the lesbian and queer communities, play a role in the decision process to seek help. This paper seeks to analyze the role of language and stereotypes in the help-seeking behaviors of victims of female-on-female sexual assault, using Relational Frame Theory as a framework.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The need for more sustainable public transportation choices drives innovation and provides opportunity for improvement in options. Transit buses provide many advantages for efficient transportation and electric drive vehicles are anticipated to play an increasing role in future transportation systems. A lifecycle cost analysis of battery electric transit buses indicates rate structures and demand charges do not currently have a large impact on lifecycle cost for small fleets of battery electric buses. As fleets grow, policies and rate structures will need to adjust to avoid becoming a barrier to adoption. Battery electric transit buses are now being developed which promise to address the primary issues of high life cycle cost, low reliability, range, and flexibility.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: There is no evidence-based guidance to facilitate design decisions for confirmatory trials or systematic reviews investigating treatment efficacy for adults with tinnitus. This systematic review therefore seeks to ascertain the current status of trial designs by identifying and evaluating the reporting of outcome domains and instruments in the treatment of adults with tinnitus. METHODS: Records were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE CINAHL, EBSCO, and CENTRAL clinical trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN, ICTRP) and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Eligible records were those published from 1 July 2006 to 12 March 2015. Included studies were those reporting adults aged 18 years or older who reported tinnitus as a primary complaint, and who were enrolled into a randomised controlled trial, a before and after study, a non-randomised controlled trial, a case-controlled study or a cohort study, and written in English. Studies with fewer than 20 participants were excluded. RESULTS: Two hundred and twenty-eight studies were included. Thirty-five different primary outcome domains were identified spanning seven categories (tinnitus percept, impact of tinnitus, co-occurring complaints, quality of life, body structures and function, treatment-related outcomes and unclear or not specified). Over half the studies (55 %) did not clearly define the complaint of interest. Tinnitus loudness was the domain most often reported (14 %), followed by tinnitus distress (7 %). Seventy-eight different primary outcome instruments were identified. Instruments assessing multiple attributes of the impact of tinnitus were most common (34 %). Overall, 24 different patient-reported tools were used, predominantly the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (15 %). Loudness was measured in diverse ways including a numerical rating scale (8 %), loudness matching (4 %), minimum masking level (1 %) and loudness discomfort level (1 %). Ten percent of studies did not clearly report the instrument used. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate poor appreciation of the basic principles of good trial design, particularly the importance of specifying what aspect of therapeutic benefit is the main outcome. No single outcome was reported in all studies and there was a broad diversity of outcome instruments. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: The systematic review protocol is registered on PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews): CRD42015017525 . Registered on 12 March 2015 revised on 15 March 2016.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

40.00% 40.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.