Some proposals to management. A suggested approach to sound industrial and public relations.

Mode of access: Internet.

Status report[s] on Clinch River Study.

UC-70

The Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NETmundial)

This case study examines NETmundial, the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, which was held in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 23 and 24 of 2014. The meeting was convened by 1net, a coalition of This case study examines NETmundial, the Global Multistakeholder Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance, which was held in Sao Paulo, Brazil on April 23 and 24 of 2014. The meeting was convened by 1net, a coalition of stakeholder groups involved in Internet governance discussions, in partnership with the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), in response to revelations of mass surveillance of communications by the United States. It sought to develop a set of universally acceptable Internet governance principles as well as a way forward for the evolution of the Internet governance system, which together could serve as a framework for the governance and use of the Internet. It convened 930 participants from 110 different countries, representing civil society, the private sector, academia, the technical community, governments and intergovernmental organizations, as well as over 1000 remote participants from 23 countries around the globe. It also employed a content contribution platform that sought to crowd source inputs from stakeholders for the production of the outcome document. The meeting served as a demonstration of the multistakeholder process in action: in the production of the outcome document, stakeholders with a diverse range of backgrounds and interests collectively negotiated the inclusion or exclusion of highly sensitive and complex issues. While the process of achieving rough consensus involved sometimes messy debates and there were procedural imperfections, the case is informative for its structured production of bottom-up multistakeholder outcomes.groups involved in Internet governance discussions, in partnership with the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br), in response to revelations of mass surveillance of communications by the United States. It sought to develop a set of universally acceptable Internet governance principles as well as a way forward for the evolution of the Internet governance system, which together could serve as a framework for the governance and use of the Internet. It convened 930 participants from 110 different countries, representing civil society, the private sector, academia, the technical community, governments and intergovernmental organizations, as well as over 1000 remote participants from 23 countries around the globe. It also employed a content contribution platform that sought to crowd source inputs from stakeholders for the production of the outcome document. The meeting served as a demonstration of the multistakeholder process in action: in the production of the outcome document, stakeholders with a diverse range of backgrounds and interests collectively negotiated the inclusion or exclusion of highly sensitive and complex issues. While the process of achieving rough consensus involved sometimes messy debates and there were procedural imperfections, the case is informative for its structured production of bottom-up multistakeholder outcomes.

Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative

Objective To improve the accuracy and completeness of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy, to allow readers to assess the potential for bias in a study, and to evaluate a study's generalisability. Methods The Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) steering committee searched the literature to identify publications on the appropriate conduct and reporting of diagnostic studies and extracted potential items into an extensive list. Researchers, editors, and members of professional organisations shortened this list during a two day consensus meeting, with the goal of developing a checklist and a generic flow diagram for studies of diagnostic accuracy. Results The search for published guidelines about diagnostic research yielded 33 previously published checklists, from which we extracted a list of 75 potential items. At the consensus meeting, participants shortened the list to a 25 item checklist, by using evidence, whenever available. A prototype of a flow diagram provides information about the method of patient recruitment, the order of test execution, and the numbers of patients undergoing the test under evaluation and the reference standard, or both. Conclusions Evaluation of research depends on complete and accurate reporting. If medical journals adopt the STARD checklist and flow diagram, the quality of reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy should improve to the advantage of clinicians, researchers, reviewers, journals, and the public.

Application of Regularized Discriminant Analysis

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 62H30, 62P99

On Some of Professor Peter Rusev's Contributions

MSC 2010: 33-00, 33C45, 33C52, 30C15, 30D20, 32A17, 32H02, 44A05

Psychosocial morbidity in women with abnormal cervical cytology managed by cytological surveillance or initial colposcopy : longitudinal analysis from the TOMBOLA randomised trial

