Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, June 2013

The Data Warehouse Replacement Project includes updated County Health Snapshot reports. The snapshots provide an overview of key health indicators for local communities. They contain county-level measures that are organized into eight categories. The categories are asthma, cancer, health behaviors and outcomes, heart disease and other chronic conditions, infectious disease, mortality and injury prevention, population statistics and reproductive outcomes. The updated county health snapshots include almost forty new chronic disease indicators in addition to all of the indicators in the existing snapshots.There will be two different reports available in the Data Warehouse replacement system. One of the reports is a multi-year county health snapshot. This report has a similar format to the previous county health snapshot report in the current Data Warehouse. It will display multiple years of data for a single county. The data will be for the most current year available and the two years prior. The state values for the current year will also be included.

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, July 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, August 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, September 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, October 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, October 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Using register data to assess the impact of response enhancement methods on the risk of nonresponse bias and survey costs

The pursuit of high response rates to minimise the threat of nonresponse bias continues to dominate decisions about resource allocation in survey research. Yet a growing body of research has begun to question this practice. In this study, we use previously unavailable data from a new sampling frame based on population registers to assess the value of different methods designed to increase response rates on the European Social Survey in Switzerland. Using sampling data provides information about both respondents and nonrespondents, making it possible to examine how changes in response rates resulting from the use of different fieldwork methods relate to changes in the composition and representativeness of the responding sample. We compute an R-indicator to assess representativity with respect to the sampling register variables, and find little improvement in the sample composition as response rates increase. We then examine the impact of response rate increases on the risk of nonresponse bias based on Maximal Absolute Bias (MAB), and coefficients of variation between subgroup response rates, alongside the associated costs of different types of fieldwork effort. The results show that increases in response rate help to reduce MAB, while only small but important improvements to sample representativity are gained by varying the type of effort. These findings lend further support to research that has called into question the value of extensive investment in procedures aimed at reaching response rate targets and the need for more tailored fieldwork strategies aimed both at reducing survey costs and minimising the risk of bias.

Project Newsletter Iowa Public Health Tracking, November 2013

The IDPH Public Health Tracking Program is an excellent way to collect data related to various indicators for Iowans, but those looking for national statistics or data from other states may want to check out the Health Indicators Warehouse (healthindicators.gov). Run and maintained by the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, this site is a centralized source for national, state, and county data for a wide variety of indicators. The data is available to the public, and can be accessed either through the tables and charts directly on the website, or indicators can be downloaded to use in a spreadsheet. Once on the site, users are able to search for their desired data either by topic or geographic region. Filters can then be applied to the chosen field to narrow down the user’s search and obtain the preferred statistics. In addition, users are also able to search for indicators derived from state and federal health indicator initiatives: County Health Rankings, Community Health Status Indicators, Healthy People 2020, and CMS Community Indicators. The warehouse provides an overview of each indicator after the user has made their selection. This overview includes information on how the data was calculated and what characteristics are being represented. For example, percent of binge drinking adults is prefaced in the overview that data was based on the question: “Considering all types of alcoholic beverages, how many times during the past 30 days did you have [5 for men, 4 for women] or more drinks on an occasion?" Data is viewable either in the basic table format, chart format, or for some indicators it is possible to view it in terms of a national map. The Health Indicators Warehouse updates indicators as data becomes available, but the collection of years varies amongst the indicators. Nonetheless, this site is a useful resource to anyone looking for comparative indicators throughout the nation or is interested in one of the hundreds of indicators housed by the site. For more information or to check out what the warehouse has to offer visit: http://healthindicators.gov/

Direct in vitro comparison of six three-dimensional positive contrast methods for susceptibility marker imaging.

PURPOSE: To compare different techniques for positive contrast imaging of susceptibility markers with MRI for three-dimensional visualization. As several different techniques have been reported, the choice of the suitable method depends on its properties with regard to the amount of positive contrast and the desired background suppression, as well as other imaging constraints needed for a specific application. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six different positive contrast techniques are investigated for their ability to image at 3 Tesla a single susceptibility marker in vitro. The white marker method (WM), susceptibility gradient mapping (SGM), inversion recovery with on-resonant water suppression (IRON), frequency selective excitation (FSX), fast low flip-angle positive contrast SSFP (FLAPS), and iterative decomposition of water and fat with echo asymmetry and least-squares estimation (IDEAL) were implemented and investigated. RESULTS: The different methods were compared with respect to the volume of positive contrast, the product of volume and signal intensity, imaging time, and the level of background suppression. Quantitative results are provided, and strengths and weaknesses of the different approaches are discussed. CONCLUSION: The appropriate choice of positive contrast imaging technique depends on the desired level of background suppression, acquisition speed, and robustness against artifacts, for which in vitro comparative data are now available.

