18 results
1 Subjective Cognitive Concerns, Neuropsychological Test Performances, and Frontoparietal Thickness and Connectivity in High-Functioning Older Adults
- Justin E. Karr, Jonathan G. Hakun, Daniel B. Elbich, Cristina N. Pinheiro, Frederick A. Schmitt, Suzanne C. Segerstrom
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 29 / Issue s1 / November 2023
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 December 2023, pp. 102-103
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Neuropsychologists have difficulty detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults, in whom substantially greater neurological change may need to occur before performance on cognitive tests are low enough to indicate cognitive impairment. For high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive concerns (SCC) may indicate decline that is not detected by the presence of low cognitive test scores but may be related to the absence of high scores and the presence of latent neurological changes. We hypothesized that high-functioning older adults with SCC would have fewer high scores than those without concerns, but a comparable number of low scores. These findings would indicate that objective decline has occurred but would not be detected by a traditional focus on low scores. We also hypothesized that SCC would be associated with lower frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity, indicating latent neurological change underlying subjective cognitive concerns.
Participants and Methods:Participants from an imaging sub-study of an ongoing longitudinal aging study were selected if they had high estimated premorbid functioning, defined as either (a) estimated intelligence >75th percentile on the North American Adult Reading Test (n=48) or (b) having a college degree (n=62). This resulted in 68 participants subdivided based on SCC, defined as one or more self-reported SCC on the Medical Outcomes Study Cognitive Functioning Scale (MOS-Cog). Participants with SCC (n=35; 73.9 years-old, SD=9.6, range: 60-95; 62.9% female; 94.3% White) and without SCC (n=33; 71.0 years-old, SD=7.2, range: 61-85, 75.8% female; 100% White) completed a neuropsychological test battery of memory and executive functions, including the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Trail Making Test Parts A and B, Controlled Oral Word Association Test, Digit Span, and Letter-Number Sequencing, and underwent structural MRI. MR images were analyzed for frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Results:Participants with and without SCC were compared on the number of low test scores (i.e., at or below the 16th percentile) and high test scores (i.e., at or above the 75th percentile), finding a comparable number of low scores, t=1.66, p=.103, d=.40, but a lower number of high scores among participants with SCC, t=2.95, p=.004, d=.71. Participants with SCC had lower bilateral mean frontoparietal network volumes (left: t=2.98, p=.004, d=.74; right: t=2.63, p=.011, d=.66) and cortical thickness (left: t=2.65, p=.010, d=.66; right: t=2.18, p=.033, d=.54), but did not differ from those without SCC in terms of network connectivity.
Conclusions:SCC have been reported as a potential risk factor for dementia in older adults. High-functioning older adults with SCC presented with fewer high scores than those without SCC but had a comparable number of low scores. Among high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with objective cognitive change not detected by the traditional emphasis on low scores, but rather the absence of high scores. SCC were also related to underlying changes in the volume and thickness of the frontoparietal network, but not connectivity. In high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with a reduction from high average functioning in some domains and underlying neurological changes.
Detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults: The relationship between subjective cognitive concerns, frequency of high neuropsychological test scores, and the frontoparietal control network
- Justin E. Karr, Jonathan G. Hakun, Daniel B. Elbich, Cristina N. Pinheiro, Frederick A. Schmitt, Suzanne C. Segerstrom
-
- Journal:
- Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society / Volume 30 / Issue 3 / March 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 September 2023, pp. 220-231
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Objective:
Neuropsychologists have difficulty detecting cognitive decline in high-functioning older adults because greater neurological change must occur before cognitive performances are low enough to indicate decline or impairment. For high-functioning older adults, early neurological changes may correspond with subjective cognitive concerns and an absence of high scores. This study compared high-functioning older adults with and without subjective cognitive concerns, hypothesizing those with cognitive concerns would have fewer high scores on neuropsychological testing and lower frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Method:Participants had high estimated premorbid functioning (e.g., estimated intelligence ≥75th percentile or college-educated) and were divided based on subjective cognitive concerns. Participants with cognitive concerns (n = 35; 74.0 ± 9.6 years old, 62.9% female, 94.3% White) and without cognitive concerns (n = 33; 71.2 ± 7.1 years old, 75.8% female, 100% White) completed a neuropsychological battery of memory and executive function tests and underwent structural and resting-state magnetic resonance imaging, calculating frontoparietal network volume, thickness, and connectivity.
Results:Participants with and without cognitive concerns had comparable numbers of low test scores (≤16th percentile), p = .103, d = .40. Participants with cognitive concerns had fewer high scores (≥75th percentile), p = .004, d = .71, and lower mean frontoparietal network volumes (left: p = .004, d = .74; right: p = .011, d = .66) and cortical thickness (left: p = .010, d = .66; right: p = .033, d = .54), but did not differ in network connectivity.
Conclusions:Among high-functioning older adults, subjective cognitive decline may correspond with an absence of high scores on neuropsychological testing and underlying changes in the frontoparietal network that would not be detected by a traditional focus on low cognitive test scores.
LO45: Does the use of point of care ultrasonography improve survival in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- P.R. Atkinson, J. Milne, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, M. Peach, L. Taylor, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, D. Lewis
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S43
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of care ultrasound (PoCUS) is an established tool in the initial management of patients with undifferentiated hypotension in the emergency department (ED). While PoCUS protocols have been shown to improve early diagnostic accuracy, there is little published evidence for any mortality benefit. We report the findings from our international multicenter randomized controlled trial, assessing the impact of a PoCUS protocol on survival and key clinical outcomes. Methods: Recruitment occurred at 7 centres in North America (4) and South Africa (3). Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. Screening at triage identified patients (SBP<100 or shock index>1), randomized to PoCUS or control (standard care and no PoCUS) groups. Demographics, clinical details and study findings were collected prospectively. Initial and secondary diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes, with ultrasound performed in the PoCUS group prior to secondary assessment. The primary outcome measure was 30-day/discharge mortality. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic accuracy, changes in vital signs, acid-base status, and length of stay. Categorical data was analyzed using Fishers test, and continuous data by Student T test and multi-level log-regression testing. (GraphPad/SPSS) Final chart review was blinded to initial impressions and PoCUS findings. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. There was no difference between groups for the primary outcome of mortality; PoCUS 32/129 (24.8%; 95% CI 14.3-35.3%) vs. Control 32/129 (24.8%; 95% CI 14.3-35.3%); RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.869 to 1.15; p=1.00). There were no differences in the secondary outcomes; ICU and total length of stay. Our sample size has a power of 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Other secondary outcomes are reported separately. Conclusion: This is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard care for undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We did not find any mortality or length of stay benefits with the use of a PoCUS protocol, though a larger study is required to confirm these findings. While PoCUS may have diagnostic benefits, these may not translate into a survival benefit effect.
