972 resultados para Ordonnances de non-publication
Resumo:
Le présent mémoire se penche sur la constitutionnalité des articles 517 et 539 C.cr., qui prévoient des ordonnances de non-publication à l'enquête sur mise en liberté provisoire ainsi qu'à l'enquête préliminaire. L'auteur présente d'abord les modalités d'application de chacune de ces ordonnances. Suit ensuite un portrait de la jurisprudence sur la constitutionnalité de ces deux dispositions. L'auteur applique par la suite aux dispositions le test élaboré dans l'arrêt Oakes. Il conclut que l'objectif des dispositions, qui consiste à assurer un procès équitable à l'accusé, est urgent et réel. L'auteur constate ensuite que le critère du lien rationnel n'est pas satisfait puisque, ordonnance ou pas, les informations préjudiciables pour un accusé seront de toute façon dispersées dans le public, notamment grâce aux nouvelles technologies de l'information. À défaut de profiter d'informations fiables retransmises par les médias, le public devra se concentrer sur les rumeurs non vérifiables propagées par le Web. Le critère de l'atteinte minimale est également examiné. L'auteur estime que ni les récusations motivées, ni le changement de venue, ni les directives aux jurés ne sont en mesure de remplacer des ordonnances de non-publication. Enfin, l'auteur estime que les articles 517 et 539 C.cr. échouent le critère de proportionnalité entre les effets préjudiciables et les effets bénéfiques. En conclusion, comme alternative aux interdits de publication, l'auteur propose une réforme du processus de récusations motivées.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The synthesis of published research in systematic reviews is essential when providing evidence to inform clinical and health policy decision-making. However, the validity of systematic reviews is threatened if journal publications represent a biased selection of all studies that have been conducted (dissemination bias). To investigate the extent of dissemination bias we conducted a systematic review that determined the proportion of studies published as peer-reviewed journal articles and investigated factors associated with full publication in cohorts of studies (i) approved by research ethics committees (RECs) or (ii) included in trial registries. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Four bibliographic databases were searched for methodological research projects (MRPs) without limitations for publication year, language or study location. The searches were supplemented by handsearching the references of included MRPs. We estimated the proportion of studies published using prediction intervals (PI) and a random effects meta-analysis. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were used to express associations between study characteristics and journal publication. Seventeen MRPs (23 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies approved by RECs; the proportion of published studies had a PI between 22% and 72% and the weighted pooled proportion when combining estimates would be 46.2% (95% CI 40.2%-52.4%, I2 = 94.4%). Twenty-two MRPs (22 publications) evaluated cohorts of studies included in trial registries; the PI of the proportion published ranged from 13% to 90% and the weighted pooled proportion would be 54.2% (95% CI 42.0%-65.9%, I2 = 98.9%). REC-approved studies with statistically significant results (compared with those without statistically significant results) were more likely to be published (pooled OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Phase-III trials were also more likely to be published than phase II trials (pooled OR 2.0; 95% CI 1.6-2.5). The probability of publication within two years after study completion ranged from 7% to 30%. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial part of the studies approved by RECs or included in trial registries remains unpublished. Due to the large heterogeneity a prediction of the publication probability for a future study is very uncertain. Non-publication of research is not a random process, e.g., it is associated with the direction of study findings. Our findings suggest that the dissemination of research findings is biased.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Not all clinical trials are published, which may distort the evidence that is available in the literature. We studied the publication rate of a cohort of clinical trials and identified factors associated with publication and nonpublication of results. METHODS: We analysed the protocols of randomized clinical trials of drug interventions submitted to the research ethics committee of University Hospital (Inselspital) Bern, Switzerland from 1988 to 1998. We identified full articles published up to 2006 by searching the Cochrane CENTRAL database (issue 02/2006) and by contacting investigators. We analyzed factors associated with the publication of trials using descriptive statistics and logistic regression models. RESULTS: 451 study protocols and 375 corresponding articles were analyzed. 233 protocols resulted in at least one publication, a publication rate of 52%. A total of 366 (81%) trials were commercially funded, 47 (10%) had non-commercial funding. 346 trials (77%) were multi-centre studies and 272 of these (79%) were international collaborations. In the adjusted logistic regression model non-commercial funding (Odds Ratio [OR] 2.42, 95% CI 1.14-5.17), multi-centre status (OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.03-4.24), international collaboration (OR 1.87, 95% CI 0.99-3.55) and a sample size above the median of 236 participants (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.23-3.39) were associated with full publication. CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of applications to an ethics committee in Switzerland, only about half of clinical drug trials were published. Large multi-centre trials with non-commercial funding were more likely to be published than other trials, but most trials were funded by industry.
Resumo:
"Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures En vue de l'obtention du grade de Docteur en droit (LL.D.)"
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: When the nature and direction of research results affect their chances of publication, a distortion of the evidence base - termed publication bias - results. Despite considerable recent efforts to implement measures to reduce the non-publication of trials, publication bias is still a major problem in medical research. The objective of our study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to prevent or reduce publication bias. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the scholarly literature and extracted data from articles. Further, we performed semi-structured interviews with stakeholders. We performed an inductive thematic analysis to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 39 articles. Thirty-four of 89 invited interview partners agreed to be interviewed. We clustered interventions into four categories: prospective trial registration, incentives for reporting in peer-reviewed journals or research reports, public availability of individual patient-level data, and peer-review/editorial processes. Barriers we identified included economic and personal interests, lack of financial resources for a global comprehensive trial registry, and different legal systems. Facilitators identified included: raising awareness of the effects of publication bias, providing incentives to make data publically available, and implementing laws to enforce prospective registration and reporting of clinical trial results. CONCLUSIONS: Publication bias is a complex problem that reflects the complex system in which it occurs. The cooperation amongst stakeholders to increase public awareness of the problem, better tailoring of incentives to publish, and ultimately legislative regulations have the greatest potential for reducing publication bias.
Resumo:
Ce mémoire porte sur l’utilisation des niveaux d’interventions médicales (NIM) en centre hospitalier (CH) au Québec. Les NIM sont des formulaires organisés sous forme d’échelle, qui ont été développés afin de faciliter la prise de décision en lien avec la réanimation, les traitements de maintien en vie et de prolongation de la vie, et les soins à offrir. L’objectif de ce mémoire est d’offrir un portrait de l’utilisation actuelle des NIM au Québec en CH afin d’émettre des recommandations pour les professionnels de la santé, les institutions et les décideurs politiques. Dans un premier temps, un article de recension des écrits est présenté afin de situer les concepts associés aux NIM avec les problèmes actuellement vécus, par exemple le grand nombre de patients qui décèdent en CH, les problèmes de communication entre les professionnels de la santé, les patients et leur famille, les difficultés liées à la prise de décision en fin de vie et les délais liés aux ordonnances de non-réanimation. Dans un deuxième temps, le second article présente les résultats de recherche. Afin d’établir le portrait de l’utilisation des NIM en CH, un audit de 299 dossiers de patients adultes, décédés dans trois CH a été entrepris. Le cadre éthique d’analyse des résultats est l’approche par principes. Bien que l’utilisation des NIM peut différer sur certains aspects selon l’hôpital, les NIM sont un système efficace pour promouvoir le respect de l’autonomie des patients, la bienfaisance et le caring, mais ceux-ci ne protègent pas contre les problèmes d’iniquité dans l’accès aux soins palliatifs. Afin de faciliter et promouvoir leur utilisation, il est recommandé de standardiser les échelles de NIM à travers la province et les institutions et d’émettre des lignes directrices d’utilisation claires. Également, une plus grande formation pour les professionnels de la santé et l’inclusion d’un membre de l’équipe interdisciplinaire permettraient aux professionnels d’être mieux outillés pour les discussions difficiles et pour la prise de décision, et encourageraient la pratique interdisciplinaire.
