German Total Ankle Replacement Register of the German Foot and Ankle Society (D. A. F.) - presentation of design and reliability of the data as well as first results

INTRODUCTION Even though arthroplasty of the ankle joint is considered to be an established procedure, only about 1,300 endoprostheses are implanted in Germany annually. Arthrodeses of the ankle joint are performed almost three times more often. This may be due to the availability of the procedure - more than twice as many providers perform arthrodesis - as well as the postulated high frequency of revision procedures of arthroplasties in the literature. In those publications, however, there is often no clear differentiation between revision surgery with exchange of components, subsequent interventions due to complications and subsequent surgery not associated with complications. The German Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Association's (D. A. F.) registry for total ankle replacement collects data pertaining to perioperative complications as well as cause, nature and extent of the subsequent interventions, and postoperative patient satisfaction. MATERIAL AND METHODS The D. A. F.'s total ankle replacement register is a nation-wide, voluntary registry. After giving written informed consent, the patients can be added to the database by participating providers. Data are collected during hospital stay for surgical treatment, during routine follow-up inspections and in the context of revision surgery. The information can be submitted in paper-based or online formats. The survey instruments are available as minimum data sets or scientific questionnaires which include patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). The pseudonymous clinical data are collected and evaluated at the Institute for Evaluative Research in Medicine, University of Bern/Switzerland (IEFM). The patient-related data remain on the register's module server in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. The registry's methodology as well as the results of the revisions and patient satisfaction for 115 patients with a two year follow-up period are presented. Statistical analyses are performed with SAS™ (Version 9.4, SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC, USA). RESULTS About 2½ years after the register was launched there are 621 datasets on primary implantations, 1,427 on follow-ups and 121 records on re-operation available. 49 % of the patients received their implants due to post-traumatic osteoarthritis, 27 % because of a primary osteoarthritis and 15 % of patients suffered from a rheumatic disease. More than 90 % of the primary interventions proceeded without complications. Subsequent interventions were recorded for 84 patients, which corresponds to a rate of 13.5 % with respect to the primary implantations. It should be noted that these secondary procedures also include two-stage procedures not due to a complication. "True revisions" are interventions with exchange of components due to mechanical complications and/or infection and were present in 7.6 % of patients. 415 of the patients commented on their satisfaction with the operative result during the last follow-up: 89.9 % of patients evaluate their outcome as excellent or good, 9.4 % as moderate and only 0.7 % (3 patients) as poor. In these three cases a component loosening or symptomatic USG osteoarthritis was present. Two-year follow-up data using the American Orthopedic Foot and Ankle Society Ankle and Hindfoot Scale (AOFAS-AHS) are already available for 115 patients. The median AOFAS-AHS score increased from 33 points preoperatively to more than 80 points three to six months postoperatively. This increase remained nearly constant over the entire two-year follow-up period. CONCLUSION Covering less than 10 % of the approximately 240 providers in Germany and approximately 12 % of the annually implanted total ankle-replacements, the D. A. F.-register is still far from being seen as a national registry. Nevertheless, geographical coverage and inclusion of "high-" (more than 100 total ankle replacements a year) and "low-volume surgeons" (less than 5 total ankle replacements a year) make the register representative for Germany. The registry data show that the number of subsequent interventions and in particular the "true revision" procedures are markedly lower than the 20 % often postulated in the literature. In addition, a high level of patient satisfaction over the short and medium term is recorded. From the perspective of the authors, these results indicate that total ankle arthroplasty - given a correct indication and appropriate selection of patients - is not inferior to an ankle arthrodesis concerning patients' satisfaction and function. First valid survival rates can be expected about 10 years after the register's start.

Measurement of the electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z-boson and distributions sensitive to vector boson fusion in proton-proton collisions at √s = 8 TeV using the ATLAS detector

Measurements of fiducial cross sections for the electroweak production of two jets in association with a Z-boson are presented. The measurements are performed using 20.3 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data collected at a centre-of-mass energy of p s = 8TeV by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. The electroweak component is extracted by a fit to the dijet invariant mass distribution in a fiducial region chosen to enhance the electroweak contribution over the dominant background in which the jets are produced via the strong interaction. The electroweak cross sections measured in two fiducial regions are in good agreement with the Standard Model expectations and the background-only hypothesis is rejected with significance above the 5ơ level. The electroweak process includes the vector boson fusion production of a Z-boson and the data are used to place limits on anomalous triple gauge boson couplings. In addition, measurements of cross sections and differential distributions for inclusive Z-boson-plus-dijet production are performed in five fiducial regions, each with different sensitivity to the electroweak contribution. The results are corrected for detector effects and compared to predictions from the Sherpa and Powheg event generators.