LO43: Does point of care ultrasound improve resuscitation markers in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED 1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- L. Taylor, J. Milne, D. Lewis, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, M. Peach, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, P.R. Atkinson
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S42
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of Care Ultrasound (PoCUS) protocols are commonly used to guide resuscitation for emergency department (ED) patients with undifferentiated non-traumatic hypotension. While PoCUS has been shown to improve early diagnosis, there is a minimal evidence for any outcome benefit. We completed an international multicenter randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the impact of a PoCUS protocol on key resuscitation markers in this group. We report diagnostic impact and mortality elsewhere. Methods: The SHoC-ED1 study compared the addition of PoCUS to standard care within the first hour in the treatment of adult patients presenting with undifferentiated hypotension (SBP<100 mmHg or a Shock Index >1.0) with a control group that did not receive PoCUS. Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. 4 North American, and 3 South African sites participated in the study. Resuscitation outcomes analyzed included volume of fluid administered in the ED, changes in shock index (SI), modified early warning score (MEWS), venous acid-base balance, and lactate, at one and four hours. Comparisons utilized a T-test as well as stratified binomial log-regression to assess for any significant improvement in resuscitation amount the outcomes. Our sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. There was no significant difference in mean total volume of fluid received between the control (1658 ml; 95%CI 1365-1950) and PoCUS groups (1609 ml; 1385-1832; p=0.79). Significant improvements were seen in SI, MEWS, lactate and bicarbonate with resuscitation in both the PoCUS and control groups, however there was no difference between groups. Conclusion: SHOC-ED1 is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard of care in hypotensive ED patients. No significant difference in fluid used, or markers of resuscitation was found when comparing the use of a PoCUS protocol to that of standard of care in the resuscitation of patients with undifferentiated hypotension.
LO07: Does point of care ultrasonography improve diagnostic accuracy in emergency department patients with undifferentiated hypotension? The first Sonography in Hypotension and Cardiac Arrest in the Emergency Department (SHOC-ED1) Study; an international randomized controlled trial
- M. Peach, J. Milne, D. Lewis, L. Diegelmann, H. Lamprecht, M. Stander, D. Lussier, C. Pham, R. Henneberry, J. Fraser, M. Howlett, J. Mekwan, B. Ramrattan, J. Middleton, D.J. van Hoving, D. Fredericks, L. Taylor, T. Dahn, S.T. Hurley, K. MacSween, C. Cox, L. Richardson, O. Loubani, G. Stoica, S. Hunter, P. Olszynski, P.R. Atkinson
-
- Journal:
- Canadian Journal of Emergency Medicine / Volume 19 / Issue S1 / May 2017
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 May 2017, p. S29
- Print publication:
- May 2017
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Introduction: Point of care ultrasonography (PoCUS) is an established tool in the initial management of hypotensive patients in the emergency department (ED). It has been shown rule out certain shock etiologies, and improve diagnostic certainty, however evidence on benefit in the management of hypotensive patients is limited. We report the findings from our international multicenter RCT assessing the impact of a PoCUS protocol on diagnostic accuracy, as well as other key outcomes including mortality, which are reported elsewhere. Methods: Recruitment occurred at 4 North American and 3 Southern African sites. Screening at triage identified patients (SBP<100 mmHg or shock index >1) who were randomized to either PoCUS or control groups. Scans were performed by PoCUS-trained physicians. Demographics, clinical details and findings were collected prospectively. Initial and secondary diagnoses were recorded at 0 and 60 minutes, with ultrasound performed in the PoCUS group prior to secondary assessment. Final chart review was blinded to initial impressions and PoCUS findings. Categorical data was analyzed using Fishers two-tailed test. Our sample size was powered at 0.80 (α:0.05) for a moderate effect size. Results: 258 patients were enrolled with follow-up fully completed. Baseline comparisons confirmed effective randomization. The perceived shock category changed more frequently in the PoCUS group 20/127 (15.7%) vs. control 7/125 (5.6%); RR 2.81 (95% CI 1.23 to 6.42; p=0.0134). There was no significant difference in change of diagnostic impression between groups PoCUS 39/123 (31.7%) vs control 34/124 (27.4%); RR 1.16 (95% CI 0.786 to 1.70; p=0.4879). There was no significant difference in the rate of correct category of shock between PoCUS (118/127; 93%) and control (113/122; 93%); RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.936 to 1.08; p=1.00), or for correct diagnosis; PoCUS 90/127 (70%) vs control 86/122 (70%); RR 0.987 (95% CI 0.671 to 1.45; p=1.00). Conclusion: This is the first RCT to compare PoCUS to standard care for undifferentiated hypotensive ED patients. We found that the use of PoCUS did change physicians’ perceived shock category. PoCUS did not improve diagnostic accuracy for category of shock or diagnosis.