Resumo:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background and context The Grain Legumes CRP was established to bring all research and development work on grain legumes within the CGIAR system under one umbrella. It was set up to provide public goods outcomes to serve the needs of the sustainable production and consumption of grain legumes in the developing world, capitalising upon their properties that enhance the natural resource base upon which production so unequivocally depends. The choice of species and research foci were finalised following extensive consultation with all stakeholders (though perhaps fewer end users), and cover all disciplines that contribute to long-lasting solutions to the issues of developing country production and consumption. ICRISAT leads Grain Legumes and is partnered by the CGIAR centers ICARDA, IITA and CIAT and a number of other important partners, both public and private, and of course farmers in the developed and developing world. Originally in mid-2012 Grain Legumes was structured around eight Product Lines (PL) (i.e. technological innovations) intersecting five Strategic Components (SC) (i.e. arranged as components along the value chain). However, in 2015, it was restructured along a more R4D output model leading to Intermediate Development Outcomes (IDOs). Thus five Flagship Projects (FP) more closely reflecting a systematic pipeline of progression from fundamental science, implementation of interventions and the development of capacity and partnerships to promote and adopt impactful outcomes: FP1) Managing Productivity through crop interactions with biotic and abiotic constraints; FP2) Determination of traits that address production constraints and opportunities; FP3) Trait Deployment of those traits through breeding; FP4) Seed Systems, post-harvest processing and nutrition; FP5) Capacity-Building and Partnerships. Another three cross-cutting FPs analyse the broader environment surrounding the adoption of outputs, the capitalising of investments in genomics research, and a focus on the Management and Governance of Grain Legumes: FP6) Knowledge, impacts, priorities and gender organisation; FP7) Tools and platforms for high throughput genotyping and bioinformatics; and FP8) Management and Governance. Five FPs focus on R4D; FPs 5 and 6 are considered cross-cutting; FP 7 has a technical focus and FP 8 has an overarching objective. Over the three year period since its inception in July 1012, Grain Legumes has had a total budget of $140 million, with $62M originally to come from W1/W2 and the remaining $78M to come from W3/bilateral. In actuality only $45M came from W1/W2 but $106M from W3/bilateral corresponding to 106% of expectation. Purpose, scope and objectives of the external evaluation Principally, the evaluation of Grain Legumes is to ensure that the program is progressing in an effective manner towards addressing the system-level outcomes of the CGIAR as they relate to grain legumes. In essence, the evaluation aims to provide essential evaluative information for decision-making by Program Management and its funders on issues such as extension, expansion and structuring of the program and adjustments in relevant parts of the program. Subsequent to the formal signing of the agreed terms of reference, the evaluation team was also invited to comment upon the mooted options for merging and/or disaggregating of Grain Legumes. The audiences are therefore manifold, from the CGIAR Fund Council and Consortium, the Boards of Trustees of the four component CGIAR centres, the Grain Legumes Steering, Management and Independent Advisory Committees, to the researchers and others involved in the delivery of R4D outcomes and their partner organisations. The evaluation was not only summative in measuring results from Grain Legumes at arm’s length; it was also formative in promoting learning and improvements, and developmental in nurturing adaption to transformational change with time. The evaluation report was written in a manner that allows for engagement of key partners and funders in a dialogue as to how to increase ownership and a common understanding of how the goals are to be achieved. We reviewed research undertaken before the CRPs but leading to impacts during Grain Legumes, and research commenced over the past 2.5 years. For related activities pre- and post-commencement of Grain Legumes, we reviewed the relevance of activities and their relation to CGIAR and the Grain Legumes goals, whether they were likely to lead to the outcomes and impacts as documented in the Grain Legumes proposal, and the quality of the science underpinning the likelihood to deliver outcomes. Throughout, we were cognisant of the extent of the reach of CGIAR centres’ activities, and those of stakeholders upon which the impact of CGIAR R4D depends. Within our remit we evaluated the original and modified management and governance structures, and all the processes/responsibilities managed within those structures. Besides the evaluation of the technical and managerial issues of Grain Legumes, we addressed cross-cutting issues of gender sensitivity, capacity building and the creation and nurturing of partnerships. The evaluation also has the objective to provide information relating to the development of full proposals for the new CRP funding cycle. The evaluation addressed six overarching questions developed from the TOR questions (listed in the Inception Report, 2015 [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh] and others including cross-cutting issues, phrasing them within the context of traditional evaluation criteria: 1. Relevance: Global development, urbanisation and technological innovation are progressing rapidly, are the aims and focus of Grain Legumes coherent, robust, fit for purpose and relevant to the global community? 2. Efficiency: Is the structure and effectiveness of leadership across Grain Legumes developing efficient partnership management and project management across PLs? 3. Quality of science: Is Grain Legumes utilising a wide range of technologies in a way that will increase our fundamental understanding of the biology that underpins several PLs; and are collected data used in the most effective way? 4. Effectiveness: Are Product Lines strategic contributors to the overarching aims and vision for Grain Legumes? 5. Impact: Are the impact pathways that underlie each PL well defined, measureable and achievable; and are they sufficiently defined in terms of beneficiaries? Does progress towards achieving outputs and outcomes from the major research areas indicate a lasting benefit for CGIAR and the communities it serves? 6. Sustainability: Is Grain Legumes managing the increasing level of restricted funding in terms of program quality and effectiveness, including attracting and retaining quality staff? Questions for the evaluation of governance and management focused on accountability, transparency, the effectiveness and success of program execution, change management processes and communication methods, taking account of the effects of CGIAR reform. The three crosscutting issues were considered as follows: i) gender balance in program delivery, e.g. whether each PL is able to contribute to the increased income, food security, nutrition, environmental and resource conservation for resource-poor women and men existing in rural livelihoods; ii) are internal and external capacity gaps identified/met, is capacity effectively developed within each product line, and are staff at all levels engaged in contributing ideas towards capacity building; and iii) is there effective involvement of partners in research and activity programming, what are the criteria for developing partnerships, how they are formalised and how is communication between partners and within Grain Legumes managed? It was not in remit to search for output, outcomes or impact, however as highlighted later, much of our time was spent on searching for information to support claims of impact, since Grain Legumes had no effective dedicated M&E in place at the time of undertaking the review. Approach and methodology The evaluation was conducted when Grain Legumes had been operational for approximately 3 years. The approach and methodology followed that outlined in the Inception Report [http://1drv.ms/1POQSZh]. The CCEE Team based its findings, conclusions and recommendations on data collection from several sources: review of program documents, communications with the CO, minutes and presentations from all management and governance committee meetings review of previous assessments and evaluations sampling of Grain Legume projects in 7 countries1 more than 66 face to face interviews, a further 133 persons in groups and 4 phone/Skype conversations: ICRISAT, ICARDA, CIAT and IITA staff, partners and stakeholders. Meetings with one Independent Science and Partnership Council (ISPC) member. meetings with over 100 people in 16 external groups, such as farmers’ groups online survey completed by 126 (33.4%) scientists who contribute to Grain Legumes and a number of non-CGIAR partners and Management representatives bibliometric review of 10 publications within each PL to qualitatively assess the design, conduct, analysis and presentation of results quantitative and qualitative self-assessment of the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above completed by PLCs (see below). We reviewed the Logical Framework that underpins the desired Goals, or Impacts of Grain Legumes, and the links between the outputs and inputs as they related to the organisational units of Grain Legumes. The logical framework approach to planning and management of Grain Legumes activities implies a linear process, leading from activities, outputs, outcomes, to impacts, but within such an approach there may be room for a more systems dynamics approach