	Gene	Alteration	RsID	COSMIC

Sample 1	ARID1A	Gln1614*	NR	NR

Sample 1	NOTCH1	N280S	rs367825691	NR

Sample 1	PIK3CA	EDLLNPI453del	NR	NR

Sample 1	ROS1	V1881_splice	rs772648589	NR

Sample 2	ARID1A	P476*	NR	NR

Sample 2	ARID1A	Leu1054Phe	NR	NR

Sample 2	KMT2D	Gln3745dup	rs775492040	NR

Sample 3	CDKN2Aa	Glu69*	rs121913383	COSM13281

Sample 3	TP53a	Asn268*	NR	COSM6583

Sample 4	TP53	Arg181Cys	rs587782596	COSM11090

Sample 5	KRAS	Gly12Val	rs121913529	COSM520

Sample 5	PIK3CA	His1047Arg	rs121913279	COSM775

Sample 6	ALK	Gly926Arg	NR	NR

Sample 6	ERBB2	Ile989Met	NR	NR

Sample 7	ARID1Aa	Tyr1055*	NR	NR

Sample 7	PIK3CAa	Lys111Glu	NR	COSM13570

Sample 8	SPOP	Lys115Glu	NR	NR

Sample 9	ARID1A	Gln537*	NR	NR

Sample 9	ARID1A	Gln2176*	NR	COSM1582021

Sample 9	PIK3CA	His1047Arg	rs121913279	COSM775


	Native	Derivative

Data collection

 Beamline	ESRF ID14-4	SLS X06DA (PXIII)

 Spacegroup	P3	P3

 Unit cell parameters (Å, °)	a = b = 104.50, c = 33.59	a = b = 104.03, c = 33.56

 	α = β = 90, γ = 120	α = β = 90, γ = 120

 Wavelength (Å)	0.91970	0.97942

 Resolution limits (Å)	52.25–1.49 (1.54–1.49)*	31.45–2.00 (2.06–2.00)*

 Reflections observed/unique	607786/64606	419456/27271

 Completeness (%)	98.3 (96.3)*	99.9 (98.9)*

 Rsym†(%)	5.6 (36.1)*	9.4 (75.2)*

 <I>/<σI>	26.3 (6.4)*	24.1 (3.9)*

 Redundancy	9.4 (8.8)*	15.4 (13.9)*

SAD phasing

 BAYES-CC		49.1 ± 18.5

 Se sites found/expected		5/6

 FOM before solvent flattening and density modification		0.35

 FOM after solvent flattening and density modification		0.69

Refinement

 Resolution limits (Å)	52.25–1.49 (1.52–1.49)*

 Reflections for Rcryst/for Rfree	59806/4800

 Rcryst‡(%)	12.4 (20.6)*

 Rfree‡(%)	16.4 (23.0)*

 No. of protein atoms/water atoms	2307/297

 Average B factor protein atoms/water atoms (Å2)	21.67/35.34

 RMSD bond lengths (Å)	0.005

 RMSD bond angles (°)	0.854

 Twin fraction (operator −h, −k, l)	0.49

Ramachandran Plot Statistics§

 Favoured region (%)	99.3

 Outliers (%)	0.0


Genetics	Mechanism	Incidence	Reference

Ptch+/−	Conventional KO	14%–19% by 10 months	(23, 44, 98)

Ptch+/−	Conventional KO; irradiation	100% by 10 months	(54, 55)

Ptch+/−; p53−/−	Conventional KO	100% by 2–3 months	(89)

Ptch+/−; Ptch2±/−	Conventional KO	17% by 10 months	(44)

Ptch+/−	Conditional KO (GFAP-Cre, Math1-Cre)	100% by 1–3 months	(95)

ND2-SmoA1	TG	94% by 2 months	(26, 28)

SmoM2	Conditional TG (GFAP-Cre, Math1-Cre, Olig2-Cre, Tlx-Cre)	100% by 2–4 months*	(69)

Sufu+/−; p53−/−	Conventional KO	58% by 10 months	(42)

Shh	RCAS	9%–34% by 3 months	(7, 49, 60, 61)

Shh; c-myc/Akt/IGF2	RCAS	23%–48% by 3 months	(60, 61)

Shh; n-myc	RCAS	78% by 3 months	(7)

Shh; Bcl-2	RCAS	78% by 3 months	(49)

Rb±/−; p53−/−	Conditional KO (GFAP-Cre)	25%–100% by 2–7 months	(48)

Ink4c±/−; p53±/−	Conventional and conditional KO (Nestin-Cre); irradiation	20%–100% by 5 months	(81)