Contributors
-
- By Mitchell Aboulafia, Frederick Adams, Marilyn McCord Adams, Robert M. Adams, Laird Addis, James W. Allard, David Allison, William P. Alston, Karl Ameriks, C. Anthony Anderson, David Leech Anderson, Lanier Anderson, Roger Ariew, David Armstrong, Denis G. Arnold, E. J. Ashworth, Margaret Atherton, Robin Attfield, Bruce Aune, Edward Wilson Averill, Jody Azzouni, Kent Bach, Andrew Bailey, Lynne Rudder Baker, Thomas R. Baldwin, Jon Barwise, George Bealer, William Bechtel, Lawrence C. Becker, Mark A. Bedau, Ernst Behler, José A. Benardete, Ermanno Bencivenga, Jan Berg, Michael Bergmann, Robert L. Bernasconi, Sven Bernecker, Bernard Berofsky, Rod Bertolet, Charles J. Beyer, Christian Beyer, Joseph Bien, Joseph Bien, Peg Birmingham, Ivan Boh, James Bohman, Daniel Bonevac, Laurence BonJour, William J. Bouwsma, Raymond D. Bradley, Myles Brand, Richard B. Brandt, Michael E. Bratman, Stephen E. Braude, Daniel Breazeale, Angela Breitenbach, Jason Bridges, David O. Brink, Gordon G. Brittan, Justin Broackes, Dan W. Brock, Aaron Bronfman, Jeffrey E. Brower, Bartosz Brozek, Anthony Brueckner, Jeffrey Bub, Lara Buchak, Otavio Bueno, Ann E. Bumpus, Robert W. Burch, John Burgess, Arthur W. Burks, Panayot Butchvarov, Robert E. Butts, Marina Bykova, Patrick Byrne, David Carr, Noël Carroll, Edward S. Casey, Victor Caston, Victor Caston, Albert Casullo, Robert L. Causey, Alan K. L. Chan, Ruth Chang, Deen K. Chatterjee, Andrew Chignell, Roderick M. Chisholm, Kelly J. Clark, E. J. Coffman, Robin Collins, Brian P. Copenhaver, John Corcoran, John Cottingham, Roger Crisp, Frederick J. Crosson, Antonio S. Cua, Phillip D. Cummins, Martin Curd, Adam Cureton, Andrew Cutrofello, Stephen Darwall, Paul Sheldon Davies, Wayne A. Davis, Timothy Joseph Day, Claudio de Almeida, Mario De Caro, Mario De Caro, John Deigh, C. F. Delaney, Daniel C. Dennett, Michael R. DePaul, Michael Detlefsen, Daniel Trent Devereux, Philip E. Devine, John M. Dillon, Martin C. Dillon, Robert DiSalle, Mary Domski, Alan Donagan, Paul Draper, Fred Dretske, Mircea Dumitru, Wilhelm Dupré, Gerald Dworkin, John Earman, Ellery Eells, Catherine Z. Elgin, Berent Enç, Ronald P. Endicott, Edward Erwin, John Etchemendy, C. Stephen Evans, Susan L. Feagin, Solomon Feferman, Richard Feldman, Arthur Fine, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, William FitzPatrick, Richard E. Flathman, Gvozden Flego, Richard Foley, Graeme Forbes, Rainer Forst, Malcolm R. Forster, Daniel Fouke, Patrick Francken, Samuel Freeman, Elizabeth Fricker, Miranda Fricker, Michael Friedman, Michael Fuerstein, Richard A. Fumerton, Alan Gabbey, Pieranna Garavaso, Daniel Garber, Jorge L. A. Garcia, Robert K. Garcia, Don Garrett, Philip Gasper, Gerald Gaus, Berys Gaut, Bernard Gert, Roger F. Gibson, Cody Gilmore, Carl Ginet, Alan H. Goldman, Alvin I. Goldman, Alfonso Gömez-Lobo, Lenn E. Goodman, Robert M. Gordon, Stefan Gosepath, Jorge J. E. Gracia, Daniel W. Graham, George A. Graham, Peter J. Graham, Richard E. Grandy, I. Grattan-Guinness, John Greco, Philip T. Grier, Nicholas Griffin, Nicholas Griffin, David A. Griffiths, Paul J. Griffiths, Stephen R. Grimm, Charles L. Griswold, Charles B. Guignon, Pete A. Y. Gunter, Dimitri Gutas, Gary Gutting, Paul Guyer, Kwame Gyekye, Oscar A. Haac, Raul Hakli, Raul Hakli, Michael Hallett, Edward C. Halper, Jean Hampton, R. James Hankinson, K. R. Hanley, Russell Hardin, Robert M. Harnish, William Harper, David Harrah, Kevin Hart, Ali Hasan, William Hasker, John Haugeland, Roger Hausheer, William Heald, Peter Heath, Richard Heck, John F. Heil, Vincent F. Hendricks, Stephen Hetherington, Francis Heylighen, Kathleen Marie Higgins, Risto Hilpinen, Harold T. Hodes, Joshua Hoffman, Alan Holland, Robert L. Holmes, Richard Holton, Brad W. Hooker, Terence E. Horgan, Tamara Horowitz, Paul Horwich, Vittorio Hösle, Paul Hoβfeld, Daniel Howard-Snyder, Frances Howard-Snyder, Anne Hudson, Deal W. Hudson, Carl A. Huffman, David L. Hull, Patricia Huntington, Thomas Hurka, Paul Hurley, Rosalind Hursthouse, Guillermo Hurtado, Ronald E. Hustwit, Sarah Hutton, Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa, Harry A. Ide, David Ingram, Philip J. Ivanhoe, Alfred L. Ivry, Frank Jackson, Dale Jacquette, Joseph Jedwab, Richard Jeffrey, David Alan Johnson, Edward Johnson, Mark D. Jordan, Richard Joyce, Hwa Yol Jung, Robert Hillary Kane, Tomis Kapitan, Jacquelyn Ann K. Kegley, James A. Keller, Ralph Kennedy, Sergei Khoruzhii, Jaegwon Kim, Yersu Kim, Nathan L. King, Patricia Kitcher, Peter D. Klein, E. D. Klemke, Virginia Klenk, George L. Kline, Christian Klotz, Simo Knuuttila, Joseph J. Kockelmans, Konstantin Kolenda, Sebastian Tomasz Kołodziejczyk, Isaac Kramnick, Richard Kraut, Fred Kroon, Manfred Kuehn, Steven T. Kuhn, Henry E. Kyburg, John Lachs, Jennifer Lackey, Stephen E. Lahey, Andrea Lavazza, Thomas H. Leahey, Joo Heung Lee, Keith Lehrer, Dorothy Leland, Noah M. Lemos, Ernest LePore, Sarah-Jane Leslie, Isaac Levi, Andrew Levine, Alan E. Lewis, Daniel E. Little, Shu-hsien Liu, Shu-hsien Liu, Alan K. L. Chan, Brian Loar, Lawrence