Reactivity of silicate liming materials from Northern Europe assessed by Soil Incubation and two pH Stat methods

Selostus: Pohjois-Euroopan silikaattisten kalkitusaineiden reaktiivisuus astiakoemenetelmällä ja kahdella pH-staattisella menetelmällä arvioituna

Evaluation of Bias in the Hamburg Wheel Tracking Device, RB00-010, 2013

As the list of states adopting the HWTD continues to grow, there is a need to evaluate how results are utilized. AASHTO T 324 does not standardize the analysis and reporting of test results. Furthermore, processing and reporting of the results among manufacturers is not uniform. This is partly due to the variation among agency reporting requirements. Some include only the midpoint rut depth, while others include the average across the entire length of the wheel track. To eliminate bias in reporting, statistical analysis was performed on over 150 test runs on gyratory specimens. Measurement location was found to be a source of significant variation in the HWTD. This is likely due to the nonuniform wheel speed across the specimen, geometry of the specimen, and air void profile. Eliminating this source of bias when reporting results is feasible though is dependent upon the average rut depth at the final pass. When reporting rut depth at the final pass, it is suggested for poor performing samples to average measurement locations near the interface of the adjoining gyratory specimens. This is necessary due to the wheel lipping on the mold. For all other samples it is reasonable to only eliminate the 3 locations furthest from the gear house. For multi‐wheel units, wheel side was also found to be significant for poor and good performing samples. After eliminating the suggested measurements from the analysis, the wheel was no longer a significant source of variation.

Radiosurgery for brain metastases: specific indications for Gamma Knife in lieu of Linac in a single center using both methods

INTRODUCTION: Radiosurgery (RS) is gaining increasing acceptance in the upfront management of brain metastases (BM). It was initially used in so-called radioresistant metastases (melanoma, renal cell, sarcoma) because it allowed delivering higher dose to the tumor. Now, RS is also used for BM of other cancers. The risk of high incidence of new BM questions the need for associated whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Recent evidence suggests that RS alone allows avoiding cognitive impairment related to WBRT, and the latter should be upheld for salvage therapy. Thus the increase use of RS for single and multiple BM raises new technical challenges for treatment delivery and dosimetry. We present our single institution experience focusing on the criteria that led to patients' selection for RS treatment with Gamma Knife (GK) in lieu of Linac. METHODS: Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion (Elekta, Sweden) was installed in July 2010. Currently, the Swiss federal health care supports the costs of RS for BM with Linac but not with GK. Therefore, in our center, we always consider first the possibility to use Linac for this indication, and only select patients for GK in specific situations. All cases of BM treated with GK were retrospectively reviewed for criteria yielding to GK indication, clinical information, and treatment data. Further work in progress includes a posteriori dosimetry comparison with our Linac planning system (Brainscan V.5.3, Brainlab, Germany). RESULTS: From July 2010 to March 2012, 20 patients had RS for BM with GK (7 patients with single BM, and 13 with multiple BM). During the same period, 31 had Linac-based RS. Primary tumor was melanoma in 9, lung in 7, renal in 2, and gastrointestinal tract in 2 patients. In single BM, the reason for choosing of GK was the anatomical location close to, or in highly functional areas (1 motor cortex, 1 thalamic, 1 ventricular, 1 mesio-temporal, 3 deep cerebellar close to the brainstem), especially since most of these tumors were intended to be treated with high-dose RS (24 Gy at margin) because of their histology (3 melanomas, 1 renal cell). In multiple BM, the reason for choosing GK in relation with the anatomical location of the lesions was either technical (limitations of Linac movements, especially in lower posterior fossa locations) or closeness of multiple lesions to highly functional areas (typically, multiple posterior fossa BM close to the brainstem), precluding optimal dosimetry with Linac. Again, this was made more critical for multiple BM needing high-dose RS (6 melanoma, 2 hypernephroma). CONCLUSION: Radiosurgery for BM may represent some technical challenge in relation with the anatomical location and multiplicity of the lesions. These considerations may be accentuated for so-called radioresistant BM, when higher dose RS in needed. In our experience, Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion proves to be useful in addressing these challenges for the treatment of BM.