Ptch+/−; Ink4c±/−	Conventional KO	40%–50% by 9 months	(81)

Lig4−/−; p53−/−	Conventional KO	100% by 2 months	(43)

Brca2−/−; p53±/−	Conventional and conditional KO (Nestin-Cre)	72%–83% by 4–8 months	(17)

Xrcc4−/−; p53−/−	Conventional and conditional KO (Nestin-Cre)	100% by 6 months	(94)


Input variables	Unit cost (£)	Source	Details

Interventions

 Lens extraction implemented as day case	866	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Phacoemulsification cataract extraction and lens implant implemented as day case (BZ02)

 Lens extraction implemented as inpatient	2157	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Phacoemulsification cataract extraction and lens implant implemented as inpatient (BZ02)

 Laser iridotomy implemented as outpatient	118	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Laser iridotomy (minor glaucoma procedures implemented as outpatient (BZ19))

Subsequent procedures

 Lens capsulotomy	121	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Lens capsulotomy (BZ04) implemented as outpatient

 Iridoplasty	172	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Major glaucoma procedures implemented as outpatient (BZ17)

 Trabeculectomy	1140	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Intermediate glaucoma procedures implemented as day case (BZ18)

 Cataract surgery	866	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Phacoemulsification cataract extraction and lens implant implemented as day case (BZ02)

Primary healthcare

 General practitioner visit	43	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

 General practitioner visit at home	53.58	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

 General practitioner telephone conversation	26	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

 Community optician and optometrist	62	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Follow-up attendance—non-consultant led outpatient attendances

 District nurse	12.40	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

 Practice nurse	10.59	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

 Clinical support worker nursing (community)	31	PSSRU 2013	Community-based healthcare staff

Secondary healthcare

 Ophthalmologist visit	80	National schedule of reference costs year 2012–2013	Consultant-led outpatient attendances, follow-up


 	Total (n = 149)

Mean age ± SD, range	38.95 ± 11.48, 20-77

Years in the US ± SD	10.24 ± 10.12

Years in Baltimore ± SD	7.56 ± 9.09

Gender

Female	(98) 65.7%

Male	(51) 34.3%

Latin American Region

Mexican	(38) 25.5%

Central American	(87) 58.4%

South American	(24) 16.1%

Education (n = 146)

None	(8) 5.48%

Less than 8 years	(80) 54.79%

Some High School	(19) 13.01%

High School Graduate	(15) 10.27%

Some College	(16) 10.96%

Completed college or

higher	(8) 5.48%

Food security

No food insecurity	(74) 49.66%

Some risk for food

insecurity	(15) 10.07%

Moderate food insecurity at the household level	(31) 20.81%

Food insecure with some hunger at the household level	(29) 19.46%

BMI <30 kg/m2	(89) 59.73%

BMI >30 kg/m2	(60) 40.27%


Substance	No. of cases	Percentage

Hydrofluoric acid	135	27.44

Sulfuric acid	115	23.37

Mixed acid	41	8.33

Sodium (potassium) hydroxide	33	6.71

Nitric acid	31	6.30

Hydrochloric acid	27	5.49

Lye	18	3.66

Phenol	14	2.85

Calcium oxide	11	2.24

Bromine	10	2.03

Bitumen	8	1.63

Acetic acid	7	1.42

Liquid ammonia	7	1.42

Aromatic amino and nitro compounds	6	1.22

Dimethyl sulfate	5	1.02

m-cresol	4	0.81

Yellow phosphorous	4	0.81

Others	16	3.25


Variable

Sex [no. (%)] n = 634

Female	388 (61.2)

Age [mean: years (SD)] n = 634	56.30 (13.95)

Nationality [no. (%)] n = 619

German	610 (98.5)

Other	9 (1.5)

Marital status [no. (%)] n = 634

Single	82 (12.9)

Married	415 (65.5)

Divorced	80 (12.6)

Widowed	57 (9.0)

Living with a partner [no. (%)] n = 611	477 (78.1)

Persons at household [no. (%)] n = 605

1 person	87 (14.4)

2 persons	297 (49.1)

3 persons	114 (18.8)

4 persons	74 (12.2)

> 4 persons	33 (5.4)

Level and years of education [no. (%)] n = 632

13/12 years	100 (15.8)

10 years	191 (30.2)

9 years	322 (50.9)

Other graduation	15 (2.4)

No qualification	4 (0.6)

Employment status [no. (%)] n = 631

Working (full or part-time)	322 (51.0)