B. Lombard, John Longeway, Dominic McIver Lopes, Michael J. Loux, E. J. Lowe, Steven Luper, Eugene C. Luschei, William G. Lycan, David Lyons, David Macarthur, Danielle Macbeth, Scott MacDonald, Jacob L. Mackey, Louis H. Mackey, Penelope Mackie, Edward H. Madden, Penelope Maddy, G. B. Madison, Bernd Magnus, Pekka Mäkelä, Rudolf A. Makkreel, David Manley, William E. Mann (W.E.M.), Vladimir Marchenkov, Peter Markie, Jean-Pierre Marquis, Ausonio Marras, Mike W. Martin, A. P. Martinich, William L. McBride, David McCabe, Storrs McCall, Hugh J. McCann, Robert N. McCauley, John J. McDermott, Sarah McGrath, Ralph McInerny, Daniel J. McKaughan, Thomas McKay, Michael McKinsey, Brian P. McLaughlin, Ernan McMullin, Anthonie Meijers, Jack W. Meiland, William Jason Melanson, Alfred R. Mele, Joseph R. Mendola, Christopher Menzel, Michael J. Meyer, Christian B. Miller, David W. Miller, Peter Millican, Robert N. Minor, Phillip Mitsis, James A. Montmarquet, Michael S. Moore, Tim Moore, Benjamin Morison, Donald R. Morrison, Stephen J. Morse, Paul K. Moser, Alexander P. D. Mourelatos, Ian Mueller, James Bernard Murphy, Mark C. Murphy, Steven Nadler, Jan Narveson, Alan Nelson, Jerome Neu, Samuel Newlands, Kai Nielsen, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Carlos G. Noreña, Calvin G. Normore, David Fate Norton, Nikolaj Nottelmann, Donald Nute, David S. Oderberg, Steve Odin, Michael O’Rourke, Willard G. Oxtoby, Heinz Paetzold, George S. Pappas, Anthony J. Parel, Lydia Patton, R. P. Peerenboom, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Adriaan T. Peperzak, Derk Pereboom, Jaroslav Peregrin, Glen Pettigrove, Philip Pettit, Edmund L. Pincoffs, Andrew Pinsent, Robert B. Pippin, Alvin Plantinga, Louis P. Pojman, Richard H. Popkin, John F. Post, Carl J. Posy, William J. Prior, Richard Purtill, Michael Quante, Philip L. Quinn, Philip L. Quinn, Elizabeth S. Radcliffe, Diana Raffman, Gerard Raulet, Stephen L. Read, Andrews Reath, Andrew Reisner, Nicholas Rescher, Henry S. Richardson, Robert C. Richardson, Thomas Ricketts, Wayne D. Riggs, Mark Roberts, Robert C. Roberts, Luke Robinson, Alexander Rosenberg, Gary Rosenkranz, Bernice Glatzer Rosenthal, Adina L. Roskies, William L. Rowe, T. M. Rudavsky, Michael Ruse, Bruce Russell, Lilly-Marlene Russow, Dan Ryder, R. M. Sainsbury, Joseph Salerno, Nathan Salmon, Wesley C. Salmon, Constantine Sandis, David H. Sanford, Marco Santambrogio, David Sapire, Ruth A. Saunders, Geoffrey Sayre-McCord, Charles Sayward, James P. Scanlan, Richard Schacht, Tamar Schapiro, Frederick F. Schmitt, Jerome B. Schneewind, Calvin O. Schrag, Alan D. Schrift, George F. Schumm, Jean-Loup Seban, David N. Sedley, Kenneth Seeskin, Krister Segerberg, Charlene Haddock Seigfried, Dennis M. Senchuk, James F. Sennett, William Lad Sessions, Stewart Shapiro, Tommie Shelby, Donald W. Sherburne, Christopher Shields, Roger A. Shiner, Sydney Shoemaker, Robert K. Shope, Kwong-loi Shun, Wilfried Sieg, A. John Simmons, Robert L. Simon, Marcus G. Singer, Georgette Sinkler, Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Matti T. Sintonen, Lawrence Sklar, Brian Skyrms, Robert C. Sleigh, Michael Anthony Slote, Hans Sluga, Barry Smith, Michael Smith, Robin Smith, Robert Sokolowski, Robert C. Solomon, Marta Soniewicka, Philip Soper, Ernest Sosa, Nicholas Southwood, Paul Vincent Spade, T. L. S. Sprigge, Eric O. Springsted, George J. Stack, Rebecca Stangl, Jason Stanley, Florian Steinberger, Sören Stenlund, Christopher Stephens, James P. Sterba, Josef Stern, Matthias Steup, M. A. Stewart, Leopold Stubenberg, Edith Dudley Sulla, Frederick Suppe, Jere Paul Surber, David George Sussman, Sigrún Svavarsdóttir, Zeno G. Swijtink, Richard Swinburne, Charles C. Taliaferro, Robert B. Talisse, John Tasioulas, Paul Teller, Larry S. Temkin, Mark Textor, H. S. Thayer, Peter Thielke, Alan Thomas, Amie L. Thomasson, Katherine Thomson-Jones, Joshua C. Thurow, Vzalerie Tiberius, Terrence N. Tice, Paul Tidman, Mark C. Timmons, William Tolhurst, James E. Tomberlin, Rosemarie Tong, Lawrence Torcello, Kelly Trogdon, J. D. Trout, Robert E. Tully, Raimo Tuomela, John Turri, Martin M. Tweedale, Thomas Uebel, Jennifer Uleman, James Van Cleve, Harry van der Linden, Peter van Inwagen, Bryan W. Van Norden, René van Woudenberg, Donald Phillip Verene, Samantha Vice, Thomas Vinci, Donald Wayne Viney, Barbara Von Eckardt, Peter B. M. Vranas, Steven J. Wagner, William J. Wainwright, Paul E. Walker, Robert E. Wall, Craig Walton, Douglas Walton, Eric Watkins, Richard A. Watson, Michael V. Wedin, Rudolph H. Weingartner, Paul Weirich, Paul J. Weithman, Carl Wellman, Howard Wettstein, Samuel C. Wheeler, Stephen A. White, Jennifer Whiting, Edward R. Wierenga, Michael Williams, Fred Wilson, W. Kent Wilson, Kenneth P. Winkler, John F. Wippel, Jan Woleński, Allan B. Wolter, Nicholas P. Wolterstorff, Rega Wood, W. Jay Wood, Paul Woodruff, Alison Wylie, Gideon Yaffe, Takashi Yagisawa, Yutaka Yamamoto, Keith E. Yandell, Xiaomei Yang, Dean Zimmerman, Günter Zoller, Catherine Zuckert, Michael Zuckert, Jack A. Zupko (J.A.Z.)
