Back, chest and abdominal pain: How good are spinal signs at identifying musculoskeletal causes of back, chest or abdominal pain?

Background: Spinal signs found in association with atypical chest and abdominal pain may suggest the pain is referred from the thoracic spine. However, the prevalence of such signs in these conditions has rarely been compared with that in those without pain. In this study, the prevalence of spinal signs and dysfunction in patients with back, chest and abdominal pain is compared with that in pain free controls. The aim of the study is to determine the significance of spinal findings in patients with such pain. Methods: A general practitioner blinded to the patients' histories performed a cervical and thoracic spinal examination on general practice patients with back, chest and/or abdominal pain and on controls without pain. Thoracic intervertebral dysfunction was diagnosed on the basis of movement and palpation findings. Results: Seventy three study patients plus 24 controls, were examined. For cervical spinal signs, pain in the back, chest and/or abdomen was associated with pain with active movements and overpressure at end range and with loss of movement range. For thoracic spinal signs, this association held for pain with active movements and overpressure, but not with loss of movement range. The prevalence of thoracic intervertebral dysfunction was 25.0% in controls, 65.5% with chest/abdominal pain, 72.0% with back pain and 79.0% with back pain with chest/abdominal pain. This prevalence was higher with chest pain than with abdominal pain. Conclusions: The results show an association, but not a causal link between thoracic intervertebral dysfunction and atypical chest/abdominal pain. A spinal examination should be performed routinely assessing these conditions. The minimum examination for the detection of intervertebral dysfunction is testing for pain with spinal movements and palpation for tenderness. The interpretation of positive signs requires knowledge of their prevalence in pain free controls and in patients with visceral disease

Carbamazepine augmentation for schizophrenia: How good is the evidence?

Background: Augmentation strategies in schizophrenia treatment remain an important issue because despite the introduction of several new antipsychotics, many patients remain treatment resistant. The aim of this study was to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of one frequently used adjunctive compound: carbamazepine. Data sources and study selection: Randomized controlled trials comparing carbamazopine (as a sole or as an adjunctive compound) with placebo or no intervention in participants with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were searched for by accessing 7 electronic databases, cross-referencing publications cited in pertinent studies, and contacting drug companies that manufacture carbamazepine. Method: The identified studies were independently inspected and their quality assessed by 2 reviewers, Because the study results were generally incompletely reported, original patient data were requested from the authors; data were received for 8 of the 10 randomized controlled trials included in the present analysis, allowing for a reanalysis of the primary data. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using the Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio and continuous data were analyzed using standardized mean differences, both specified with 95% confidence intervals. Results: Ten studies (total N = 283 subjects) were included. Carbamazepine was not effective in preventing relapse in the only randomized controlled trial that compared carbamazepine monotherapy with placebo. Carbamazepine tended to be less effective than perphenazine in the only trial comparing carbamazepine with an antipsychotic. Although there was a trend indicating a benefit from carbamazepine as an adjunct to antipsychotics, this trend did not reach statistical significance. Conclusion: At present, this augmentation strategy cannot be recommended for routine use. The most promising targets for future trials are patients with excitement, aggression, and schizoaffective disorder bipolar type.

Institutional Development for Good Governance: the role of intermediary NGOs in Pará state, Amazonia

The paper analyses the roles of intermediary NGOs for linkages between government and rural communities in carrying out socio-environmental development programs as a mean of institutional development for good governance. In particular, the paper focuses on the Proambiente program that was carried out in Pará State, Amazonia, Brazil. This program was the first experience of a socio-environmental development program in Brazilian Amazonia that took into account local communities' demands to link environmental conservation and small-scale family-based rural production. Methodologically, the research was based on qualitative analysis and used semi-structured interviews for data collection. The paper shows that NGOs as intermediaries between government and rural communities is a significant mechanism to promote the strengthening of the power of local communities, to create bridges between federal government and local communities; and to stimulate participatory processes by engaging rural communities' culture and knowledge in socio-environmental development program as Proambiente.