Reasons for not working [no. (%)] n = 306

Keeping house	48 (15.7)

Retired	228 (74.6)

Unemployed	27 (8.8)

Other	3 (1.0)

First time of back pain [no (%)] n = 634

Since < 1 year	77 (12.2)

Since 1-2 years	47 (7.4)

Since 2-5 years	86 (13.6)

Since 5-10 years	92 (14.5)

Since > 10 years	332 (52.4)


Sample Name	N-Call stretch lengths (bp)	Mutation found by conventional sequencing

	*GSEQ	*sPROFILER

mtDNA1	5, 6, 9, 13	4, 5	1 point mutation (in 5 base stretch)

mtDNA2	5, 6, 12	4, 5, 6	1 point mutation (in 6 base stretch)

mtDNA3	5, 6, 7, 11	4, 10	1 point mutation, 1 insertion (in 10 base stretch)

mtDNA4	5, 6, 11	4, 5	1 insertion (in 5 base stretch)

mtDNA5	5, 13	4, 5	1 insertion (in 5 base stretch)

mtDNA6	5, 7, 11	4, 5, 11	1 point mutation, 1 insertion (in 11 base stretch)

mtDNA7	5, 10	4	Entire mtDNA sequenced: 1 point mutation(in 4 N-call stretch)

mtDNA8	5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 18, 20	4, 5, 6, 8, 10,18, 20	1 point mutation (in 20 base stretch)2 point mutations (in 18 base stretch)1 point mutation (in 10 base stretch)

mtDNA9	5, 6, 9, 11, 12	4, 5, 8	2 insertions (in 8 base stretch)

mtDNA10	5, 7, 8, 9, 10	4, 5, 7, 9	1 point mutation (in 9 base stretch)

mtDNA11	5, 6, 8, 9, 12	4, 5, 8	1 point mutation (in 8 base stretch)

mtDNA12	5, 9, 10	4, 9	1 insertion (in 9 base stretch)

mtDNA13	5, 7, 8, 9, 10	4, 5, 9	1 point mutation (in 9 base stretch)

mtDNA14	5, 8, 10	4, 5	No point mutation or indel (in 5 base stretch)

mtDNA15	5, 6, 7, 11	4, 5	No point mutation or indel (in 5 base stretch)

mtDNA16	5, 7, 8, 10, 11	4, 6	No point mutation or indel (in 6 base stretch)


Spot No.	Protein Identity	Symbol	MW (kDa)

1	Aldehyde dehydrogenase,mitochondrial precursor	Aldh2	56

2	Protein disulfide-isomerase A3precursor	Pdia3/ERP57	57

3	Proteasome subunit alpha type 6	Psma6	27

4	Peptidyl-prolyl cis-transisomerase A	Ppia/CYPA	17


Criteria	Conventional	Sutureless

Operation duration	Longer	Shorter

Blood less during operation	More probable	Less probable

Safe and reliable	Less probable	More probable

Resistance of anastomosis (mechanical and pressure testing)	Less probable	More probable

Operative and post-operative complications	More probable	Less probable

Stress of surgeon and patient	More	Less

Reduce the cost of treatment	More	Less


Institution	Checklists

Step 1	Step 2	Step 3	Step 4	Step 5	Step 6	Step 7

A			4	1		2	2

B			3		1	2	5

C			1	2			1

D	1	1	2	1	2	2	4

E			3		4	3	3

F							3

G	2	2	2	2	4	4	5

Total number of failure cases at each checklist	3	3	15	6	11	13	23


No	Preparation	Dosage from	Trade name / Manufacturer	Dissolution time (mins, n=3)

pH 1.2	pH 5.8

1	Ferrous sulphate	Tablet	NAAlmus	48 ± 4	362 ± 16

2	Ferrous fumarate	Tablet	FersamalGoldshield	57 ± 6	85 ± 9

3	Ferrous gluconate	Tablet	NAZanza	64 ± 4	208 ± 12

4	Ferrous sulphate plus ascorbic acid	Controlled release tablet	Ferrograd CTeopharma	256 ± 8	–

5	Ferrous fumarate plus minerals and vitamins	Sustained release capsule	Ferroglobin B12Vitabiotics	274 ± 8	388 ± 11


	Multiple Sexual Partners	Paying Sex

	n	%	n	%

Used condom	384	33.9	469	58.5

Did not use condom	748	66.1	333	41.5


Items	1) Basic science content objectives were made clear to students	2) Basic science content was sufficiently integrated across basic science courses	3) Basic science content objectives and examination content matched closely	4) Basic science content had sufficient illustrations of clinical relevance	5) Basic science content provided relevant preparation for clerkships