- Edited by Robert Audi, University of Notre Dame, Indiana
-
- Book:
- The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
- Published online:
- 05 August 2015
- Print publication:
- 27 April 2015, pp ix-xxx
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
The Wilkes Land Anomaly revisited
- John G. Weihaupt, Frans G. Van Der Hoeven, Frederick B. Chambers, Claude Lorius, John W. Wyckoff, Devin Castendyk
-
- Journal:
- Antarctic Science / Volume 27 / Issue 3 / June 2015
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 14 January 2015, pp. 291-305
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The Wilkes Land Gravity Anomaly, first reported in 1959–60, is located in northern Victoria Land in the Pacific Ocean sector of East Antarctica, 1400 km west of the Ross Sea and centred at 70°00'S-140°00'E. Initially described on the basis of ground-based seismic and gravity survey, and estimated at the time to have a diameter of 243 km, the original data are now supplemented by data from airborne radiosound survey, airborne gravity survey, airborne magnetic survey and satellite remote sensing. These new data enable us to expand upon the original data, and reveal that the structure has a diameter of some 510 km, is accompanied by ice streams and a chaotically disturbed region of the continental ice sheet, has a subglacial topographical relief of ≥1500 m, and exhibits a negative free air gravity anomaly associated with a larger central positive free air gravity anomaly. The feature has been described as a volcanic structure, an igneous intrusion, an ancient igneous diapir, a subglacial sedimentary basin, a glacially eroded subglacial valley, a tectonic feature and a meteorite impact crater. We re-examine the feature on the basis of these collective data, with emphasis on the free air gravity anomaly signs, magnitudes and patterns, magnetic signature magnitudes and patterns, and the size, shape, dimensions and morphology of the structure. This enhanced view adds substantially to the original description provided at the time of discovery, and suggests several explanations for the origin of the Wilkes Land Anomaly. However, the importance of this feature lies not only in determining its origin but by the fact that this part of the Wilkes Subglacial Basin is one of the most prominent regional negative geoid and associated gravity anomalies of the Antarctic continent.
Including Science Advocacy in Industrial–Organizational Curriculum
- Samuel T. McAbee, Frederick L. Oswald, Eden B. King, Tammy D. Allen, Stephen Stark, Patrick D. Converse, Lillian T. Eby, Lisa M. Leslie, Rustin D. Meyer, Steven G. Rogelberg, Liu-Qin Yang
-
- Journal:
- Industrial and Organizational Psychology / Volume 7 / Issue 1 / March 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 07 January 2015, pp. 61-65
-
- Article
- Export citation
Making Disaster Care Count: Consensus Formulation of Measures of Effectiveness for Natural Disaster Acute Phase Medical Response
- Rajesh K. Daftary, Andrea T. Cruz, Erik J. Reaves, Frederick M. Burkle, Jr., Michael D. Christian, Daniel B. Fagbuyi, Andrew L. Garrett, G. Bobby Kapur, Paul E. Sirbaugh
-
- Journal:
- Prehospital and Disaster Medicine / Volume 29 / Issue 5 / October 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 September 2014, pp. 461-467
- Print publication:
- October 2014
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Introduction
No standard exists for provision of care following catastrophic natural disasters. Host nations, funders, and overseeing agencies need a method to identify the most effective interventions when allocating finite resources. Measures of effectiveness are real-time indicators that can be used to link early action with downstream impact.
HypothesisGroup consensus methods can be used to develop measures of effectiveness detailing the major functions of post natural disaster acute phase medical response.
MethodsA review of peer-reviewed disaster response publications (2001-2011) identified potential measures describing domestic and international medical response. A steering committee comprised of six persons with publications pertaining to disaster response, and those serving in leadership capacity for a disaster response organization, was assembled. The committee determined which measures identified in the literature review had the best potential to gauge effectiveness during post-disaster acute-phase medical response. Using a modified Delphi technique, a second, larger group (Expert Panel) evaluated these measures and novel measures suggested (or “free-texted”) by participants for importance, validity, usability, and feasibility. After three iterations, the highest rated measures were selected.
ResultsThe literature review identified 397 measures. The steering committee approved 116 (29.2%) of these measures for advancement to the Delphi process. In Round 1, 25 (22%) measures attained >75% approval and, accompanied by 77 free-text measures, graduated to Round 2. There, 56 (50%) measures achieved >75% approval. In Round 3, 37 (66%) measures achieved median scores of 4 or higher (on a 5-point ordinal scale). These selected measures describe major aspects of disaster response, including: Evaluation, Treatment, Disposition, Public Health, and Team Logistics. Of participants from the Expert Panel, 24/39 (63%) completed all rounds. Thirty-three percent of these experts represented international agencies; 42% represented US government agencies.
ConclusionExperts identified response measures that reflect major functions of an acute medical response. Measures of effectiveness facilitate real-time assessment of performance and can signal where practices should be improved to better aid community preparedness and response. These measures can promote unification of medical assistance, allow for comparison of responses, and bring accountability to post-disaster acute-phase medical care. This is the first consensus-developed reporting tool constructed using objective measures to describe the functions of acute phase disaster medical response. It should be evaluated by agencies providing medical response during the next major natural disaster.