allowing for feedback at every step and within every step, in order to refine and improve upon the respective activities as new results, ideas, and directions come to light. We then developed a matrix that summarised quantitatively and qualitatively the contributions of each of the PLs to the six criteria and 3 cross-cutting issues of evaluation mentioned above. Main findings and conclusions Grain legume production and consumption remain of great importance to the food security of not inconsiderable populations in the developing world, and merit sustained research investment. We conclude that Grain Legumes continues to contribute significant returns to research investments by the CGIAR, and such investment should continue. The global research community looks to the CGIAR for leadership in Grain legumes, but needs to be assured of value adding when bringing CGIAR centres under the expected umbrella of synergy. However, there is considerable scope for improving the efficiency with which outcomes are achieved. We note that an absence of an effective M&E has hampered the assessment of the effectiveness of proposed impact pathways. Likewise progress has been hampered by the limited numbers of research partnerships with Advanced Institutes and by budgetary constraints (lamented for their stifling effects on continuation of ongoing exciting research). The unworkable management structure constrains the CRP Director’s leadership role; responsibility without authority will never lead to effective outcomes. Good fortune is responsible for many of the successes of Grain Legumes, underpinned by a devoted work force across the participating CGIAR centres and partners. The quality of the science is not uniformly high, and we believe that mentoring of scientists should be given priority where quality is poor. Simplified yet informative reporting is an imperative to this. World class science underpins the identification of, and molecular basis for, traits important for yield improvement and this expertise should be extended to all grain legume species, capitalising upon the germplasm collections. The linking of Grain Legumes with regional research and development consortia has been very successful, with outcomes aligning with those of Grain Legumes. We see that with declining funding consolidation of research effort based on likely successes will be necessary, and welcome the move afoot to incorporate grain legumes into an agri-food system focused on successful value chains that deliver sustainable outcomes. Relevance and Strategy Grain Legumes has geographic and disciplinary relevance, addressing the major supply chain issues of variety development seed system and agronomy, with some attention to quality and postharvest marketing systems. The CRP has provided the opportunity to cut ongoing and to initiate new research. Research funded by the Gates Foundation (Anon, 2014) suggests that the need for improvement is greatest in Africa and advocates reducing the number of crop by country combinations when resources are sparse. The lesser research investment in Latin America, however, is not in line with the regions’ dependency on legumes. In spite of the fact that there is no evidence of strong inter-partner CGIAR centre or internal synergy, the program is still moving ahead on most fronts in line with the overall project logframe. This is in spite of continual pushing and pulling by in particular donors and the CO. However, to quantify real impact, we believe Grain Legumes must have access to reliable baseline data on production and consumption, and this is missing. Similarly, there is little evidence of the proposed ‘Inclusive Market Oriented Development’ (IMOD) framework being used to assist with priority setting. The product lines, eight of which cover most of the historical programmes in place in the partner CGIAR centres at the commencement of the Grain Legumes, do not cover all the constraints for formal constraints analysis was not undertaken at the inception of the Grain Legumes, and some of this additionally identified research is undertaken under the umbrella of the FPs; this needs to be rationalised. We found the PLs to be isolated in activity, even with minimally-integrated activities within each PL, with little evidence of synergy between PLs. Even though the SCs should ensure a systems approach, as with the new FPs, we did not get a feel that this is so. The underplaying of agronomy, and production practices may be one reason for this. We believe that treating legume crops as if they were horticultural crops will increase farmer returns from investment. The choice of Flagship Projects makes sense, with the flow of activity firstly around crop management and agronomy followed by the logical sequence of trait discovery, incorporation into improved varieties, dissemination of those varieties through appropriate seed chains leading to market impacts, and the capacity building required at all steps. One obvious omission, however, is the lack of a central and strategic policy on the role of transgenics in Grain Legumes. We found four notable comparative advantages for Grain Legumes: the access to germplasm of component species, the use of the phenotyping facility at ICRISAT, the approach for village level industry for IPM, and the emphasis on hybrid pigeonpea. Efficiency Each centre has strong control of, and emphasis on, their ‘species’ domains, and ownership of the same detracts from possible synergy. Without synergy or value add, the Grain Legumes brings with it no comparative advantage over each centre continuing their own pre-CRP research agendas. We found little evidence of integration of programmes between centres and almost no cross-centre authorship of publications, such as could have occurred with the integrated cross-centre approaches to stress tolerance including crop modelling: the one publication (Gaur et al., 2015) on heat tolerance by ICRISAT, CIAT and ICARDA does not provide any keys to inter-centre collaboration. The integration of each centre with NARS and university research programmes is good, but the cross-centre links with NARS are poor. A better coordinated integration with Grain Legumes, , rather than through the individual centres, may reduce transactions costs for NARS, Monitoring and evaluation is, as noted throughout our report, one area of Grain Legumes research management that has not been given the attention it should have received. If it had have received proper attention, some of the issues of poor efficiency might have been nipped in the bud. A strong monitoring and evaluation system would have provided the baseline data and set the milestones that would have allowed both efficiency and effectiveness to be better appraised. We found no attempt to define comparative advantages of the CGIAR centres and their R4D activities, although practice showed the better grasp of CIAT in developing innovative seed distribution systems. During field visits and interviews, the CCEE Team observed shortcomings in the communication processes within Grain Legumes and with the broader scientific community and the public. For example, the public face of the program on the internet is out of date. Survey findings, however, suggest that information is shared freely and routinely within the PL within which scientists work. Some external issues, such as those with funding, low W1/W2 and poor sustainability of funding (especially if funding is top heavy with a few agencies), undermine research investment and confidence of partners in the system (e.g. as voiced by researchers working on crops and countries not included in TL III and the cessation of ongoing competitively-funded projects especially in India), but other issues attributable to the governance and management of the Grain Legumes, such as opaque integration of W3/bilaterals with W1/W2 funding require attention. Offsetting this, the existence of the Grain Legumes did mobilise additional funding [that it would not have if Grain Legumes did not exist]. We were concerned that Grain Legumes is simply not recognised outside of the CRP, with a limited www presence and centres promote themselves, rather than Grain Legumes (with exception in IITA). This is not a good move if one wishes to increase investment in the Grain Legumes. Although funding agencies require cost:benefit ratios, for example for each PL we faced difficulty in determining comparative value for money between investment in different types of research, and in being able to clearly attribute research and development outcomes to financial investment. There was also a time CCEE frame issue too. There is poor interaction with the private sector, notably in areas where they have a comparative financial advantage. We questioned in particular the apparent lack of interaction with the major agro-chemical companies, with respect to the development of herbicide tolerant (HT) grain legumes and the lack of evidence that the regulatory and trade aspects related to herbicide tolerant crops had been considered. Quality of science The quality of the science is highly variable across Grain Legumes, with pockets of real excellence that are linked to good levels of productivity, whereas other PLs are struggling to deliver quality publications, and outputs and outcomes that are based on these. There is much evidence of gradualism in terms of research output and outcomes, i.e. essentially the same activities that were ongoing at the time of the launch of Grain Legumes are still in place. However, there are examples of game changers including those from valuable investments in genomics, phenotyping, and bio-control. We were pleased to see large proportions of collaboration on publications with non-CGIAR centres, reflecting cooperation with partners in developed and developing countries. The value of collaboration when ensuring quality of science cannot be stressed highly enough both within the CRP, and with other global and national partners. PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. There is little cohesion between PLs and with other CRPs as evidenced by publications, although there are some exceptions. We suspect the reasons for this are driven by funding. Productivity from the different PLs is also highly variable and it is not clear what other activities staff are engaged in since, in some PLs, they do not appear to lead to quality publications. Effectiveness Grain Legumes has been very effective in addressing component issues of research, but not the continuum from variety development to legumes on someone’s dinner plate. Our overall assessment of the effectiveness of Grain Legumes in stimulating synergy, innovation and impact indicate that gradualism is more prevalent than innovation. It also shows, as do publications, that there is little integration of disciplines or a focus on ‘systems’. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. However, research on genomics, plant breeding and seed systems have made great strides forward, on the brink of delivering impact. Agronomy has been a poor sister, but some of the competitive grants within Grain Legumes have unearthed some potential game changers, such as objective use of transplanting as an agronomic practice. As mentioned earlier, the lack of effective M&E (however, this was part of some major projects such as TL II/TL III), and therefore the ability to monitor impact pathways and achievement of impact, implies no systematic management of data. This creates difficulty when attempting to evaluate the achievement of the Grain Legumes objectives. One might have expected at least one attempt to try to develop publications between centres arguing for similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella, but we did not find any evidence for this. It is most unfortunate that, due to budgetary cuts, the new ‘schemes’, e.g. competitive grants and scholarships, were cut off before gaining a foothold. With 8 species addressed by Grain Legumes, it is not unexpected that there will be little evidence of shared protocols across centres/species. One rare example was that hosted by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) on shared methods for phenotyping of legume germplasm. Researchers from CIAT, IITA, ICRISAT and three USDA stations attended, focusing in simple canopy temperature and root morphology measurements. It is our belief that as a set of research centres, the CGIAR centres should be focusing on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral), it is less so for a research institute, and the structure should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres as in a CRP). Impact It is well known that research does not always lead to scientific breakthroughs. Also, activities such as plant breeding are long term; making impacts difficult to assess. We believe that sufficient progress with genomics and associated research has been made to warrant impact, but we are unable to quantify the levels of impact, or the timeframe for the same. Work in Grain Legumes has enormous potential for real impact in scientific research, commercial, farming, smallholder and household communities, much of which is being realised. However, the PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases that are strongly evidenced for these impacts, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. Interviews conducted by the CCEE during site visits showed that PLs are quantifying the area of adoption of varieties, but in most cases they are not measuring the impact on environment, health/nutrition. Since the health and nutritional benefits and the environmental gains from growing legumes are major arguments for supporting grain legume research, the community is currently missing substantial opportunities to strengthen its own case for continued support. Whilst there are some impressive examples of considering the whole value chain, e.g. white beans from production through to export; in the main, the pipeline to end user is somewhat piece-meal, with no clear definition of the end user nor differential responsibility of Grain Legumes and of partners. The lack of robust time-defined impact pathways is highlighted in Section 7.4, and even though developed for PL5, timeframes are essential for measuring progress against prediction. Sustainability In summary, there is general acknowledgement that future funding is likely to become more limited, specifically in W1&2 and there is understandable concern over the support for the staff and basic infrastructure that underpin the Grain Legumes programme. For example, it is reported that staffing in parts of CIAT has been dependent on W1&2 and that this is too unstable to re-establish a critical mass. The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2. This position is not sustainable in the long term as there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. The only obvious options to prevent this outcome include a severe reduction in the fixed costs of the centres and/or a refusal to accept W3 and bilateral funding with an inadequate overhead component. In the latter case, there is an obvious danger that funders will move their resources away from the CGIAR system towards other, perhaps less expensive, suppliers of research, and possibly more relevant development expertise. This issue must be addressed. As the Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Gender is not mainstreamed, but there is some evidence that this is improving, especially with dedicated gender specialists and the slow integration of gender across CRPs. There is a need to approach gender through the vision of agriculture as a social practice, with recognition of what changes will be acceptable culturally and what not, and capitalising upon the perceived and actual features of production and processing that grain legumes are primarily women-based crops. Gender awareness may be high among Scientists, but it appears to be a predominantly passive attribute with few proactively seeking opportunities for gender equity. It is, however, a sound sensitivity base on which to build. Nevertheless, examples of notable gender initiatives were identified during field visits. For example, in Benin, the development of biocontrol technologies has enthusiastically integrated diversity, engaging with women farmers’ and youths while maintaining cultural norms. Women are gathering and processing, youths are taking the product to market. The implication is that several groups benefit, rather than domination by the majority group. In Malawi, innovative approaches have been developed to improving nutrition for children, such as incorporating nutrient enriched bean flour products into snacks. In India, scientists collaborating with gender scientists and socio-economists are identifying the impact of mechanical harvesting on agricultural labour and the potential displacement of female labourers. In Kenya, a novel initiative is improving the accessibility of certified seed for new varieties. Seed suppliers have introduced small packs of grain legume seed at low unit cost, which are being purchased by young people and women. Capacity building efforts for external partners are not clearly aligned with the research mandate and delivery of Grain Legumes. However, there are a number of training activities that are being undertaken by Grain Legumes, largely through the W3/bilateral project. Gender balance never reaches parity, but it appears that efforts are made to include female participants. Within the evaluation timeframe it was not possible to conduct external surveys to further validate or review external capacity building efforts in Grain Legumes. Training of scientists is significant, with >40 benefiting. Postgraduate training is varied across PLs, and there is some opportunity to increase the numbers being supervised. We consider that support for postgraduates at ICRISAT could be better coordinated, satisfying more of the students’ needs. It is important, however, to follow up investments in capacity building by monitoring effectiveness, career progressions and so on. Training activities appear to be rather centre-specific, not following a coordinated programme managed by, nor at the level of, the Grain Legumes. Numbers of persons trained and their gender are important, but a measure of the effectiveness of the training is more important. Although optimism is expressed by the great majority of Research Managers that partnerships were working well to leverage knowledge and research capacities, scientists have a less favourable view, particularly in terms of their incentives to participate. It seems likely that the activities taking place within Grain Legumes were, in the most part, continuations of previous collaborations. This is not surprising in light of the reduction in the emphasis on partnerships as Grain Legumes evolved to a funded project, and the consequent lack of opportunity and ambition for establishing novel partnerships. Where they exist, partnerships are good on the whole, especially with US. They could be expanded where comparative advantages exist (for example with Canada and Australia for machine harvestable legumes), but some earlier identified partnerships, e.g. with Turkey, have not been capitalised upon. Others experience problems of variety access (the embargo on exports of some sources of materials from India), yet others do have relevance e.g. imported Brazilian varieties in pre-release in Ethiopia (even though two of the three are from CIAT materials). Governance and Management The standard format of committee structure and responsibilities is common to other CRPs, as are the attendant problems. One of the major problems is