Good deals in markets with frictions

This paper studies a portfolio choice problem such that the pricing rule may incorporate transaction costs and the risk measure is coherent and expectation bounded. We will prove the necessity of dealing with pricing rules such that there exists an essentially bounded stochastic discount factor, which must be also bounded from below by a strictly positive value. Otherwise good deals will be available to traders, i.e., depending on the selected risk measure, investors can build portfolios whose (risk, return) will be as close as desired to (−infinity, infinity) or (0, infinity). This pathologic property still holds for vector risk measures (i.e., if we minimize a vector valued function whose components are risk measures). It is worthwhile to point out that essentially bounded stochastic discount factors are not usual in financial literature. In particular, the most famous frictionless, complete and arbitrage free pricing models imply the existence of good deals for every coherent and expectation bounded (scalar or vector) measure of risk, and the incorporation of transaction costs will not guarantee the solution of this caveat.

Constructing good deals in discrete time arbitrage-free dynamic pricing models

Recent literature has proved that many classical pricing models (Black and Scholes, Heston, etc.) and risk measures (V aR, CV aR, etc.) may lead to “pathological meaningless situations”, since traders can build sequences of portfolios whose risk leveltends to −infinity and whose expected return tends to +infinity, i.e., (risk = −infinity, return = +infinity). Such a sequence of strategies may be called “good deal”. This paper focuses on the risk measures V aR and CV aR and analyzes this caveat in a discrete time complete pricing model. Under quite general conditions the explicit expression of a good deal is given, and its sensitivity with respect to some possible measurement errors is provided too. We point out that a critical property is the absence of short sales. In such a case we first construct a “shadow riskless asset” (SRA) without short sales and then the good deal is given by borrowing more and more money so as to invest in the SRA. It is also shown that the SRA is interested by itself, even if there are short selling restrictions.

Provably good scheduling of sporadic tasks with resource sharing on a two-type heterogeneous multiprocessor platform

Consider the problem of scheduling a set of implicit-deadline sporadic tasks to meet all deadlines on a two-type heterogeneous multiprocessor platform where a task may request at most one of |R| shared resources. There are m1 processors of type-1 and m2 processors of type-2. Tasks may migrate only when requesting or releasing resources. We present a new algorithm, FF-3C-vpr, which offers a guarantee that if a task set is schedulable to meet deadlines by an optimal task assignment scheme that only allows tasks to migrate when requesting or releasing a resource, then FF-3Cvpr also meets deadlines if given processors 4+6*ceil(|R|/min(m1,m2)) times as fast. As far as we know, it is the first result for resource sharing on heterogeneous platforms with provable performance.

A conjecture about provably good task assignment on heterogeneous multiprocessor platforms but with a stronger adversary

Consider the problem of scheduling a set of implicit-deadline sporadic tasks to meet all deadlines on a heterogeneous multiprocessor platform. We use an algorithm proposed in [1] (we refer to it as LP-EE) from state-of-the-art for assigning tasks to heterogeneous multiprocessor platform and (re-)prove its performance guarantee but for a stronger adversary.We conjecture that if a task set can be scheduled to meet deadlines on a heterogeneous multiprocessor platform by an optimal task assignment scheme that allows task migrations then LP-EE meets deadlines as well with no migrations if given processors twice as fast. We illustrate this with an example.

Provably good task assignment on heterogeneous multiprocessor platforms for a restricted case but with a stronger adversary

Consider the problem of scheduling a set of implicit-deadline sporadic tasks to meet all deadlines on a heterogeneous multiprocessor platform. We consider a restricted case where the maximum utilization of any task on any processor in the system is no greater than one. We use an algorithm proposed in [1] (we refer to it as LP-EE) from state-of-the-art for assigning tasks to heterogeneous multiprocessor platform and (re-)prove its performance guarantee for this restricted case but for a stronger adversary. We show that if a task set can be scheduled to meet deadlines on a heterogeneous multiprocessor platform by an optimal task assignment scheme that allows task migrations then LP-EE meets deadlines as well with no migrations if given processors twice as fast.

Provably good multiprocessor scheduling with resource sharing

We present a 12(1 + 3R/(4m)) competitive algorithm for scheduling implicit-deadline sporadic tasks on a platform comprising m processors, where a task may request one of R shared resources.