Independent at heart: persistent association of altitude with ischaemic heart disease mortality after consideration of climate, topography and built environment.

BACKGROUND Living at higher altitude was dose-dependently associated with lower risk of ischaemic heart disease (IHD). Higher altitudes have different climatic, topographic and built environment properties than lowland regions. It is unclear whether these environmental factors mediate/confound the association between altitude and IHD. We examined how much of the altitude-IHD association is explained by variations in exposure at place of residence to sunshine, temperature, precipitation, aspect, slope and distance to main road. METHODS We included 4.2 million individuals aged 40-84 at baseline living in Switzerland at altitudes 195-2971 m above sea level (ie, full range of residence), providing 77 127 IHD deaths. Mortality data 2000-2008, sociodemographic/economic information and coordinates of residence were obtained from the Swiss National Cohort, a longitudinal, census-based record linkage study. Environment information was modelled to residence level using Weibull regression models. RESULTS In the model not adjusted for other environmental factors, IHD mortality linearly decreased with increasing altitude resulting in a lower risk (HR, 95% CI 0.67, 0.60 to 0.74) for those living >1500 m (vs<600 m). This association remained after adjustment for all other environmental factors 0.74 (0.66 to 0.82). CONCLUSIONS The benefit of living at higher altitude was only partially confounded by variations in climate, topography and built environment. Rather, physical environment factors appear to have an independent effect and may impact on cardiovascular health in a cumulative way. Inclusion of additional modifiable factors as well as individual information on traditional IHD risk factors in our combined environmental model could help to identify strategies for the reduction of inequalities in IHD mortality.

A genome-wide association study confirms PNPLA3 and identifies TM6SF2 and MBOAT7 as risk loci for alcohol-related cirrhosis

Alcohol misuse is the leading cause of cirrhosis and the second most common indication for liver transplantation in the Western world. We performed a genome-wide association study for alcohol-related cirrhosis in individuals of European descent (712 cases and 1,426 controls) with subsequent validation in two independent European cohorts (1,148 cases and 922 controls). We identified variants in the MBOAT7 (P = 1.03 × 10(-9)) and TM6SF2 (P = 7.89 × 10(-10)) genes as new risk loci and confirmed rs738409 in PNPLA3 as an important risk locus for alcohol-related cirrhosis (P = 1.54 × 10(-48)) at a genome-wide level of significance. These three loci have a role in lipid processing, suggesting that lipid turnover is important in the pathogenesis of alcohol-related cirrhosis.

Do multiple true-false items beat the commonly used one-best-answers questions regarding to the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment? Results of a literature review

Background: Multiple True-False-Items (MTF-Items) might offer some advantages compared to one-best-answer-questions (TypeA) as they allow more than one correct answer and may better represent clinical decisions. However, in medical education assessment MTF-Items are seldom used. Summary of Work: With this literature review existing findings on MTF-items and on TypeA were compared along the Ottawa Criteria for Good Assessment, i.e. (1) reproducibility, (2) feasibility, (3) validity, (4) acceptance, (5) educational effect, (6) catalytic effects, and (7) equivalence. We conducted a literature research on ERIC and Google Scholar including papers from the years 1935 to 2014. We used the search terms “multiple true-false”, “true-false”, “true/false”, and “Kprim” combined with “exam”, “test”, and “assessment”. Summary of Results: We included 29 out of 33 studies. Four of them were carried out in the medical field Compared to TypeA, MTF-Items are associated with (1) higher reproducibility (2) lower feasibility (3) similar validity (4) higher acceptance (5) higher educational effect (6) no studies on catalytic effects or (7) equivalence. Discussion and Conclusions: While studies show overall good characteristics of MTF items according to the Ottawa criteria, this type of question seems to be rather seldom used. One reason might be the reported lower feasibility. Overall the literature base is still weak. Furthermore, only 14 % of literature is from the medical domain. Further studies to better understand the characteristics of MTF-Items in the medical domain are warranted. Take-home messages: Overall the literature base is weak and therefore further studies are needed. Existing studies show that: MTF-Items show higher reliability, acceptance and educational effect; MTF-Items are more difficult to produce