% of agree	TC	57.9	37.9	56.6	43.4	65.5

RC	78.8	72.7	81.8	69.7	72.7

TC	Mean	3.48	3.20	3.46	3.26	3.64

SD	0.973	0.925	0.936	0.993	0.926

RC	Mean	4.03	3.91	4.03	3.85	3.91

SD	0.770	0.843	0.728	0.906	0.843

U (p)	*1,657.5 (0.003)	*1,401.5 (<0.0001)	*1,587.5(0.001)	*1,616.5(0.002)	2,041.0(0.153)

Cohen’s d	−0.627	−0.802	−0.680	−0.621	−0.305


Reported Adverse event	No of related AEs (no. of patients)	CTCAE-grade (range)

Fever	8 (5)	1–2

Chills	2 (2)	1

Rash	1 (1)	1

Hypotension	1 (1)	2


No.	Gene ID	P-value	Fold difference (sensitive vs resistant)	Fold difference (description)

1	SLC1A4	0.00004	2.695	Sensitive up vs resistant

2	NEK3	0.00006	−2.544	Sensitive down vs resistant

3	GLA	0.00007	2.073	Sensitive up vs resistant

4	AKNA	0.00020	4.043	Sensitive up vs resistant

5	ARHGAP27	0.00035	3.599	Sensitive up vs resistant

6	LY96	0.00045	3.796	Sensitive up vs resistant

7	DLST	0.00070	−2.001	Sensitive down vs resistant

8	MSL3	0.00132	2.237	Sensitive up vs resistant

9	SQRDL	0.00134	3.906	Sensitive up vs resistant

10	NCAPH2	0.00206	2.129	Sensitive up vs resistant

11	PLK1S1	0.00262	−2.035	Sensitive down vs resistant

12	MRI1	0.00284	2.448	Sensitive up vs resistant

13	TARS2	0.00294	−2.083	Sensitive down vs resistant

14	OBFC2A	0.00307	3.756	Sensitive up vs resistant

15	RAB8A	0.00319	2.097	Sensitive up vs resistant

16	ABHD2	0.00363	2.475	Sensitive up vs resistant

17	LMF2	0.00364	2.558	Sensitive up vs resistant

18	C6orf48	0.00367	−2.462	Sensitive down vs resistant

19	TUBA4A	0.00400	2.189	Sensitive up vs resistant

20	HSPA1B	0.00467	−2.335	Sensitive down vs resistant

21	TFEB	0.00471	−2.302	Sensitive down vs resistant

22	RNF170	0.00504	−2.34	Sensitive down vs resistant

23	SOX12	0.00569	−2.281	Sensitive down vs resistant

24	ZNFX1-AS1	0.00604	−2.482	Sensitive down vs resistant

25	C2orf69	0.00622	2.038	Sensitive up vs resistant

26	PTPN18	0.00634	2.635	Sensitive up vs resistant

27	PRKD2	0.00641	3.5	Sensitive up vs resistant

28	KHK	0.00662	2.484	Sensitive up vs resistant

29	PAQR6	0.00710	−3.645	Sensitive down vs resistant

30	HIST1H2BD	0.00763	−4.514	Sensitive down vs resistant

31	CERK	0.00776	2.481	Sensitive up vs resistant

32	UBE2K	0.00806	−2.048	Sensitive down vs resistant

33	LYSMD1	0.00814	−2.379	Sensitive down vs resistant

34	GPSM3	0.00832	5.309	Sensitive up vs resistant

35	MNAT1	0.00906	−2.144	Sensitive down vs resistant

36	WFS1	0.00911	2.397	Sensitive up vs resistant

37	MYH9	0.00923	2.011	Sensitive up vs resistant

38	CYTIP	0.00925	2.855	Sensitive up vs resistant

39	SVIP	0.00928	2.148	Sensitive up vs resistant

40	ARSA	0.00931	3.3	Sensitive up vs resistant

41	SFMBT2	0.00947	2.111	Sensitive up vs resistant

42	POLR3GL	0.00958	−2.251	Sensitive down vs resistant


Sample no.	Number of subjects	RhD	RhCcEe	RHD zygosity*	RHD allele

Micro-plate	IAT	Adsorption/elute

13001-13030	30	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD-	RHD1227A

13031-13033	3	–	–	+	CCee	RHD+/RHD-	RHD1227A

13034-13035	2	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD+	RHD1227A

13036	1	–	–	+	CCEe	RHD+/RHD-	RHD1227A

13037	1	–	–	+	CcEe	RHD+/RHD-	RHD1227A

13038	1	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD-	RHD-CE (2-5)-D

13039	1	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD-	RHD-CE (4-7)-D

13040	1	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD+	RHD93T>A

13041	1	–	–	+	Ccee	RHD+/RHD-	RHD838G>A


Method	Week 4	Week 5

Positive/total	Specificity (%)	Sensitivity (%)	Positive/total	Specificity (%)	Sensitivity (%)