. ,Daftary RK ,Cruz AT ,Reaves EJ ,Burkle FM Jr ,Christian MD ,Fagbuyi DB ,Garrett AL ,Kapur GB .Sirbaugh PE Making Disaster Care Count: Consensus Formulation of Measures of Effectiveness for Natural Disaster Acute Phase Medical Response . Prehosp Disaster Med.2014 ;29 (5 ):1 -7
Origin(s) of Antarctica's Wilkes Subglacial Basin
- John G. Weihaupt, Frans G. Van Der Hoeven, Claude Lorius, Frederick B. Chambers
-
- Journal:
- Antarctic Science / Volume 26 / Issue 4 / August 2014
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 16 December 2013, pp. 377-383
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
The Wilkes Subglacial Basin (WSB), the largest subglacial basin in East Antarctica, is a topographic depression of continental proportions that lies beneath the East Antarctic continental ice sheet. Discovered by the US Victoria Land Traverse 1959–60, the origin of the WSB and the influence of palaeoclimate on its overlying continental ice sheet have remained uncertain since the time of its discovery. Most explanations of origin favour lithospheric structural control as a function of tectonic activity. Lithospheric flexure due to thermally or isostatically induced uplift of the Transantarctic Mountains was suggested in the 1980s. Lithospheric extension and rifting was proposed in the 1990s. More recent investigations have revealed the presence of fold and thrust belts, casting doubt on flexural and extensional hypotheses as the primary mechanisms, suggesting instead a compressional scenario. While remaining inconclusive, these tectonic mechanisms in one form or another, or in combination, are now believed to have provided the structural control for the origin of the WSB. Not yet comprehensively examined, however, is the role of non-tectonic processes in the formation of the WSB, as they may have influenced the size, configuration, subglacial sedimentation and subglacial topography of the WSB. In this paper we review the tectonic hypotheses and examine post-tectonic climate change along with glacial and marine processes as potentially significant factors in the present condition and configuration of the WSB. In the process, we find that there are a number of features not included in previous investigations that may have been major factors in the modification of the subglacial basin.
A Consensus-based Educational Framework and Competency Set for the Discipline of Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness
- Italo Subbarao, James M. Lyznicki, Edbert B. Hsu, Kristine M. Gebbie, David Markenson, Barbara Barzansky, John H. Armstrong, Emmanuel G. Cassimatis, Philip L. Coule, Cham E. Dallas, Richard V. King, Lewis Rubinson, Richard Sattin, Raymond E. Swienton, Scott Lillibridge, Frederick M. Burkle, Richard B. Schwartz, James J. James
-
- Journal:
- Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness / Volume 2 / Issue 1 / March 2008
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 08 April 2013, pp. 57-68
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- HTML
- Export citation
-
Background: Various organizations and universities have developed competencies for health professionals and other emergency responders. Little effort has been devoted to the integration of these competencies across health specialties and professions. The American Medical Association Center for Public Health Preparedness and Disaster Response convened an expert working group (EWG) to review extant competencies and achieve consensus on an educational framework and competency set from which educators could devise learning objectives and curricula tailored to fit the needs of all health professionals in a disaster.
Methods: The EWG conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed and non–peer reviewed published literature. In addition, after-action reports from Hurricane Katrina and relevant publications recommended by EWG members and other subject matter experts were reviewed for congruencies and gaps. Consensus was ensured through a 3-stage Delphi process.
Results: The EWG process developed a new educational framework for disaster medicine and public health preparedness based on consensus identification of 7 core learning domains, 19 core competencies, and 73 specific competencies targeted at 3 broad health personnel categories.
Conclusions: The competencies can be applied to a wide range of health professionals who are expected to perform at different levels (informed worker/student, practitioner, leader) according to experience, professional role, level of education, or job function. Although these competencies strongly reflect lessons learned following the health system response to Hurricane Katrina, it must be understood that preparedness is a process, and that these competencies must be reviewed continually and refined over time. (Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness. 2008;2:57–68)
Contributors
-
