866 resultados para empirical studies in interaction design


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

by S. Schechter

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Schechter, Salomon. Übers. von Ignatz Kaufmann

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND The early repolarization (ER) pattern is associated with an increased risk of arrhythmogenic sudden death. However, strategies for risk stratification of patients with the ER pattern are not fully defined. OBJECTIVES This study sought to determine the role of electrophysiology studies (EPS) in risk stratification of patients with ER syndrome. METHODS In a multicenter study, 81 patients with ER syndrome (age 36 ± 13 years, 60 males) and aborted sudden death due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) were included. EPS were performed following the index VF episode using a standard protocol. Inducibility was defined by the provocation of sustained VF. Patients were followed up by serial implantable cardioverter-defibrillator interrogations. RESULTS Despite a recent history of aborted sudden death, VF was inducible in only 18 of 81 (22%) patients. During follow-up of 7.0 ± 4.9 years, 6 of 18 (33%) patients with inducible VF during EPS experienced VF recurrences, whereas 21 of 63 (33%) patients who were noninducible experienced recurrent VF (p = 0.93). VF storm occurred in 3 patients from the inducible VF group and in 4 patients in the noninducible group. VF inducibility was not associated with maximum J-wave amplitude (VF inducible vs. VF noninducible; 0.23 ± 0.11 mV vs. 0.21 ± 0.11 mV; p = 0.42) or J-wave distribution (inferior, odds ratio [OR]: 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33 to 2.81]; p = 0.95; lateral, OR: 1.57 [95% CI: 0.35 to 7.04]; p = 0.56; inferior and lateral, OR: 0.83 [95% CI: 0.27 to 2.55]; p = 0.74), which have previously been demonstrated to predict outcome in patients with an ER pattern. CONCLUSIONS Our findings indicate that current programmed stimulation protocols do not enhance risk stratification in ER syndrome.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

H. P. Stokes

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

ed. by George Kohut

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

by Leon Simon. With an introd. by Alfred E. Zimmern

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The success rate in the development of psychopharmacological compounds is insufficient. Two main reasons for failure have been frequently identified: 1) treating the wrong patients and 2) using the wrong dose. This is potentially based on the known heterogeneity among patients, both on a syndromal and a biological level. A focus on personalized medicine through better characterization with biomarkers has been successful in other therapeutic areas. Nevertheless, obstacles toward this goal that exist are 1) the perception of a lack of validation, 2) the perception of an expensive and complicated enterprise, and 3) the perception of regulatory hurdles. The authors tackle these concerns and focus on the utilization of biomarkers as predictive markers for treatment outcome. The authors primarily cover examples from the areas of major depression and schizophrenia. Methodologies covered include salivary and plasma collection of neuroendocrine, metabolic, and inflammatory markers, which identified subgroups of patients in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety. A battery of vegetative markers, including sleep-electroencephalography parameters, heart rate variability, and bedside functional tests, can be utilized to characterize the activity of a functional system that is related to treatment refractoriness in depression (e.g., the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system). Actigraphy and skin conductance can be utilized to classify patients with schizophrenia and provide objective readouts for vegetative activation as a functional marker of target engagement. Genetic markers, related to folate metabolism, or folate itself, has prognostic value for the treatment response in patients with schizophrenia. Already, several biomarkers are routinely collected in standard clinical trials (e.g., blood pressure and plasma electrolytes), and appear to be differentiating factors for treatment outcome. Given the availability of a wide variety of markers, the further development and integration of such markers into clinical research is both required and feasible in order to meet the benefit of personalized medicine. This article is based on proceedings from the "Taking Personalized Medicine Seriously-Biomarker Approaches in Phase IIb/III Studies in Major Depression and Schizophrenia" session, which was held during the 10th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society for Clinical Trials Meeting (ISCTM) in Washington, DC, February 18 to 20, 2014.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Land use science has traditionally used case-study approaches for in-depth investigation of land use change processes and impacts. Meta-studies synthesize findings across case-study evidence to identify general patterns. In this paper, we provide a review of meta-studies in land use science. Various meta-studies have been conducted, which synthesize deforestation and agricultural land use change processes, while other important changes, such as urbanization, wetland conversion, and grassland dynamics have hardly been addressed. Meta-studies of land use change impacts focus mostly on biodiversity and biogeochemical cycles, while meta-studies of socioeconomic consequences are rare. Land use change processes and land use change impacts are generally addressed in isolation, while only few studies considered trajectories of drivers through changes to their impacts and their potential feedbacks. We provide a conceptual framework for linking meta-studies of land use change processes and impacts for the analysis of coupled human–environmental systems. Moreover, we provide suggestions for combining meta-studies of different land use change processes to develop a more integrated theory of land use change, and for combining meta-studies of land use change impacts to identify tradeoffs between different impacts. Land use science can benefit from an improved conceptualization of land use change processes and their impacts, and from new methods that combine meta-study findings to advance our understanding of human–environmental systems.