FIU	18/53	72.3	83.3	12/53	83.3	80

CM	13/53	81	66.6	7/53	91.7	60

FIU+CM	8/53	91.5	66.6	6/53	93.8	60


Incremental # sub-types	P-valuesa

mRNA	Methylation

3 vs 2	0.02	<0.01

4 vs 3	0.06	0.04

5 vs 4	0.41	<0.01


Grouping variable	Variance	F-value	P-value

Year	0.73	37.86	<0.001

Farmland type	0.08	4.27	0.001

Year: Farmland type	0.13	6.48	<0.001


Health facility indicators	DRH	HFSUH	KGH	Over all

Percentage in stock of key drugs	12(80.0%)a	6(40.0%)a	11(73.3%)a	20(66.7%)

% of drugs with adequate recording	11(73.3%) a	0a	12(80.0%)a	19(63.3)

Average number of stock out days during the year for adequately recorded drugs	9.78	__	35a	30

Percentage of Expired drug	0	7(46.7%)a	6(40.0%)a	8(26.7%)a


Sociodemographic and clinical variablesa	Patients with TRD (n=12)	Comparison participants (n=10)	Statisticb	P-value

Age, years: mean (s.d.)	59.17 (8.02)	54.4 (8.37)	−1.454	0.159

Gender, male: n (%)	6 (50)	5 (50)	0	1

Education, years: mean (s.d.)	9.75 (5.91)	12.44 (3.39)	−1.253	0.219

Psychotic symptoms: n (%)	5 (41.7)

Comorbid anxiety disorder: n (%)	3 (25)

Age at onset, years: mean (s.d.)	40.58 (19.00)

Duration of current episode, weeks: mean (s.d.)	61.75 (134.46)

Number episodes: mean (s.d.)	4.08 (2.71)

HRSD1c: mean (s.d.)	31.25 (9.21)

HRSD2: mean (s.d.)	28.50 (9.52)

HRSD3: mean (s.d.)	6.75 (5.17)

HRSD4: mean (s.d.)	2.92 (2.54)

MSM: mean (s.d.)	9.33 (1.15)

Drugs: %

 Antidepressant	100

 Antipsychotics	75

 Lithium	16.7

 Anxiolytics	50

Previous ECT: %	16.7


Design theory	Definition	Example

Accessible design [46]	Provides separate design features for user groups with disabilities Usually permanent and noticeableFulfills code requirements for use by individuals with disabilities 	Provide the minimum level of accessibility required by the local building code. This can vary by region (e.g., province or state), and with different building types within the same region. For example, Ontario Building Code requires power door operators (e.g., push button, automatic sensor, etc.) on entrances to hotels, but not on entrances to stand-alone office spaces of less than 300 m2 [47].

Adaptable design [46]	Provides design features that are usable by groups with disabilities, however remain concealed or omitted until neededFeatures are either adjustable or easily and quickly added or removed in order to “adapt” the environment for specific individuals	An electronic push button is provided to open the door, but the use of the push button is optional (i.e., door will open manually).

Transgenerational design [48]	Develops products and environments that are compatible with the natural physical and sensory declines experienced during the aging process	Provide a power assist door, which augments the force applied by the user to fully open the door [49].


Group	Survivors of intimate partner violence (n =8)	Women who have not experienced violence (n = 5)	General practitioners (n = 3)

Age group	18-25: 3	18-25: 1	18-25: 0

26-50: 4	26-50: 4	26-50: 2

51-74: 1	51-74: 0	51-74: 1

Mean age	36	36.6	50.6

Number of children	None: 3	None: 3	No data

One: 2	One: 0

Two: 3	Two: 2

Employment status	Employed 1	Employed 4	Employed 3

 	Unemployed 6	Unemployed 1

Retired 1

Ethnicity	Danish 3	Danish 5	Danish 3

Other Scandinavian 1

Other ethnicity 4


Patient Characteristic	First Line	Supporting Reference

Elderly	Lamotrigine or Levetiracetam	[26, 27]