- By Jane E. Adcock, Yahya Aghakhani, A. Anand, Eva Andermann, Frederick Andermann, Alexis Arzimanoglou, Sandrine Aubert, Nadia Bahi-Buisson, Carman Barba, Agatino Battaglia, Geneviève Bernard, Nadir E. Bharucha, Laurence A. Bindoff, William Bingaman, Francesca Bisulli, Thomas P. Bleck, Stewart G. Boyd, Andreas Brunklaus, Harry Bulstrode, Jorge G. Burneo, Laura Canafoglia, Laura Cantonetti, Roberto H. Caraballo, Fernando Cendes, Kevin E. Chapman, Patrick Chauvel, Richard F. M. Chin, H. T. Chong, Fahmida A. Chowdhury, Catherine J. Chu-Shore, Rolando Cimaz, Andrew J. Cole, Bernard Dan, Geoffrey Dean, Alessio De Ciantis, Fernando De Paolis, Rolando F. Del Maestro, Irissa M. Devine, Carlo Di Bonaventura, Concezio Di Rocco, Henry B. Dinsdale, Maria Alice Donati, François Dubeau, Michael Duchowny, Olivier Dulac, Monika Eisermann, Brent Elliott, Bernt A. Engelsen, Kevin Farrell, Natalio Fejerman, Rosalie E. Ferner, Silvana Franceschetti, Robert Friedlander, Antonio Gambardella, Hector H. Garcia, Serena Gasperini, Lorenzo Genitori, Gioia Gioi, Flavio Giordano, Leif Gjerstad, Daniel G. Glaze, Howard P. Goodkin, Sidney M. Gospe, Andrea Grassi, William P. Gray, Renzo Guerrini, Marie-Christine Guiot, William Harkness, Andrew G. Herzog, Linda Huh, Margaret J. Jackson, Thomas S. Jacques, Anna C. Jansen, Sigmund Jenssen, Michael R. Johnson, Dorothy Jones-Davis, Reetta Kälviäinen, Peter W. Kaplan, John F. Kerrigan, Autumn Marie Klein, Matthias Koepp, Edwin H. Kolodny, Kandan Kulandaivel, Ruben I. Kuzniecky, Ahmed Lary, Yolanda Lau, Anna-Elina Lehesjoki, Maria K. Lehtinen, Holger Lerche, Michael P. T. Lunn, Snezana Maljevic, Mark R. Manford, Carla Marini, Bindu Menon, Giulia Milioli, Eli M. Mizrahi, Manish Modi, Márcia Elisabete Morita, Manuel Murie-Fernandez, Vivek Nambiar, Lina Nashef, Vincent Navarro, Aidan Neligan, Ruth E. Nemire, Charles R. J. C. Newton, John O'Donavan, Hirokazu Oguni, Teiichi Onuma, Andre Palmini, Eleni Panagiotakaki, Pasquale Parisi, Elena Parrini, Liborio Parrino, Ignacio Pascual-Castroviejo, M. Scott Perry, Perrine Plouin, Charles E. Polkey, Suresh S. Pujar, Karthik Rajasekaran, R. Eugene Ramsey, Rahul Rathakrishnan, Roberta H. Raven, Guy M. Rémillard, David Rosenblatt, M. Elizabeth Ross, Abdulrahman Sabbagh, P. Satishchandra, Swati Sathe, Ingrid E. Scheffer, Philip A. Schwartzkroin, Rod C. Scott, Frédéric Sedel, Michelle J. Shapiro, Elliott H. Sherr, Michael Shevell, Simon D. Shorvon, Adrian M. Siegel, Gagandeep Singh, S. Sinha, Barbara Spacca, Waney Squier, Carl E. Stafstrom, Bernhard J. Steinhoff, Andrea Taddio, Gianpiero Tamburrini, C. T. Tan, Raymond Y. L. Tan, Erik Taubøll, Robert W. Teasell, Mario Giovanni Terzano, Federica Teutonico, Suzanne A. Tharin, Elizabeth A. Thiele, Pierre Thomas, Paolo Tinuper, Dorothée Kasteleijn-Nolst Trenité, Sumeet Vadera, Pierangelo Veggiotti, Jean-Pierre Vignal, J. M. Walshe, Elizabeth J. Waterhouse, David Watkins, Ruth E. Williams, Yue-Hua Zhang, Benjamin Zifkin, Sameer M. Zuberi
- Edited by Simon D. Shorvon, Frederick Andermann, Renzo Guerrini
-
- Book:
- The Causes of Epilepsy
- Published online:
- 05 March 2012
- Print publication:
- 14 April 2011, pp ix-xvi
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Contributors
-
- By Shamsuddin Akhtar, Greg Albert, Sidney Allison, Muhammad Anwar, Haruo Arita, Amanda Barker, Mary Hanna Bekhit, Jeanna Blitz, Tyson Bolinske, David Burbulys, Asokumar Buvanendran, Gregory Cain, Keith A. Candiotti, Daniel B. Carr, Derek Chalmers, John Charney, Rex Cheng, Roger Chou, Keun Sam Chung, Anna Clebone, Frederick Conlin, Susan Dabu-Bondoc, Tiffany Denepitiya-Balicki, Jeanette Derdemezi, Anahat Kaur Dhillon, Ho Dzung, Juan Jose Egas, Stephen M. Eskaros, Zhuang T. Fang, Claudia R. Fernandez Robles, Victor A. Filadora, Ellen Flanagan, Dan Froicu, Allison Gandey, Nehal Gatha, Boris Gelman, Christopher Gharibo, Muhammad K. Ghori, Brian Ginsberg, Michael E. Goldberg, Jeff Gudin, Thomas Halaszynski, Martin Hale, Dorothea Hall, Craig T. Hartrick, Justin Hata, Lars E. Helgeson, Joe C. Hong, Richard W. Hong, Balazs Horvath, Eric S. Hsu, Gabriel Jacobs, Jonathan S. Jahr, Rongjie Jaing, Inderjeet Singh Julka, Zeev N. Kain, Clinton Kakazu, Kianusch Kiai, Mary Keyes, Michael M. Kim, Peter G. Lacouture, Ryan Lanier, Vivian K. Lee, Mark J. Lema, Oscar A. de Leon-Casasola, Imanuel Lerman, Philip Levin, Steven Levin, JinLei Li, Eric C. Lin, Sharon Lin, David A. Lindley, Ana M. Lobo, Marisa Lomanto, Mirjana Lovrincevic, Brenda C. McClain, Tariq Malik, Jure Marijic, Joseph Marino, Laura Mechtler, Alan Miller, Carly Miller, Amit Mirchandani, Sukanya Mitra, Fleurise Montecillo, James M. Moore, Debra E. Morrison, Philip F. Morway, Carsten Nadjat-Haiem, Hamid Nourmand, Dana Oprea, Sunil J. Panchal, Edward J. Park, Kathleen Ji Park, Kellie Park, Parisa Partownavid, Akta Patel, Bijal Patel, Komal D. Patel, Neesa Patel, Swati Patel, Paul M. Peloso, Danielle Perret, Anthony DePlato, Marjorie Podraza Stiegler, Despina Psillides, Mamatha Punjala, Johan Raeder, Siamak Rahman, Aziz M. Razzuk, Maggy G. Riad, Kristin L. Richards, R. Todd Rinnier, Ian W. Rodger, Joseph Rosa, Abraham Rosenbaum, Alireza Sadoughi, Veena Salgar, Leslie Schechter, Michael Seneca, Yasser F. Shaheen, James H. Shull, Elizabeth Sinatra, Raymond S. Sinatra, Neil Singla, Neil Sinha, Denis V. Snegovskikh, Dmitri Souzdalnitski, Julie Sramcik, Zoreh Steffens, Alexander Timchenko, Vadim Tokhner, Marc C. Torjman, Co T. Truong, Nalini Vadivelu, Ashley Vaughn, Anjali Vira, Eugene R. Viscusi, Dajie Wang, Shu-ming Wang, J. Michael Watkins-Pitchford, Steven J. Weisman, Ira Whitten, Bryan S. Williams, Jeremy M. Wong, Thomas Wong, Christopher Wray, Yaw Wu, Anthony T. Yarussi, Laurie Yonemoto, Bita H. Zadeh, Jill Zafar, Martha Zegarra, Keren Ziv
- Edited by Raymond S. Sinatra, Jonathan S. Jahr, University of California, Los Angeles, School of Medicine, J. Michael Watkins-Pitchford
-
- Book:
- The Essence of Analgesia and Analgesics
- Published online:
- 06 December 2010
- Print publication:
- 14 October 2010, pp xi-xviii
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
Chaos in small-amplitude surface gravity waves over slowly varying bathymetry
- Michael G. Brown, Frederick D. Tappert, Sekhar E. R. B. Sundaram
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Fluid Mechanics / Volume 227 / June 1991
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 April 2006, pp. 35-46
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