Intendedness of pregnancy among active duty women in the U.S. Army

Objective. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of unintended pregnancy and the association between social and demographic factors among a population of active duty women in the U.S. Army giving birth to viable infants at a U.S. Army hospital at Fort Hood, Texas. Prevalence of unintended pregnancy in this group was 50.9% (95% CI 44.0 to 57.9) with 36.3% being mistimed (95% CI 29.8 to 33.2) and 14.6% being unwanted (95% CI 10.2 to 20.1). A further 14.2% of the women experienced ambivalence (95% CI 9.8 to 19.6). ^ The study population was a cross-sectional group of active duty pregnant women who represent the target population of all female soldiers that deliver viable infants in the Army. Using a survey based on previous studies, intendedness of pregnancy at conception was retrospectively determined. Unintended births are further characterized as mistimed or unwanted. Demographic and other exposures were described bivariately. Associations were evaluated using measures of relative risk and chi-square analysis. ^ The results of the research indicate that in the study population, race/ethnicity is not associated with unintended pregnancy and non-commissioned officers had a lower rate of unintended pregnancy than other rank groupings. ^

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 28 - Korrespondenzen mit u.a. Siegfried Kracauer (p. I 14, 115-368)

95 Briefe und Beilagen zwischen Siegfried Kracauer und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1949; 2 Briefe zwischen Else Staudinger vom American Committee for Refugee Scholars, Writers and Artists New York und Max Horkheimer, 10.07.1945, 24.07.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Meyer Schapiro und Siegfried Kracauer 19.11.1937, 03.12.1937; 2 Briefe von Leo Löwenthal an Schapiro Meyer, 1940, 1941; 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Max Horkheimer an A. Schütz, 02.08.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Trude Krautheimer, 30.07.1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Hebrew Sheltering and Immigrant Aid New York, 10.06.1940; 2 Briefe ziwschen dem Department of State Washington und Max Horkheimer, 05.04.1939, 1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Betty Drury Max Horkheimer, 05.11.1938, 07.11.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Margaret Krafft und Max Horkheimer, 1938, 1939; 1 Brief von Gertrud Kurth-Kieslinger an Max Horkheimer, 02.10.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Werner Kraft und Max Horkheimer, 19.01.1940, 01.03.1940; 1 Brief und 1 Beilage von Friedrich Krause an Max Horkheimer, 05.01.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen Karl Krayl und Max Horkheimer, 201.10.1937, 25.11.1937; 11 Briefe zwischen Ernst Krenek und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 1 Brief von S. Krezel an Max Horkheimer, 12.02.1936; 1 Brief von Charles I. Krieger an Max Horkheimer, 01.08.1940; 1 Brief von H. Kronstein an Max Horkheimer, 20.05.1935; 3 Briefe zwischen Germaine Krull und Max Horkheimer, 1934, 06.09.1937, 1937; 3 Briefe zwischen Lawrence S. Kubie Sekretär der American Psychoanalytic Association, New York und Max Horkheimer, 11.05.1938, 1938; 5 Briefe und Beilagen zwsichen Julius Kühl und Max Horkheimer, 18.10.1939-1940; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Herr Guggenheim, 20.02.1940; 1 Brief von Julius Kühl an die ESKA, 31.03.1945; 4 Briefe zwischen B. Kugelmann und Max Horkheimer, 1934, 1938, 1939; 1 Brief von Georg Kunzel an Max Horkheimer, 01.08.1930;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 1 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Franz Alexander (p. I 1, 1-205)