Female of reproductive age	Lamotrigine	[25-27]

Pregnant	Lamotrigine	[26, 27]

Liver failure	Levetiracetam or Lamotrigine or Gabapentina	[26, 27]

Renal failure	Lamotrigine or Valproic acidb	[26, 27]

Depression	Lamotrigine or Valproic acidb or Oxcarbazepinec	[26, 27]


Characteristic	Number (n) or Median (Range)

Median age (years)	22.5 (18–26)

Ethnicity (n)

White British	8

Pakistani British	1

Indian British	2

Canadian (various ethnicities)	4

Gender (n)

Female	15

Male	3

Median number of lifetime sexual partners	3.5 (1–8)

Median number of new sexual partners (in last 12 months)	0 (0–4)

Previous self-test use (n)

Had self-tested	11

Had not self-tested	7

Previous self-test location (n)

Home	3

University Students’ Union	5

Clinic	3


Characteristic	Focus groups (N = 5)	Interviews (N = 10)

No. participants	n = 20	n = 10

Mean age (years)	88.4 (SD ± 5.20)	88.9 (SD ± 3.60)

Gender

Male	20 % (n = 4)	-

Female	80 % (n = 16)	100 % (n = 10)

Marital status

Single	5 % (n = 1)	10 % (n = 1)

Widowed	85 % (n=17)	80 % (n = 8)

Married	5 % (n = 1)	-

Separated	-	-

Divorced	5 % (n = 1)	-

Common-law	-	-

Education

Public school	30 % (n = 6)	10 % (n = 1)

High school	45 % (n = 9)	30 % (n = 3)

College (diploma)	10 % (n = 2)	30 % (n = 3)

University (Bachelors)	5 % (n = 1)	10 % (n = 1)

University (Masters)	5 % (n = 1)	-

University (PhD/MD)	-	-

Other education	5 % (n = 1)	20 % (n = 2)

Perceived Healtha

Excellent	5 % (n = 1)	10 % (n = 1)

Very good	20 % (n = 4)	30 % (n = 3)

Good	50 % (n = 10)	40 % (n = 4)

Fair	25 % (n = 5)	20 % (n = 2)

Poor	-	-

Mean Self-Rated Independenceb

Completely independent	10 % (n = 2)	20 % (n = 2)

Very independent	25 % (n = 5)	70 % (n = 7)

Somewhat independent	25 % (n = 5)	10 % (n = 1)

Very little independence	5 % (n = 1)	-

Not at all independent	-	-


Element type of membrane	Pressure driving force bar

NF90-4040	6.96 bar

Parameters mg/L	Internal (Feed water) mg/L	Output Permeable (NF Process) mg/L

TDS	3902.78	212.58

Cl ̄1	1223.4	101.31

Na+1	812.41	67.53


Gene symbol	Description	Gene function	Gene expression in IBS	Psychiatric diseases	Reference

NGF	Nerve growth factor	Pro-inflammatory mediator; psychoneuroendocrine modulator	Overexpression (in rat model)	Anxiety, chronic alcohol consumption, depression	[71, 72]

BDNF	Brain-Derived Neurotrophic Factor	Regulation of stress response and in the biology of mood disorders	SNP	Psychiatric IBS, schizophrenia, mood disorders, PTSD	[73, 74]

COMT	Catechol	Degradative pathways of the catecholamine transmitters; metabolism of catechol drugs	SNP	Anxiety, panic disorder, and cognitive performance	[75, 76]

O-Methyltransferase

OPRM1	Mu Opiate Receptor	Principal target of endogenous opioid peptides	SNP	Pain sensitivity, opioid dependence, and social sensitivity	[77, 78]

5-HTTLPR	5-hydroxytryptamine transporter gene-linked polymorphic region	Serotonin transporter	SNP	Depression, anxiety, rectal pain ratings	[79, 80]


Recombinant strain	Transfer medium	Resistant colonies (%)

RQ7/pDH10	SVO	104.92 ± 9.57

	SVO + Kan	106.66 ± 3.56

Tm/pDH10	SVO	100.96 ± 23.72

	SVO + Kan	108.59 ± 7.54


Nucleotide (genomic)	Nucleotide (cDNA)	Amino Acid	Type	Age at Onset	Number of affected	TCGA_ID	Previous Reported

11:108098418C>T	c.G67T	p.R23X	Nonsense	71	1	TCGA-RD-A8MV*	NA

11:108106511delTTCT	c.446_449del	p.I149fs	Frameshift deletion	46	1	TCGA-BR-6564	NA