We are grateful for the co-operation and assistance that we received from NHS staff in the co-ordinating centres and clinical sites. We thank the women who participated in TOMBOLA. The TOMBOLA trial was supported by the Medical Research Council (G9700808) and the NHS in England and Scotland. The TOMBOLA Group comprises the following: Grant-holders: University of Aberdeen and NHS Grampian, Aberdeen, Scotland: Maggie Cruickshank, Graeme Murray, David Parkin, Louise Smart, Eric Walker, Norman Waugh (Principal Investigator 2004–2008) University of Nottingham and Nottingham NHS, Nottingham, England: Mark Avis, Claire Chilvers, Katherine Fielding, Rob Hammond, David Jenkins, Jane Johnson, Keith Neal, Ian Russell, Rashmi Seth, Dave Whynes University of Dundee and NHS Tayside, Dundee, Tayside: Ian Duncan, Alistair Robertson (deceased) University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada: Julian Little (Principal Investigator 1999–2004) National Cancer Registry, Cork, Ireland: Linda Sharp Bangor University, Bangor, Wales: Ian Russell University of Hull, Hull, England: Leslie G Walker Staff in clinical sites and co-ordinating centres Grampian Breda Anthony, Sarah Bell, Adrienne Bowie, Katrina Brown (deceased), Joe Brown, Kheng Chew, Claire Cochran, Seonaidh Cotton, Jeannie Dean, Kate Dunn, Jane Edwards, David Evans, Julie Fenty, Al Finlayson, Marie Gallagher, Nicola Gray, Maureen Heddle, Alison Innes, Debbie Jobson, Mandy Keillor, Jayne MacGregor, Sheona Mackenzie, Amanda Mackie, Gladys McPherson, Ike Okorocha, Morag Reilly, Joan Rodgers, Alison Thornton, Rachel Yeats Tayside Lindyanne Alexander, Lindsey Buchanan, Susan Henderson, Tine Iterbeke, Susanneke Lucas, Gillian Manderson, Sheila Nicol, Gael Reid, Carol Robinson, Trish Sandilands Nottingham Marg Adrian, Ahmed Al-Sahab, Elaine Bentley, Hazel Brook, Claire Bushby, Rita Cannon, Brenda Cooper, Ruth Dowell, Mark Dunderdale, Dr Gabrawi, Li Guo, Lisa Heideman, Steve Jones, Salli Lawson, Zoë Philips, Christopher Platt, Shakuntala Prabhakaran, John Rippin, Rose Thompson, Elizabeth Williams, Claire Woolley Statistical analysis Seonaidh Cotton, Kirsten Harrild, John Norrie, Linda Sharp External Trial Steering Committee Nicholas Day (chair, 1999–2004), Theresa Marteau (chair 2004-), Mahesh Parmar, Julietta Patnick and Ciaran Woodman.

Design and protocol for the Focusing on Clozapine Unresponsive Symptoms (FOCUS) trial : a randomised controlled trial

Acknowledgements Thank you to all the participants who agreed to take part in the trial. This study was supported NHS Research Scotland (NRS), through Chief Scientist Office (CSO) and the Scottish Mental Health Research Network, and the Clinical Research Network-Mental Health. We are grateful to the Psychosis Research Unit (PRU) Service User Reference Group (SURG) for their consultation regarding the design of the study and contribution to the developments of study related materials. We are grateful to our Independent Trial Steering Committee and Independent Data Monitoring Committee for provided oversight of the trial. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment (NIHR HTA) programme (project number10/101/02) and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment. Visit the HTA programme website for further project information. The views and opinions expressed therein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the HTA programme, NIHR, NHS or the Department of Health.

U.S. Highway 20 Corridor Development Study, Report B: Improvement Alternatives, Costs and Traffic, 1992

In February the U.S. 20 Corridor Development Study's Steering Committee met to review Report A. At that meeting the Committee selected seven alternatives to be evaluated from a cost and traffic perspective. This report, Report B, presents the cost and traffic evaluation of these seven alternatives. This Report B and its cost and traffic estimates will be reviewed at the next Steering Committee meeting. At that time it is possible that, based on the traffic and cost estimates, one or more of the alternatives will be eliminated from further consideration. After that meeting the Consultant will initiate the more in-depth analyses, including the economic feasibility

Executive order no. 2016-13

This executive order by Governor Nikki R. Haley establishes the South Carolina Community Development Block Grant Steering Committee to advise the South Carolina Department of Commerce on the development of the South Carolina State Action Plan and oversee its implementation for the disbursement of the Community Development Block Grant - Disaster Relief funds due to the historic flooding in October of 2015, leading to widespread damage to homes across the state

Iowa Plan for Suicide Prevention: 2011 to 2014, March 1, 2013

The Iowa Department of Public Health (IDPH) and Iowa’s Suicide Prevention Strategy Steering Committee, hereinafter referred to as the Committee, has guided the development of the Iowa Plan for Suicide Prevention: 2011 to 2014. The committee reviewed the most recent Iowa Plan for Suicide Prevention 2005-2009 and the Surgeon General’s Call to Action to Prevent Suicide and the National Strategy for Suicide Prevention, which highlights the need to increase awareness of suicide as a public health issue and calls for a public health approach toward suicide prevention.