1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Abel, 16.03.1936; 3 Briefe zwischen Hubert Abrahamsohn und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1936, 21.12.1936; 2 Briefe zwischen Emanuel Adler und Max Horkheimer, 12.04.1946, 26.04.1946; 2 Briefe zwischen Max Adler und Max Horkheimer, 16.03.1935, 29.03.1935; 1 Brief von Eva Ahamson an Max Horkheimer, 01.11.1944; 2 Briefe der Aircraft Warning Service Brentwood an Max Horkheimer, Mai 1942; 6 Briefe zwischen Librairie Félix Alcan und Max Horkheimer, 1935, 18.12.1935; 11 Briefe zwischen Franz Alexander und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen der American Historical Review New York und Max Horkheimer, 01.04.1941, 07.04.1941; 1 Brief von Paul Reiwald an Max Horkheimer, 18.10.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Helen Manice Alexander und Max Horkheimer, 1936; 2 Briefe zwischen Bernardine Allen und Max Horkheimer, 17.06.1938, 24.06.1938; 1 Brief der Alumni Federation of Columbia University an Max Horkheimer, 21.07.1942; 1 Brief der American Friends Service Comittee an Max Horkheimer, 10.12.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen der American Academy of Political and Social Science Philadelphia und Max Horkheimer, 1939,1940, 16.01.1939; 1 Brief der American Automobile Association Washington an Max Horkheimer, 22.03.1938; 1 Brief der American Association for the Advancement of Science Washington an Max Horkheimer, 16.08.1937; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an den American Consulate General Berlin, 1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den American Consulate General Havana, 03.03.1941; 4 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an den American Consul London, 1939-1941; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an den American Consulate General Stuttgart, 1939-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den American Consul Zürich, 1939; 1 Brief von Friedrich Pollock an den American Council of Learned Society, Washington, 27.06.1941; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an die American Friends of German Freedom New York, 1941; 4 Briefe der American Historical Association Washington an Max Horkheimer, 1937-1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den American Red Cross Westwood Office, 21.06.1943; 18 Briefe zwschen der American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals New York und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an die American Women's Volunteer Service Pacific Palisades, 27.07.1942; 23 Briefe zwischen Eugene Anderson und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 2 Briefe zwischen Norah Andreae und Max Horkheimer, 27.10.1944, 09.09.1946; 1 Brief von Rosa Nebel-Schenk, 04.03.1946; 1 Brief von der National Catholic Welfare Conference, 14.08.1944; 12 Briefe zwischen Werner Andreae und Max Horkheimer, 1945-1954; 1 Brief von Julius Marx an Werner Andreae, 10.05.1946, 11.05.1950; 2 Briefe von Josef Messinger an Werner Andreae, 23.10.1946, ohne Datum; 3 Briefe zwischen dem Advokatenbüro Hodler und Max Horkheimer, 1946, 09.05.1946;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 4 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Richard Bach (p. I 2, 131-358)