11:108121753delAG	c.1561_1562del	p.R521fs	Frameshift deletion	NA	1	TCGA-HF-7133	NA

11:108183151G>T	c.G5932T	p.E1978X	Nonsense	41,64	2	TCGA-BR-6710TCGA-BR-8077	Li and Swift et al., 2000

11:108214065delTTTCAGTGCC	c.8385_8395del	p.D2795fs	Frameshift deletion	57	1	TCGA-VQ-AA6F	NA

11:108216616T>G	c.8565T>G	p.S2855R	Missense	64	1	TCGA-BR-7196	Castellvi-Bel et al., 1999

11:108186638G>A	c.6095G>A	p.R2032K	Missense	70	1	TCGA-BR-8365	Li and Swift et al., 2000

11:108199929T>G	c.7271T>G	p.V2424G	Missense	71	1	TCGA-RD-A7BW	Stankovic et al., 1998


Component	Low-N Plot	Net Change (g N m–2)	High-N Plot	Net Change (g N m−2)

Before	After	Before	After

N input–output (g N m−2 year−1)

N input	0	5	5	0	15	15

N leaching	0.66	0.77	0.11	0.42	2.67	2.25

N retention			4.89			12.75

N storage (g N m−2)

Aboveground biomass N	15.68	9.26	−6.42	13.36	19.12	5.76

Belowground biomass N	4.59	7.29	2.71	5.54	8.12	2.58

N mass remaining in litter	0.85	1.18	0.33	1.37	1.73	0.36

Soil inorganic N	4.10	3.92	−0.18	3.50	3.94	0.44

Estimated N storage			8.11			2.72


	M5:M5	M5:G1F	M5:M3G1F	M5:G0F	M5:M3G0F	G0F:G0F

Calculated relative	0.62%	1.12%	0.11%	5.29%	0.18%	45.43%

Calculated relative to the most abundant G0F:G0F	1.36%	2.46%	0.24%	11.64%	0.40%	100%

Observed relative to the most abundant G0F:G0F	5.13%	ND	ND	12.73%	ND	100%


Socio-demographic characteristics

Mean age (range) years	21 (17 – 30)

Occupation (n)

 Farmer	3

 Factory worker	2

 Student	1

Education level (n)

 Completed secondary school	5

 Vocational high school training	1

Marital status (n)

 Married	6

Perception of economic status (n)

 Similar to other households in this area	6

Parity (n)

 Nulliparous	4

 Multiparous	2

Number of household members over prior six months, median (range)	5 (4 – 6)

Persons participant living with in the same household (n)

 Husband	6

 Mother-in-law	6

 Father-in-law	6

 Husband’s brother/sister	2

 Husband’s grandmother	1

 Mother	2

Reproductive health

 Median gestation (range) weeks	32.5 (28 – 35)

Current pregnancy (n)

 Very welcome	6

Coincidental adverse events

 No current worrying or distressing coincidental life events	6

Relationship with partner

Ever experienced fear of husband over the past year (n)

 Never	4

 Sometimes or often	2

Ever physically hurt by husband over last year (n)

 Never	6


Sociodemographic characteristics	Health-related characteristics

Males N (%)	119 (41.8)	Smokers N (%)	81 (28.4)

Mean Age in years (SD)	50.18 (10.1)	Mean Pack-years for smokers (SD)	24.82 (21.8)

Married N (%)	188 (66)	Mean BMI in Kg/m2 (SD)	26.34 (5.34)

Living alone N (%)	55 (19.3)	Diagnosis of Disease N (%)	130 (45.6)

Having children N (%)	209 (73.3)	Mean PSS score (SD)	26.35 (7.99)

Tertiary education N (%)	165 (57.9)	Mean Internal HLC score (SD)	26.12 (4.96)

Employed N (%)	214 (75.1)	Mean External HLC score (SD)	22.23 (6.04)

Working shifts N (%)	64 (22.5)	Mean Chance HLC score (SD)	16.75 (6.04)

Caregivers N (%)	22 (7.7)	SRRS score N (%)

≤150	164 (57.5)

151-299	80 (28.1)

≥300	41 (14.4)

	Mean Sleep Quality (SD)	6.16 (2.13)

Mean Health Assessment (in a scale from 1 to 10) (SD)	7.48 (1.4)


marker	# of markers	detectable strains	data quality

Minimal set of SNPs	2	known	perfect

All SNPs + VNTRs	150+15	some unknown	moderate

CDSs	~10,000	many unknown	poor

Sequence alignment	~5,300,000	arbitrary	arbitrary


		ELISA	PCR

		B. bigemina	B. bovis	B. bigemina and B. bovis	B. bigemina	B. bovis

Governorate	No. tested animals	No. of positive animals	Infection (%)	No. of positive animals	Infection (%)	No. of positive animals	Co-infection (%)	No. of positive animals	Infection (%)	No. of infected animals	Infection (%)