We consider the motion of small-amplitude surface gravity waves over variable bathymetry. Although the governing equations of motion are linear, for general bathymetric variations they are non-separable and cannot be solved exactly. For slowly varying bathymetry, however, approximate solutions based on geometric (ray) techniques may be used. The ray equations are a set of coupled nonlinear ordinary differential equations with Hamiltonian form. It is argued that for general bathymetric variations, solutions to these equations - ray trajectories - should exhibit chaotic motion, i.e. extreme sensitivity to initial and environmental conditions. These ideas are illustrated using a simple model of bottom bathymetry, h(x,y) = h0(1 + εcos (2πx/L) cos (2πy/L)). The expectation of chaotic ray trajectories is confirmed via the construction of Poincaré sections and the calculation of Lyapunov exponents. The complexity of chaotic geometric wavefields is illustrated by considering the temporal evolution of (mostly) chaotic wavecrests. Some practical implications of chaotic ray trajectories are discussed.
Parallaxes of Brown Dwarfs at USNO
- Hugh C. Harris, Conard C. Dahn, Frederick J. Vrba, Harry H. Guetter, Blaise Canzian, Arne A. Henden, Stephen E. Levine, Christian B. Luginbuhl, Alice K. B. Monet, David G. Monet, Jeffery R. Pier, Ronald C. Stone, Richard L. Walker
-
- Journal:
- Symposium - International Astronomical Union / Volume 211 / 2003
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 May 2016, pp. 409-412
- Print publication:
- 2003
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Export citation
-
Trigonometric parallaxes have been measured by Dahn et al. (2002) for 28 cool dwarfs and brown dwarfs, including 17 L dwarfs and three T dwarfs. Broadband CCD and near-IR photometry (VRIz*JHK) have been obtained for these objects and for 24 additional late-type dwarfs. These data have been supplemented with astrometry and photometry from the literature, including parallaxes for the brighter companions of ten L and two T dwarfs. The absolute magnitudes and colors are reviewed here. The I - J color and the spectral type are both good predictors of absolute magnitude for late-M and L dwarfs. MJ becomes monotonically fainter with I - J color and with spectral type through late-L dwarfs, then brightens for early-T dwarfs. In contrast, the J - K color correlates poorly with absolute magnitude for L dwarfs. Using several other parameters from the literature (Li detection, Hα emission strength, projected rotation velocity, and tangential velocity), we fail to uncover any measurable parameter that correlates with the anomalous J - K color.
Phase and Morphology in Mixed CuO-WO3 Films for Chemical Sensing
- A. El Madi, B. Meulendyk, R. S. Pilling, G. Bernhardt, R. J. Lad, B. G. Frederick
-
- Journal:
- MRS Online Proceedings Library Archive / Volume 751 / 2002
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 11 February 2011, Z3.48
- Print publication:
- 2002
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Semiconducting metal oxide (SMO) chemiresistive sensors are highly sensitive toward a broad range of hydrocarbons. To develop a gas phase sensor with selectivity toward organophosphorus compounds, such as chemical warfare agents and pesticides, we have developed dosimeters based upon a poisoning mechanism. Here, we report the growth and characterization of WO3 thin films, modified with Cu2O. XPS data show that exposure to phosphonate compounds leads to accumulation of phosphate on the surface, together with dramatic changes in the surface segregation of copper. We present XRD and XPS results to characterize the phase changes following growth, annealing, and exposure to phosphonate compounds. The correlation between sensor response and phosphorous accumulation shows that the highest activity occurs at intermediate coverages of Cu2O, in the15–25 Å range, on 500 Å WO3 films.
An Intuitive Method for the Determination of Crystal-Field Parameters in Laser Crystals
- Frederick G. Anderson, H. Weidner, P. L. Summers, R. E. Peale, B. H. T. Chai
-
- Journal:
- MRS Online Proceedings Library Archive / Volume 329 / 1993
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 15 February 2011, 203
- Print publication:
- 1993
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Expanding the crystal field in terms of operators that transform as the irreducible representations of the Td group leads to an intuitive interpretation of the crystal-field parameters. We apply this method to the crystal field experienced by Nd3+ dopants in the laser crystals YLiF4, YVO4, and KLiYF5.
Political Science and Federal Employment*
- Frederick M. Davenport, Lewis B. Sims, Leonard D. White, G. Lyle Belsley, Frances R. Fussell
-
- Journal:
- American Political Science Review / Volume 35 / Issue 2 / April 1941
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 02 September 2013, pp. 304-310
- Print publication:
- April 1941
-
- Article
- Export citation
-
Only since 1939 have political scientists, as such, had much chance to gain entrance into the permanent federal civil service. This opportunity came as the result of two well-timed phenomena: (1) the demand of a number of federal agencies for young men and women educated in certain branches of political science, and (2) the United States Civil Service Commission's announcement of the Junior Professional Assistant examination, which included an optional called “Junior Administrative Technician.” This combination of happy circumstances, however, did not solve all the problems of the young political scientist or clarify all the requirements for federal employment; so, at the 1939 meeting of the American Political Science Association a committee was appointed to study the question.