Effects of Resources Exploitation on Water Quality: case studies in Salt Water Intrusion and Acid Mine Drainage

Throughout the world, pressures on water resources are increasing, mainly as a result of human activity. Because of their accessibility, groundwater and surface water are the most used reservoirs. The evaluation of the water quality requires the identification of the interconnections among the water reservoirs, natural landscape features, human activities and aquatic health. This study focuses on the estimation of the water pollution linked to two different environmental issues: salt water intrusion and acid mine drainage related to the exploitation of natural resources. Effects of salt water intrusion occurring in the shallow aquifer north of Ravenna (Italy) was analysed through the study of ion- exchange occurring in the area and its variance throughout the year, applying a depth-specific sampling method. In the study area were identified ion exchange, calcite and dolomite precipitation, and gypsum dissolution and sulphate reduction as the main processes controlling the groundwater composition. High concentrations of arsenic detected only at specific depth indicate its connexion with the organic matter. Acid mine drainage effects related to the tin extraction in the Bolivian Altiplano was studied, on water and sediment matrix. Water contamination results strictly dependent on the seasonal variation, on pH and redox conditions. During the dry season the strong evaporation and scarce water flow lead to low pH values, high concentrations of heavy metals in surface waters and precipitation of secondary minerals along the river, which could be released in oxidizing conditions as demonstrated through the sequential extraction analysis. The increase of the water flow during the wet season lead to an increase of pH values and a decrease in heavy metal concentrations, due to dilution effect and, as e.g. for the iron, to precipitation.

Impact of random and systematic recall errors and selection bias in case--control studies on mobile phone use and brain tumors in adolescents (CEFALO study)

Whether the use of mobile phones is a risk factor for brain tumors in adolescents is currently being studied. Case--control studies investigating this possible relationship are prone to recall error and selection bias. We assessed the potential impact of random and systematic recall error and selection bias on odds ratios (ORs) by performing simulations based on real data from an ongoing case--control study of mobile phones and brain tumor risk in children and adolescents (CEFALO study). Simulations were conducted for two mobile phone exposure categories: regular and heavy use. Our choice of levels of recall error was guided by a validation study that compared objective network operator data with the self-reported amount of mobile phone use in CEFALO. In our validation study, cases overestimated their number of calls by 9% on average and controls by 34%. Cases also overestimated their duration of calls by 52% on average and controls by 163%. The participation rates in CEFALO were 83% for cases and 71% for controls. In a variety of scenarios, the combined impact of recall error and selection bias on the estimated ORs was complex. These simulations are useful for the interpretation of previous case-control studies on brain tumor and mobile phone use in adults as well as for the interpretation of future studies on adolescents.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalizability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies.The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers.This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

One-year bacterial colonization patterns of Staphylococcus aureus and other bacteria at implants and adjacent teeth

AIMS: (i) To assess the pattern of early bacterial colonization on titanium oral implants after installation, at 12 weeks and at 12 months, (ii) to compare the microbiota at submucosal implant sites and adjacent subgingival tooth sites and (iii) to assess whether or not early colonization was predictive of 12-month colonization patterns. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Submucosal/subgingival plaque samples from 17 titanium oral implants and adjacent teeth were analyzed by checkerboard DNA-DNA hybridization 30 min, 12 weeks and 12 months after implant installation. RESULTS: At 12 months, none of the inserted implants had been lost or presented with signs of peri-implantitis. The distribution of sites at implants and teeth with bleeding on probing varied between 2% and 11%. Probing pocket depths < or =3 mm were found at 75% of implant sites. At 12 months, the sum of the bacterial counts of 40 species was statistically significantly higher at tooth compared with implant sites (mean difference: 34.4 x 10(5), 95% confidence interval -0.4 to 69.4, P<0.05). At 12 months, higher individual bacterial counts at tooth sites were found for 7/40 species compared with implant sites. Detection or lack of detection of Staphylococcus aureus at implant sites at 12 weeks resulted in the highest positive (e.g. 80%) and negative (e.g. 90%) predictive values, respectively. Between 12 weeks and 12 months, the prevalence of Tannerella forsythia increased statistically significantly at implant sites (P<0.05). Lack of detection of Porphyromonas gingivalis at 12 weeks yielded a negative predictive value of 93.1% of this microorganism being undetectable at implant sites at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limits of this study, the findings showed (i) a few differences in the prevalence of bacterial species between implant and adjacent tooth sites at 12 months and (ii) high positive and negative predictive values for selected bacterial species.

What do case-control studies estimate? Survey of methods and assumptions in published case-control research

To evaluate strategies used to select cases and controls and how reported odds ratios are interpreted, the authors examined 150 case-control studies published in leading general medicine, epidemiology, and clinical specialist journals from 2001 to 2007. Most of the studies (125/150; 83%) were based on incident cases; among these, the source population was mostly dynamic (102/125; 82%). A minority (23/125; 18%) sampled from a fixed cohort. Among studies with incident cases, 105 (84%) could interpret the odds ratio as a rate ratio. Fifty-seven (46% of 125) required the source population to be stable for such interpretation, while the remaining 48 (38% of 125) did not need any assumptions because of matching on time or concurrent sampling. Another 17 (14% of 125) studies with incident cases could interpret the odds ratio as a risk ratio, with 16 of them requiring the rare disease assumption for this interpretation. The rare disease assumption was discussed in 4 studies but was not relevant to any of them. No investigators mentioned the need for a stable population. The authors conclude that in current case-control research, a stable exposure distribution is much more frequently needed to interpret odds ratios than the rare disease assumption. At present, investigators conducting case-control studies rarely discuss what their odds ratios estimate.

Differential effects of natural product microtubule stabilizers on microtubule assembly: single agent and combination studies with taxol, epothilone B, and discodermolide

A systematic comparison has been performed of the morphology and stability of microtubules (MTs) induced by the potent microtubule-stabilizing agents (MSAs) taxol, epothilone B (Epo B), and discodermolide (DDM) under GTP-free conditions. DDM-induced tubulin polymerization occurred significantly faster than that induced by taxol and Epo B. At the same time, tubulin polymers assembled from soluble tubulin by DDM were morphologically distinct (shorter and less ordered) from those induced by either taxol or Epo B, as demonstrated by electron microscopy. Exposure of MSA-induced tubulin polymers to ultrasound revealed the DDM-based polymers to be less stable to this type of physical stress than those formed with either Epo B or taxol. Interestingly, MT assembly in the presence of both DDM and taxol appeared to produce a distinct new type of MT polymer with a mixed morphology between those of DDM- and taxol-induced structures. The observed differences in MT morphology and stability might be related, at least partly, to differences in intramicrotubular tubulin isotype distribution, as DDM showed a different pattern of beta-tubulin isotype usage in the assembly process.

[Strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE): explanation and elaboration]

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.