24 Briefe zwischen Richard Bach und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Alfred Chalk und Max Horkheimer, 17.10.1939, 14.11.1939; 3 Briefe von Morduch Lexandrowitsch und der American Consulate General, 1939; 4 Briefe von der American Consulate General und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Amtstgericht Berlin, 15.03.1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Stiedry, 05.12.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den Collector of Custom, 26.10.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Josef Maier und Carson Alexandrowitsch, 28.06.1938, 29.06.1938; 1 Brief von Margarete Baruch an Alice Maier, 11.04.1938; 1 Brief von Emanuel List an Carson Alexandrowitsch, 23.02.1938; 1 Abschrift des Briefes von der Metropolitan Opera Association New York an Morduch Lexandrowitsch, 22.02.1938; 1 Brief von Jacques Barzun an Max Horkheimer, 09.07.1947; 4 Briefe zwischen K. Baschwitz und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1946; 2 Briefe zwischen E. Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 08.04.1935, 27.05.1935; 4 Briefe zwischen Fritz Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Lina Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 20.07.1942, 16,08,1942; 4 Briefe zwsichen Rudolf Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1937; 15 Briefe zwischen Gertrud Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an den Collector of Customs, 15.03.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen I. Hannah Davidson vom Jewish Community Center San Francisco und Max Horkheimer, 19.09.1938, 29.09.1938; 2 Briefe zwsichen I. Bauer und Max Horkheimer, 25.09.1938, 29.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Klopfer, 27.09.1938; 3 Briefe zwischen Y.M.H.A. - Y.W.H.A The Jewish Center of Saint Louis und Max Horkheimer, 19.09.1938, 1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Julius Rosenberg, 17.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Jwish Center Salt Lake City, Utah, 07.09.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an das Jewish Community Center San Fransisco, 07.09.1938; 3 Briefe zwischen dem New York Section of the National Council of Jewish Women und Max Horkheimer, 07.04.1938, 1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Baum und Max Horkheimer, 12.03.1946, 25.05.1946; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Charles A. Beard , 12.12.1934; 1 Brief von Charles A. Beard an C. A. Beard; 5 Briefe von Friedrich Pollock an Charles A. Beard, 1940-1941; 5 Briefe zwischen Lilo Beck und Max Horkheimer, 1940-1941; 7 Briefe zwischen Maximilian Beck und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 1 Brief von Paul Tillich an Max Horkheimer , 01.10.1940; 1 Brief von dem Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars New York an Max Horkheimer, 19.04.1940; 5 Briefe zwischen Konrad Bekker und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1939; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Ludwig Bendix, 1921, 1937; 1 Brief von Peter Bendmann an Max Horkheimer; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Ruth Benedict, 30.07.1937; 1 Brief von Eric Russel Bentley an Max Horkheimer, 30.01.1945; 1 Brief von George Berg an Max Horkheimer, 12.07.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen Egon Bergel und Max Horkheimer, 18.08.1938, 22.08.1938; 1 Brief von Marie Jahoda an Max Horkheimer, 14.07.1928; 1 Brief von Theodor W. Adorno an Kurt Bergel, 09.09.1939; 15 Briefe zwischen Klaus Berger und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1943; 1 Brief von Frederick Pollock an Philip M. Hayden von der Columbia University New York, 05.03.1942; 1 Brief von Hans Venedey an Max Horkheimer, 05.03.1938; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Ida Berger-Chevant, 18.02.1939;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 23 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Gertrud Isch (p. I 12, 1-175)

3 Briefe zwischen R. Imelmann und Max Horkheimer, 20.07.1934, 1934; 2 Briefe vom Institute of International Education New York an Max Horkheimer, 1939-1940; 1 Brief vom Instytut Spraw Spolecznych Warschau an Max Horkheimer, 28.12.1935; 2 Briefe vom International House New York an Max Horkheimer, 1939; 11 Briefe zwischen dem Internationaal Instituut voor Sociale Geschiedenis Amsterdam, 1937-1938; 2 Rundschreiben der International Labour Office Genf, 1940; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an die International Relief Association New York, 1940; 2 Briefe der International Science New York an Max Horkheimer, 1941-1942; 1 Rundbrief und Beilage des International Student Service Genf, 01.03.1934; 3 Briefe und Beilage zwischen Harry Isay und Max Horkheimer, 1941, 13.10.1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Elsa Hirschberg, 09.03.1942; 52 Briefe zwischen Gertrude Isch und Max Horkheimer, 1934-1946; 10 Briefe zwischen Karl Israelski und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1938;

Na 1 Nachlass Max Horkheimer, 14 - Korrespondenzen u.a. mit Hugo Fischer und Karl August Wittfogel (p. I 7, 224-429)