that the Grain Legumes Director has responsibility but no authority; hence, even with the support of the RMC, the Director is unable to ‘direct’ in the literal sense of the work the activities of Grain Legumes. We also see the same sense of helplessness with the role of the PLCs. They have responsibility but no authority in managing the affairs of their PL, and they have no access to funds with which to promote intellectual collaboration and cooperation. Minutes from governance and management meetings do not reflect the compromised weak position of the Director and the associated difficulties in the management of Grain Legumes. Nor do the minutes reflect concerns about the amount of time spent by scientists in meetings for planning, integration, evaluation and reporting. Many scientists reported significant opportunity costs in participating in the ongoing imposed [by the CO] evolution of Grain Legumes and CRPs in general. The changes brought in by the CO have not helped promote any greater authority and capacity of the Grain Legumes Director to direct. Likewise, they do not address any of the issues with the conflict of interest in having the Lead Centre chair the Steering Committee. Indeed, we believe that the combining of the Steering Committee with the Independent Advisory Committee, besides becoming unwieldy in number, annuls any sense of independence in advice offered to the Grain Legumes management. We have concerns with the declining proportion of W1/W2 funds (as expressed in the section on Sustainability), and believe that when basic financial planning takes place, integration of W1/W2 and W3/bilateral sources must occur, and be linked to anticipated outcomes and impacts. This will ensure a close alignment of collaborators’ and partners’ objectives and contributions to that of the Grain Legumes. We also queried the process for, and the formality, or lack of, surrounding, the approval of annual budgets, and the level of priority setting when budgets are cut. Recommendations for Grain Legumes The CCEE Team makes the following recommendations, critical issues are highlighted in bold, and those that require action by an entity other than the Grain Legumes Research Management Committee or Project Management united are identified in a footnote. Relevance and Strategy Recommendation 1: A period of consistency is necessary to raise confidence, morale and trust across scientists, managers and partners to foster the assembly of enduring Grain Legumes outcomes2. There needs to be a concerted effort to undertake baseline studies and to implement a robust M&E activity during this period. Without these data the foundation for integrated research in grain legumes is jeopardised. There is a strong need to link more closely with the private sector, especially where there are financial and other comparative advantages to do so. Recommendation 2: The agronomic and physiological trait targets of Grain Legumes (tolerance to changing climate patterns, to the pests and diseases of today and of the future, incorporation of quality traits and adaptations to intensive production systems [machine-harvestability and herbicide tolerance], and short season high yielding characters) are all worthy of continued investment when selecting for improved varieties. There needs to be a common strategy, implemented across centres and species, as to how to address these trait targets through conventional and modern breeding approaches, but only if adequate funding is assured and secured and if a consistency and unity of purpose can be achieved across a large-scale. This should take the form of cross-species coordinated research programmes to address these breeding targets that cooperate across centres and make efficient use of facilities and other resources. The CRP should undertake a detailed strategic review of the role of transgenics across the range of targets in the mandate crops. Efficiency Recommendation 3: The lack of an effective M&E process is a significant omission, not least in terms of more efficient use of resources and the lack of baseline data with which to measure impact, and must be rectified. Reinforcing Recommendation 1, an effective M&E system initially directed towards baseline studies must be implemented. Transaction costs may be reduced through bilateral projects, which are seen as more cost effective than W1/W2 where transaction costs are disproportionately higher. Recommendation 4: To improve communication and coordination within the CRP, and with a broader audience: There is a priority need for a central database containing, names of staff associated with Grain Legumes and their time commitments, their responsibilities, and involvement in CRP activities, their progress and achievements, their publications, plans of training, travel, and other opportunities for interaction. Regular global meetings of staff involved in managing PLs, the entire CRP management staff and the IAC are essential for effective coordination of all activity within Grain Legumes. The website must be given a complete overhaul and improvement and then regular maintenance must be provided to keep it current. Quality of Science Recommendation 5: It is essential to continue investment in good science and to institute a change from gradualism in research output and outcomes to an expectation of innovative and concrete achievements that can be attributed clearly to people, centres and core facilities. A cost:benefit analysis and subsequent strategic planning must be undertaken to justify further investment in the genomics and phenotyping facilities at ICRISAT especially as such technologies advance rapidly. Strategic planning and coordination must also be implemented for capitalising on the investment in crop simulation modelling. (The phenotyping facility of ICRISAT needs to focus on delivering some outcomes, not only outputs.) PLs should be given incentives to collaborate with other CRPs and external institutions. The CCEE recommends special recognition of high quality collaborative papers, thereby encouraging increased quality of the research programmes and widening the penetration of research impacts. More importance should be placed on the quality of publication, rather than quantity of outputs and there should be recognition of other types of outputs from Grain Legumes. The CRP Director must be party to this. If staff are engaged in activities that relate more to impact than publication then this needs to be monitored and recorded and a clearer understanding developed of what constitutes a pathway to impact and how success of such activities can be evaluated. A system must be devised and incorporated into the M&E to enable recognition of other types of outputs (non- publication based) from Grain Legumes, e.g. varieties for breeders. Effectiveness Recommendation 6: To develop greater synergy, Grain Legumes should review management processes and the direction of research activities. In particular, far more extensive integration of research and knowledge exchange should take place across both African and Asian continents so that the best aspects of both can be shared. A multidisciplinary approach is recommended that considers processing solutions, as well as breeding solutions, to capitalise upon the nutritional benefits of the grain legume crops. We recommend: A better collaboration with social scientists at the design stage of experiments in order to improve the utility of the work carried out and to understand its reach. Supporting3 the adoption of best practice electronic data collection, central storage and open access, particularly of genomic data, for public use. Given the focus on the link between phenotyping and genotyping, we note that there is a lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped, and therefore these could be better aligned within each species. Concentrating investment external to Grain Legumes on scaling up production of varieties with the most promising trait profiles to meet the basic seed requirement. Developing a more holistic approach that coordinates an understanding of the disease pathology and epidemiology, and of new chemicals before they become commercially available, together with agronomic practice such that recommendations can be made for growers. Continuing work to establish whether agronomic factors hold true in different environments and to assess GxE effects within breeding programmes. Such rigorous trial practices should be used to inform the evaluation of breeding lines and to provide phenotype data to associate with markers for traits such as heat, drought and herbicide tolerance. Considering grain legumes as if they were vegetable crops in terms of the strategy for intensification of production, both from the management perspective and for seed systems, will be a useful development objective into the future. This will bring about more rapid intensification and is likely to increase farmer returns from investment. Recommendation 7: The CGIAR centres should focus in on the research for which they have a comparative advantage. While imposing the restructure to FPs, which is fine for development objectives and outcomes (funded through W3/bilateral) it is less so for a research institute, and should not detract from the more basic work expected of an international CGIAR centre (or set of centres in a CRP). Collaborative approaches should be explored within Grain Legumes, e.g. similar biologies/research approaches, bringing species together under one umbrella. Similarly better alignment is needed to address the lack of congruence between the populations that are being phenotyped and those being genotyped. Despite positive impacts from research in genomics, plant breeding and seed systems, the lack of an effective M&E, already mentioned elsewhere, has reduced the ability to monitor impact pathways. This