EU-Suomi ja Putinin Venäjän odotukset

Kirjoitus perustuu esitelmään Tieteen päivillä 2005

Perheestäkö turva? : vanhat naiset ja perhe Vihdissä 1800- ja 1900-luvun alussa

Summary: Sheltered by the family

Evaluation of clinician-operated sonography and fine-needle aspiration in the assessment of salivary gland tumours.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the combination of ultrasound (US) + fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in the assessment of salivary gland tumours in the hands of the otolaryngologist. DESIGN: A retrospective review of case notes was performed. SETTING: Two university teaching hospitals in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: One hundred and three patients with a total of 106 focal masses of the salivary glands were included. Clinician-operated US + FNA were the first line of investigation for these lesions. All patients underwent surgical excision of the lesion, which allowed for confirmation of diagnosis by histopathology in 104 lesions and by laboratory testing in two lesions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary--diagnostic accuracy in identifying true salivary gland neoplasms and detecting malignancy. Secondary--predicting an approximate and specific diagnosis in these tumours. RESULTS: The combination of US + FNA achieved a diagnostic accuracy of 99% in identifying and differentiating true salivary gland neoplasms from tumour-like lesions. In detecting malignancy, this combination permitted an accuracy of 98%. An approximate diagnosis was possible in 89%, and a specific diagnosis in 69% of our patients. CONCLUSIONS: Due to economic factors and a high diagnostic accuracy, the combination of US + FNA represents the investigation method of choice for most salivary gland tumours. We suggest that the otolaryngologist be employed in carrying out these procedures, as is already the rule in other medical specialties, while computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging should be reserved to those few lesions, which cannot be delineated completely by sonography.

Tietojärjestelmäammattilaisten ennakkokäsityksiä

Lektio tietojenkäsittelyopin väitöskirjasta Information system specialist predispositions, tarkastettu Tampereen yliopistossa 8.3.2002.

Protocol for a systematic review on the extent of non-publication of research studies and associated study characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Methodological research has found that non-published studies often have different results than those that are published, a phenomenon known as publication bias. When results are not published, or are published selectively based on the direction or the strength of the findings, healthcare professionals and consumers of healthcare cannot base their decision-making on the full body of current evidence. METHODS: As part of the OPEN project (http://www.open-project.eu) we will conduct a systematic review with the following objectives:1. To determine the proportion and/or rate of non-publication of studies by systematically reviewing methodological research projects that followed up a cohort of studies that a. received research ethics committee (REC) approval,b. were registered in trial registries, orc. were presented as abstracts at conferences.2. To assess the association of study characteristics (for example, direction and/or strength of findings) with likelihood of full publication.To identify reports of relevant methodological research projects we will conduct electronic database searches, check reference lists, and contact experts. Published and unpublished projects will be included. The inclusion criteria are as follows:a. RECs: methodological research projects that examined the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies that received approval from RECs;b. Trial registries: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of publication of studies registered in trial registries;c. Conference abstracts: methodological research projects that examine the subsequent proportion and/or rate of full publication of studies which were initially presented at conferences as abstracts.Primary outcomes: Proportion/rate of published studies; time to full publication (mean/median; cumulative publication rate by time).Secondary outcomes: Association of study characteristics with full publication.The different questions (a, b, and c) will be investigated separately. Data synthesis will involve a combination of descriptive and statistical summaries of the included methodological research projects. DISCUSSION: Results are expected to be publicly available in mid 2013.