723 resultados para Bertrán de Lis, Vicente-Biografies


Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Mode of access: Internet.

Relevância:

100.00% 100.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

La especie porcina constituye hoy en día la de elección en muchos modelos experimentales utilizados en investigación, debido principalmente, a sus similitudes anatómicas y fisiológicas y a su reactividad farmacológica con el hombre; sin embargo son animales de difícil manejo que se estresan con facilidad, por lo que la vía intramuscular constituye la vía más cómoda y fácil de utilizar. Tradicionalmente se ha utilizado, para la tranquilización y anestesia de la especie porcina la ketamina, combinada con benzodiacepinas o con agonistas de los receptores adrenérgicos α2 habituales; sin embargo, recientemente se están empleando nuevos y potentes fármacos para la tranquilización y anestesia de esta especie, entre los que se encuentran la dexmedetomidina, un agonista potente, eficaz y selectivo de los receptores adrenérgicos α2 sobre el sistema nervioso central y periférico. La bradicardia e hipotensión se encuentran entre sus efectos adversos más comunes, sin embargo ejerce un efecto leve sobre la ventilación y produce un excelente efecto sedante y antinociceptivo, disminuyendo los requerimientos de otros fármacos anestésicos intravenosos, con la ventaja de poder ser antagonizada, por lo que viene siendo utilizada en medicina veterinaria tanto en el campo de la anestesiología clínica como en la captura y manejo de animales exóticos. La dexmedetomidina se ha empleado tanto en medicina humana como en veterinaria de forma parenteral sola y/o combinada con ketamina o alfaxalona...

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Port. con grab. xil. representando a San Vicente

Relevância:

30.00% 30.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Existe emisión con variantes tipográficas en la port. y con dedicatoria a Juan V, Rey de Portugal y esc. real calc. en cabecera de h. 2¶2

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The topic of library and information science (LIS) education has been under the spotlight in the professional literature in Australia and New Zealand for a number of years. Critical issues of discussion encompass the apparent lack of a core curriculum for the discipline, the perceived gulf between LIS education and LIS practice, and the pressing need for career-long learning and development. One of the central points of debate that emerges repeatedly is the long-standing question about the positioning of the profession: Is LIS a graduate profession of highly skilled individuals valued for their expertise and professionalism or is it a profession of anyone who works in a library, regardless of their qualifications (LIANZA, 2005)? While Australia and New Zealand do not stand alone in this debate – similar issues are echoed in many other countries – there are inevitably some local characteristics which warrant exploration. The discussion presented here highlights the historical background to professional training, the specific professional policies and standards that guide LIS education and some of the challenges facing professional and paraprofessional education, given the changing environment of education in Australia as a whole, with some comparisons made with the New Zealand situation. While all too often library practitioners point the finger at the library educators to ‘right the wrongs’, the authors wish to reinforce the idea that the future of effective and relevant LIS education is a matter for all stakeholders in the profession: practitioners and educators, students and staff, employers and employees, with cohesion potentially offered by the professional body.

Relevância:

20.00% 20.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

The paper describes the processes and the outcomes of the ranking of LIS journal titles by Australia’s LIS researchers during 2007-8, firstly through the Australian federal government’s Research Quality Framework (RQF) process and then its replacement, the Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) initiative. The requirement to rank the journals titles used came from discussions held at the RQF panel meeting held in February 2007 in Canberra, Australia. While it was recognised that the Web of Science (formerly ISI) journal impact approach of journal acceptance for measures of research quality and impact might not work for LIS, it was apparent that this model would be the default if no other ranking of journal titles became apparent. Although an increasing number of LIS and related discipline journals were appearing in the Web of Science listed rankings, the number was few and it was thus decided by the Australian LIS research community to undertake the ranking exercise.