must be addressed. The absence of socio-economists from research teams is evident in the general lack of an end user focus. Responsibilities of the different actors in the whole value chain must be considered and identified when developing impact targets, and the pathway leading to them, for individual projects. People with socio-economist skills must be part of the team from project inception so that appropriate frameworks are incorporated for measuring and influencing sociological and economic changes brought about by Grain Legumes research. Impact Recommendation 8: PLs need to become more adept at providing convincing cases in which impact is strongly evidenced, as this is likely to be a key factor in leveraging future funding. Claimed gains must be referenced against baseline data, and these are not always readily available. The CCEE Team realises that such impact evaluation represents a significant drain on resources, and Grain Legumes should determine whether the balance of costs to benefits favours such investment. It is essential that Grain Legumes provides training to staff on what constitutes impact and how it can be recorded. Specific, rather than generalised, potential impacts arising from activity within Grain Legumes should be defined at the time of justifying the programme of work and a pathway to impact should form part of the documentation prepared ahead of a piece of research commencing. . In other words, centres should submit work plans to Grain Legumes before they are undertaken using W1/W2 funds Recommendation 9: The reporting activity must be streamlined to a single (brief) format that can be used to report to Grain Legumes, Centres and to donors for special project activities4. Sustainability Recommendation 10: As Grain Legumes moves into the future, and if sustainable funding cannot be assured, decisions must be made concerning a reduction in activities, keeping some caretaker breeding maintenance, and focus (as has TL III) on fewer species and a reduced geographic focus. Zeigler (Director General of IRRI) states “…time and effort would be better spent … making tough decisions about which programs deserve the precious support.” The present system whereby W3 and bilateral projects do not pay a realistic level of overheads means that such projects are being effectively subsidised by W1&2 and there will be a progressive but definite loss of basic skills and resources in the core centres. To prevent this outcome it is necessary to significantly reduce the fixed costs of the centres and/or refuse to accept W3 and bilateral funding without an adequate overhead component. In the absence of long term certainty, the scale of the budget allocated to each of the new CRPs should be very conservative, a feature that can only be achieved by restricting/reducing the scope, probably quite significantly. Cross cutting issues: Gender, capacity building and partnerships Recommendation 11: The challenge for Grain Legumes is to achieve pro-active gender mainstreaming, which facilitates opportunities for gender diversity within all activities, from employment processes through research to end users. Strategic measurable gender indicators need to be embedded in research design, for instance, through specific IDOs for each of the flagships projects. Accurate baseline data are also required to facilitate M&E reviews of progress. Implementation of the Gender Strategy is the responsibility of everyone, not solely the Gender Team. Thus, ownership could be encouraged by setting personal development for key personnel objectives with specific outcomes, e.g. employment practices or research outcomes. Recognising the positive gender initiatives in progress or planned, feedback must be communicated and integrated into broader research planning to share opportunities, methods and outcomes. In addition to promoting gender equity in research, Grain Legumes also needs to ensure that working environments are gender sensitive and that recruitment processes, including promotion opportunities are equitable. Gender imbalance in management should be actively examined to identify further opportunities for developing female leadership. Recommendation 12: It is recommended that a training plan be devised to ensure that capacity building efforts are more clearly aligned with the research mandate, delivery and timeframe of Grain Legumes. Moreover, we recommend that ICRISAT develop a strategy to treat their new cohort of researchers more equitably in the future. Recommendation 13: To develop a more coherent strategic programme designed to eliminate overlap and promote synergy between programmes with common aims, Grain Legumes should hold a meeting with a range of partners. Governance Recommendation 14: Governance processes should be re-assessed and the structure altered to ensure that the Grain Legumes Director has the authority and budget control to drive the execution of strategy. The ISC should be truly independent and given the power to influence strategic decisions before they become final. We also recommend that PLCs are provided with the authority to manage the direction and finances of their PL; and that ring-fenced funds are provided for the promotion of collaboration, coordination and staff training5. The way ahead In our view, having seen the ineffectiveness of much of the attempts [or lack of attempts] to harness synergies between multiple centres, and of the strength in few or sole centre partnerships, we believe that there is little to justify a full retention of the 8 legume species and 4 CGIAR centres in a CRP. TL I and II and PABRA have shown to be reasonably good cross-centre and single centre integrated programmes, but even they suffer from incomplete value chain approaches to increasing rural incomes while increasing food and nutritional security; they both need multi-faceted solutions which are not immediately forthcoming from Grain Legumes. It is important to embed Grain Legumes research within the agri-food systems these crops serve. Figure ES1 broadly shows the perceived current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and species, and is discussed more in the text. It is clear that the value chains for individual species from trait determination to nutritional impact have more cohesion than do the individual activities (e.g. trait deployment) across species. For this reason we believe that the future for research in Grain Legumes is best addressed by focusing on each of the species separately, and within an ecosystem framework; any synergy for research across species can be effected through communication and not necessarily through obligatory cooperative research. The ecosystem framework will allow for strengthening of agronomy type systems research, the arguments for benefits of inclusion of grain legumes in cropping systems, which is notable by its absence in much of what Grain Legumes currently undertakes. Figure ES1. Current and potential degrees of synergy between centres, PLs and crop species We therefore agree with the innovation in agri-food systems approach of the CG, and believe that Grain Legumes rightly belongs in the Dryland Cereals and Legumes Agri-food Systems. We believe that the option of combining the crops of dryland cereals and legumes in the cereal-legume-livestock systems of subsistence farming communities for whole-farm productivity is closest to the best way forward. Indeed the inclusion of grain legumes may not warrant even a CRP alone, rather the legume components should fit in with the major crops that determine the production systems. Legumes will always be subservient to the major cereals, as necessary adjuncts to the whole production system, providing both nutritional diversity and environmental services, neither achievable from cereals alone. Figure ES2. Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP Most suitable option for integration of Grain Legumes and Dryland Cereals into an Agri-Food Systems CRP, which Incorporates ex-Dryland Systems, Dryland Cereals, Grain Legumes, some HumidTropics, some ex-Livestock &Fisheries into a new CRP Will cover full agri-food system VC for all 8 legumes in all ecologies, but must interact (dock) with the relevant AFS-CRPs for the dominant cereal in the relevant ecology Hence, will need to negotiate with other Agrifood Systems-CRPs on who does what for legumes In addition, responsible for sorghum and millet in the mixed dryland crop-livestock agro-ecologies For major game changers to be effected, we believe that the game has to change, and there is little evidence of this. The direction of CRPs is the correct route, but the journey has not yet come to its destination. A major change of game [such as the adoption of a Flagship Project approach as exemplified by the Australian CSIRO – where flagships contract services from centres of research excellence] would be painful to implant. The CGIAR system is going down the right pathway but it has not gone far enough.
Resumo:
Seat belts are one of the most effective passive safety features in vehicles and there is a host of research literature attesting to the effectiveness of seat belts in protecting against death and injury. Even when use rates are high the potential gains in trauma reduction from further improvements in wearing rates are substantial. However, those currently most resistant to restraint use have also proven most difficult to target using conventional countermeasures. It is necessary to address the issues of non-wearing in order to achieve further gains in seat belt wearing. This study provide evidence-based recommendations for the way forward to tackle the problems of adult restraint non-use in light passenger vehicles in the short, medium and longer term in Australia. While there are substantial issues to be addressed for these groups, these are outside the scope of this study.