1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Rosel Favez, 03.12.1935; 5 Briefe zwischen Sidney B. Fay von der Bureau of International Search Cambridge, Massachusetts und Max Horkheimer, 1939-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an James Feibleman, 02.03.1942; 5 Briefe von Hans Feibelmann an Max Horkheimer, 1936-1937; 2 Briefe zwischen Babette Feigenbaum und Max Horkheimer, 29.04.1941, 05.05.1941; 1 Brief von Arthur Feiler an Max Horkheimer, 15.10.1939; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Adolf Feitler, 03.01.1935; 3 Briefe zwischen Frederick V. Filed von dem American Council Institute of Pacific Relations und Max Horkheimer, 1937, 05.04.1937; 9 Briefe zwischen Thea Field, Lowell Field und Max Horkheimer, 1935-1941; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Finkelstein, 18.09.1941; 7 Briefe zwischen Harry Finkelstein und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1940; 1 Brief von Louis Finkelstein an Robert MacIver, 29.05.1940; 2 Briefe zwischen Louis Finkelstein und Max Horkheimer, 06.06.1940, 04.06.1940; 15 Briefe zwischen Hugo Fischer und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1938; 1 Brief von Hugo Fischer an P. Tillich; 1 Brief von Hugo Fischer an Karl A. Wittfogel, 17.06.1940; 2 Briefe von Max Horkheimer an Ernest Manheim, April 1942; 1 Brief von Alexander Farquharson an Max Horkheimer, 20.01.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen dem Institute of International Education, New York Edgar J. Fisher und Max Horkheimer, Oktober 1938, 18.10.1938; 10 Briefe zwischen Paul Fischer und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 2 Briefe zwischen der Hessian Hills School New York und Max Horkheimer, 21.02.1938, 28.02.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Dorothy Canfield Fisher und Max Horkheimer, 24.01.1939, 19.01.1939; 1 Brief von Ossip K. Flechtheim an Max Horkheimer, 04.01.1941; 2 Briefe zwischen der University of Minnesota, Minneapolis und Max Horkheimer, 02.08.1945, 15.09.1945; 3 Briefe zwischen Leo Löwenthal und Max Horkheimer, 1943-1945, 17.08.1945; 2 Briefe zwischen der University of Denver, Colorado und Max Horkheimer, 11.05.1943, 28.05.1943; 1 Brief von dem Institute Universitaire De Hautes Etudes Internationales Genf an Max Horkheimer, 25.01.1939; 1 Brief von Hans Kelsen an Max Horkheimer, 30.01.1939; Lebenslauf und 2 Empfehlungsschreiben von Max Fleischmann für Prof. Edwin Borchard; 1 Brief von der Columbia University in the City of New York an Franz Neumann, 17.04.1940; 3 Briefe zwischen Philipp Flesch und Max Horkheimer, 26.03.1940, 1939-1940; 17 Briefe zwischen Babette Fletcher, Theo Fletcher und Max Horkheimer, 1941-1950; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Abraham Flexner, 07.06.1939; 1 Brief von Robert Fließ an Max Horkheimer, 24.10.1938; 1 Brief von der Foreign Policy Association New York an Max Horkheimer, 03.11.1934; 1 Brief von Max Horkheimer an Rudolf Forster, 10.01.1940; 2 Briefe von der Fortune Time & Life Building New York und Max Horkheimer, 1938-1940; 4 Briefe zwischen Siegmund H. Foulkes (Fuchs) und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1937, 31.12.1936; 5 Briefe zwischen Elsie M. Foulstone und Max Horkheimer, 1941; 1 Brief von Mary Fox an Max Horkheimer, 09.12.1938; 5 Briefe zwischen Ernst Fraenkel und Max Horkheimer, 1936-1938; 1 Heiratsanzeige Liesl Frank; 7 Briefe zwischen Philipp Frank und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1939; 6 Briefe zwischen Lothar G. Frank und Max Horkheimer, 1941; 7 Briefe zwischen Felix Frankfurter und Max Horkheimer, 1937-1941; 2 Briefe zwischen Joseph Freeman und Max Horkheimer, 22.11.1944; 1 Brief von der Free Synagogue New York an Max Horkheimer, 14.11.1938; 2 Briefe zwsichen Benjamin Freilichmann und Max Horkheimer, 07.01.1939, 23.01.1939; 2 Briefe zwischen dem Frenkel Travel Service New York und Max Horkheimer, 21.02.1936, 23.02.1936; 2 Briefe zwischen Hugo Freund und Max Horkheimer, 14.11.1938, 18.11.1938; 2 Briefe zwischen Julius A. Jr. Freynick und Max Horkheimer, 11.09.1939, 18.09.1939;

Na 50 Nachlass Arthur Schopenhauer - 'Schopenhauer-Archiv', 201 - Übermittlung von August Röckel des vom British Association in Aberdeen bestätigten Beweises der Richtigkeit der Farbenlehre Goethes

u.a.: Zitat aus dem englischen Magazin Athenaeum; Experiment zur Farbenlehre; Johann Wolfgang von Goethe; Smith; Isaak Newton;