Resumo:
Contient : 1 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 6 octobre 1385. En latin. « Pour la reparation des edifices des eglises » ; 2 Acte de CHARLES VII. Chinon, 10 mars 1431. « Nul de quelque estat et dignité, prérogative, preeminence ou auctorité qu'il soit, ne sera receu à tenir et avoir le gouvernement ou administracion d'aucun archeveschiéz (sic), eveschié, abbaye, dignité, prieuré ou autre benefice ecclesiastique en nostredict royaume et seignorie, s'il n'est natif d'icellui nostre royaume, et seignorie et feal et bienveullant de nous » ; 3 Bulle de MARTIN V, du 1er mai 1429. En latin. « Comme au roy appartient de congnoistre des benefices en matiere possessoire » ; 4 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 26 mai 1404. « Nous, actendu ... les bons et aggreables services que nous ont fait et font continuelment ... nos dicts conseilliers, greffiers, notaires, advocas, procureurs et huissiers, et esperons qu'ilz nous facent, ou temps advenir, ne voulons ne entendons » que au « fait de l'aide nouvellement mis sus pour resister à l'entreprinse de Henry de Lenclaustre, soy disant roy d'Angleterre... ils soient aucunement comprins » ; 5 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 5 mars 1388-9. Défense à l'évêque d'Amiens, à son official et à ses archidiacres, de faire comparaître devant eux ceux qui, étant mariés, sont inculpés d'adultère, et de les condamner à une amende ; 6 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 30 juillet 1406. Le roi accorde aux habitants du Cambrésis d'hériter de leurs parents décédés en France; pourvu qu'il en soit de même pour les Français dont les parents décéderaient en Cambrésis ; 7 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 17 avril 1410. En faveur des membres du l'Université qui ont été pourvus de benefices « selon les statuz et ordonnances du concile », pour les garantir contre toute entreprise qui pourroit troubler leur possession ; 8 Acte de CHARLES VI, du 3 mai 1412. « Concessio quod gentes parlamenti, racione feodorum suorum, non arment se cum rege, in armata per eum facta Bicturis et alibi, contra certos subditos suos et inobedientes, ut sciebatur » ; 9 Acte de JEAN DE BROGNIER, évêque d'Ostie, cardinal de la sainte Eglise romaine, et vice-chancelier, du 1er avril 1410. En latin. « Transcriptum certarum conclusionum et cappitulorum in cappitulo Pisano factarum super facto beneficiorum durante neutralitate et alias collatorum » ; 10-14 Actes en latin de CHARLES VI ; 10 Paris, 18 février 1406. « Ordinacio super reduccione libertatum Ecclesie gallicane » ; 11 Même date. « Confirmacio arresti super exactione financiarum gencium ecclesiarum prolati » ; 12 11 septembre 1406. « Arrestum per modum provisionis super facto exaccionum curie romane » ; 13 Paris, après le 27 mars 1418. « Reductio perpetua ecclesiarum Francie et Delphinatus ad suas libertates antiquas » ; 14 Paris, 9 septembre 1418. « Revocacio reductionis ecclesiarum gallicane et Dalphinatus Viennensis ad suas libertates antiquas » ; 15 « Opposition du procureur du roy » et du parlement « à l'enterinement et publication des lectres revocatoires de celles de la reduccion de l'Eglise de France à ses anciennes libertez ». 15 février et 30 mars 1419 ; 16 « Extrait des ordonnances faictes touchant l'alienacion du domainne de la coronne de France », depuis le mois de décembre 1360 jusqu'au 18 octobre 1425 ; 17 « Ce sont les droicts de souveraineté et de ressort et autres drois roiaulx appartenans seul (sic) et pour le tout au roy nostre sire, et desquelx et deppendences d'iceulz, et de tous autres droiz royaulz et de souveraineté, qui par exprès icy ne peuvent estre exprimés, le gouverneur à ce ordonné aura la cognoissance, la garde et la conservation. Et ne soufferra que autrement en soit usé par le roy de Naverre ne par ses gens, ne par quelzconques autres ; et lesquels droiz ont esté baillés par manière d'instruction à maistre Arnaux de Lux, secretaire du roy et gouverneur dessusdict, le VIIIe jour de may mil CCC LXXII » ; 18 « C'est l'advis et instruction fait sur la conservacion des souverainetés et ressors et autres drois roiaulx appartenans au roy en la ville, baronie et rectorie de Montpellier, baillés au roy de Navarre, lesquelz drois et souverainetés sont toujours appartenans au roy en tout son roiaume, et par especial aussi ont été reservés au bail de lad. terre, laquelle instruction a esté baillée à maistre Arnault de Lar, secretaire du roy et gouverneur desd. souverainetés, le VIIIme jour de may l'an mil CCCLXXII » ; 19 Acte de PHILIPPE LE LONG, du 24 fevrier 1320-1321, par lequel il fait rentrer dans le domaine de la couronne les droits, les terres et les bâtiments que les héritiers de Pierre Le Hideux détenaient indûment ; 20 Acte de PHILIPPE VI DE VALOIS : donne un arrêt par lequel le comte de Vendôme, Bouchard, qui avait envahi à main armée les terres du comte de Blois, est condamné à raser la tour qu'il avait fait construire à Vendôme, etc. En latin. 23 janvier 1328-9 ; 21 « Lettres de nomination de la court, que prengnent les conseillers pour leurs benefices » ; 22 « Coppie des ordonnances et declaracions faictes par le roy nostre sire de ses droiz royaulx ès duchiés de Touraine, Anjou et le Maine, par la bonne et meure deliberacion de son conseil, ouquel estoient lors les seigneurs de son sang et lignage, les gens de son grant conseil et autres, pour ce assemblez, du temps de feu monseigneur le duc d'Anjou, et depuis ce observées et gardées » ; 23 « Extraict du livre et registre des plaidoiries de la court de parlement, videlicet du parlement commançant l'an mil IIIC. IIIIXX et cinq, le lendemain de la Saint Martin. Du XXIIe jour de fevrier, oud. an mil IIIC. IIIIXX et cinq. Entre messire Denis comparant, presbtre, d'une part, et M. Jehan de Chacteu, bailli de Meaulx, d'autre part », était débat à cause d'un prisonnier de Provins, que l'archevêque de Sens disait être clerc, et qu'il devait jouir du privilège de clergie, tandis que le bailli de Meaux prétendait qu'il était laic » ; 24 Autre extrait concernant les dîmes. Acte donné à Toulouse le 17 juin 1417, par « Galaubras de Panaffaco » ; 25 « Sentence entre Dame Pericte de La Rivière, dame de La Rocheguion, demanderesse et complaignante, en cas de saisine et de nouvelleté d'une part, et le conte de Joigny, defendeur et opposant oudict cas, d'autre part ». Paris, 23 septembre 1460 ; 26 Acte en latin de LOUIS XI, du premier février 1462-3. Même objet que l'acte précédent ; 27 « De regalia ». Exercice de la régale à Chartres sur l'évêché, après la mort de Philippe de Boys Giloud en 1418, jusqu'au départ des Anglais ; 28 « L'ordonnance du roy LOYS » XI « faite ... à Paris, le IXe jour de septembre, l'an mil IIIIe ; LXI ... touchant l'alienation du demainne » ; 29 Acte de CHARLES VII sur les revenus des eglises et leur emploi. Inachevé. En latin ; 30 Avis pour « monstrer clerement le pays de Waise, la ville et chasteau de Ruplemonde, ou pays et conté de Flandres, que monseigneur de Bourgongne dit estre de l'empire, estre neuement en ce royaume, et tenu à une seule foy et hommaige, avec lad. conté de Flandres, du roy nostre sire, et que les causes des terres et choses scituées et assises oud. paÿs, ville et chasteau, ont de tout temps et ancienneté acoustumé venir par appel et ressort en la court de parlement »
Resumo:
Background: Noise is a significant barrier to sleep for acute care hospital patients, and sleep has been shown to be therapeutic for health, healing and recovery. Scheduled quiet time interventions to promote inpatient rest and sleep have been successfully trialled in critical care but not in acute care settings. Objectives: The study aim was to evaluate as cheduled quiet time intervention in an acute care setting. The study measured the effect of a scheduled quiet time on noise levels, inpatients’ rest and sleep behaviour, and wellbeing. The study also examined the impact of the intervention on patients’, visitors’ and health professionals’ satisfaction, and organisational functioning. Design: The study was a multi-centred non-randomised parallel group trial. Settings: The research was conducted in the acute orthopaedic wards of two major urban public hospitals in Brisbane, Australia. Participants: All patientsadmitted to the two wards in the5-month period of the study were invited to participate, withafinalsample of 299 participants recruited. This sample produced an effect size of 0.89 for an increase in the number of patients asleep during the quiet time. Methods: Demographic data were collected to enable comparison between groups. Data for noise level, sleep status, sleepiness and well being were collected using previously validated instruments: a Castle Model 824 digital sound level indicator; a three point sleep status scale; the Epworth Sleepiness Scale; and the SF12 V2 questionnaire. The staff, patient and visitor surveys on the experimental ward were adapted from published instruments. Results: Significant differences were found between the two groups in mean decibel level and numbers of patients awake and asleep. The difference in mean measured noise levels between the two environments corresponded to a ‘perceived’ difference of 2 to 1. There were significant correlations between average decibel level and number of patients awake and asleep in the experimental group, and between average decibel level and number of patients awake in the control group. Overall, patients, visitors and health professionals were satisfied with the quiet time intervention. Conclusions: The findings show that a quiet time intervention on an acute care hospital ward can affect noise level and patient sleep/wake patterns during the intervention period. The overall strongly positive response from surveys suggests that scheduled quiet time would be a positively perceived intervention with therapeutic benefit.
Resumo:
The paper details the results of the first phase of an on-going research into the sociocultural factors that influence the supervision of higher degrees research (HDR) engineering students in the Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering (BEE) and Faculty of Science and Technology (FaST) at Queensland University of Technology. A quantitative analysis was performed on the results from an online survey that was administered to 179 engineering students. The study reveals that cultural barriers impact their progression and developing confidence in their research programs. We argue that in order to assist international and non-English speaking background (NESB) research students to triumph over such culturally embedded challenges in engineering research, it is important for supervisors to understand this cohort's unique pedagogical needs and develop intercultural sensitivity in their pedagogical practice in postgraduate research supervision. To facilitate this, the governing body (Office of Research) can play a vital role in not only creating the required support structures but also their uniform implementation across the board.
Resumo:
Schizophrenia may not be a single disease, but the result of a diverse set of related conditions. Modern neuroscience is beginning to reveal some of the genetic and environmental underpinnings of schizophrenia; however, an approach less well travelled is to examine the medical disorders that produce symptoms resembling schizophrenia. This book is the first major attempt to bring together the diseases that produce what has been termed 'secondary schizophrenia'. International experts from diverse backgrounds ask the questions: does this medical disorder, or drug, or condition cause psychosis? If yes, does it resemble schizophrenia? What mechanisms form the basis of this relationship? What implications does this understanding have for aetiology and treatment? The answers are a feast for clinicians and researchers of psychosis and schizophrenia. They mark the next step in trying to meet the most important challenge to modern neuroscience – understanding and conquering this most mysterious of human diseases.
Resumo:
The tear film plays an important role preserving the health of the ocular surface and maintaining the optimal refractive power of the cornea. Moreover dry eye syndrome is one of the most commonly reported eye health problems. This syndrome is caused by abnormalities in the properties of the tear film. Current clinical tools to assess the tear film properties have shown certain limitations. The traditional invasive methods for the assessment of tear film quality, which are used by most clinicians, have been criticized for the lack of reliability and/or repeatability. A range of non-invasive methods of tear assessment have been investigated, but also present limitations. Hence no “gold standard” test is currently available to assess the tear film integrity. Therefore, improving techniques for the assessment of the tear film quality is of clinical significance and the main motivation for the work described in this thesis. In this study the tear film surface quality (TFSQ) changes were investigated by means of high-speed videokeratoscopy (HSV). In this technique, a set of concentric rings formed in an illuminated cone or a bowl is projected on the anterior cornea and their reflection from the ocular surface imaged on a charge-coupled device (CCD). The reflection of the light is produced in the outer most layer of the cornea, the tear film. Hence, when the tear film is smooth the reflected image presents a well structure pattern. In contrast, when the tear film surface presents irregularities, the pattern also becomes irregular due to the light scatter and deviation of the reflected light. The videokeratoscope provides an estimate of the corneal topography associated with each Placido disk image. Topographical estimates, which have been used in the past to quantify tear film changes, may not always be suitable for the evaluation of all the dynamic phases of the tear film. However the Placido disk image itself, which contains the reflected pattern, may be more appropriate to assess the tear film dynamics. A set of novel routines have been purposely developed to quantify the changes of the reflected pattern and to extract a time series estimate of the TFSQ from the video recording. The routine extracts from each frame of the video recording a maximized area of analysis. In this area a metric of the TFSQ is calculated. Initially two metrics based on the Gabor filter and Gaussian gradient-based techniques, were used to quantify the consistency of the pattern’s local orientation as a metric of TFSQ. These metrics have helped to demonstrate the applicability of HSV to assess the tear film, and the influence of contact lens wear on TFSQ. The results suggest that the dynamic-area analysis method of HSV was able to distinguish and quantify the subtle, but systematic degradation of tear film surface quality in the inter-blink interval in contact lens wear. It was also able to clearly show a difference between bare eye and contact lens wearing conditions. Thus, the HSV method appears to be a useful technique for quantitatively investigating the effects of contact lens wear on the TFSQ. Subsequently a larger clinical study was conducted to perform a comparison between HSV and two other non-invasive techniques, lateral shearing interferometry (LSI) and dynamic wavefront sensing (DWS). Of these non-invasive techniques, the HSV appeared to be the most precise method for measuring TFSQ, by virtue of its lower coefficient of variation. While the LSI appears to be the most sensitive method for analyzing the tear build-up time (TBUT). The capability of each of the non-invasive methods to discriminate dry eye from normal subjects was also investigated. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were calculated to assess the ability of each method to predict dry eye syndrome. The LSI technique gave the best results under both natural blinking conditions and in suppressed blinking conditions, which was closely followed by HSV. The DWS did not perform as well as LSI or HSV. The main limitation of the HSV technique, which was identified during the former clinical study, was the lack of the sensitivity to quantify the build-up/formation phase of the tear film cycle. For that reason an extra metric based on image transformation and block processing was proposed. In this metric, the area of analysis was transformed from Cartesian to Polar coordinates, converting the concentric circles pattern into a quasi-straight lines image in which a block statistics value was extracted. This metric has shown better sensitivity under low pattern disturbance as well as has improved the performance of the ROC curves. Additionally a theoretical study, based on ray-tracing techniques and topographical models of the tear film, was proposed to fully comprehend the HSV measurement and the instrument’s potential limitations. Of special interested was the assessment of the instrument’s sensitivity under subtle topographic changes. The theoretical simulations have helped to provide some understanding on the tear film dynamics, for instance the model extracted for the build-up phase has helped to provide some insight into the dynamics during this initial phase. Finally some aspects of the mathematical modeling of TFSQ time series have been reported in this thesis. Over the years, different functions have been used to model the time series as well as to extract the key clinical parameters (i.e., timing). Unfortunately those techniques to model the tear film time series do not simultaneously consider the underlying physiological mechanism and the parameter extraction methods. A set of guidelines are proposed to meet both criteria. Special attention was given to a commonly used fit, the polynomial function, and considerations to select the appropriate model order to ensure the true derivative of the signal is accurately represented. The work described in this thesis has shown the potential of using high-speed videokeratoscopy to assess tear film surface quality. A set of novel image and signal processing techniques have been proposed to quantify different aspects of the tear film assessment, analysis and modeling. The dynamic-area HSV has shown good performance in a broad range of conditions (i.e., contact lens, normal and dry eye subjects). As a result, this technique could be a useful clinical tool to assess tear film surface quality in the future.
Resumo:
This paper reviews the current status of the application of optical non-destructive methods, particularly infrared (IR) and near infrared (NIR), in the evaluation of the physiological integrity of articular cartilage. It is concluded that a significant amount of work is still required in order to achieve specificity and clinical applicability of these methods in the assessment and treatment of dysfunctional articular joints.
Resumo:
This paper gives a modification of a class of stochastic Runge–Kutta methods proposed in a paper by Komori (2007). The slight modification can reduce the computational costs of the methods significantly.