Kafr El-Sheikh	7	5	71.4	3	42.9	2	28.6	0	0	2	28.6

El-Beheira	74	13	17.6	15	20.3	3	4.1	0	0	1	1.4

Total	81	18	22.2	18	22.2	5	6.2	0	0	3	3.7


Author	Aims scope	Ethical dimension	Study design	Rigour	Analysis procedure	Depth/detail	Credibility	Relevance transferability	Contribution to knowledge	Overall quality

Andersen et al. (a) and (b)	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG

Apps et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Boeckxstaens et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG

Brandt	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	L	L	G	G	G

Brien et al.	VG	VG	G	G	G	G	G	G	G	G

Chang et al.	VG	G	G	G	VG	G	G	G	G	G

Chen et al. (a) and (b)	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	L	VG	VG	VG

Cicutto et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Duangpaeng et al.	VG	G	G	G	G	G	L	G	G	G

Ehrlich et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Fotokain et al.	G	VG	G	VG	VG	G	G	G	G	G

Gysels and Higginson	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Harris et al.	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Harrison et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Hillebregt et al.	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	G	VG	VG	VG

Hyde et al.	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Johnston et al. (a)	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	G	VG	VG	VG

Johnston et al. (b)	VG	G	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Kayyali et al.	VG	G	G	G	G	G	L	G	G	G

McCabe et al.	VG	G	VG	G	G	G	G	VG	VG	G

Ogunbayo et al.	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG

Panos et al.	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Robinson et al.	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG

Sheridan et al.	VG	VG	VG	G	L	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Stellefson et al.	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	G	G	VG

Summers et al.	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG

Verbrugge et al.	VG	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Wong et al.	VG	VG	VG	G	G	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Wortz et al.	VG	VG	G	G	G	VG	VG	VG	VG	VG

Young et al.	VG	VG	VG	G	G	VG	G	VG	VG	VG

Zakrisson and Hagglund	VG	G	G	G	G	VG	G	VG	VG	G


Sample	Peel	Pulp

K. pneumoniae	Activity	S. aureus	Activity	K. pneumoniae	Activity	S. aureus	Activity

Jeruk Nipis	4.2 ± 1.8a	Bactericide	3.5 ±1.4a,b	Bacteriostatic	4.1 ± 0.4a,b	Bactericide	3.1 ± 0.6a,b	Bactericide

Jeruk Purut	4.6 ± 1.2a	Bacteriostatic	4.8 ± 1.7a,b	Bactericide	5.5 ± 1.1a,b	Bactericide	3.4 ± 0.9a,b	Bactericide

Calung	5.6 ± 0.7a	Bacteriostatic	7.0 ± 1.9b	Bacteriostatic	7.5 ± 1.1b	Bactericide	6.2 ± 2.0b	Bacteriostatic

Makin	4.1 ± 0.9a	Bacteriostatic	2.5 ± 0.5a	Bactericide	3.3 ± 0.3a 	Bactericide	2.6 ± 0.6a	Bactericide

Kruet Mameh	4.3 ± 0.9a	Bactericide	4.1 ± 1.0a,b	Bactericide	6.8 ± 2.5a,b	Bacteriostatic	4.7 ± 1.5a,b	Bacteriostatic

Mentui	11.6 ± 3.5b	Bacteriostatic	4.8 ± 1.8a,b	Bacteriostatic	6.3 ± 1.0a,b	Bacteriostatic	4.1 ± 0.5a,b	Bacteriostatic


Gene symbol	Gene title	log2 fold change	P-value

VTRNA1-2	vault RNA 1-2	2.28	0.026

PGF	Placenta growth factor	0.70	0.013

RNH1	ribonuclease/angiogenin inhibitor 1	0.57	0.036

ITPK1	inositol 1,3,4-triphosphate 5/6 kinase	0.55	0.037

Mir-503	microRNA 503	0.52	0.047

RAD23A	RAD23 homolog A (S. cerevisiae)	0.52	0.013

APOC1	apolipoprotein C-I	0.50	0.037

USP15	ubiquitin specific peptidase 15	−0.87	0.026

PPP1R12A	protein phosphatase 1. regulatory (inhibitor) subunit 12A	−0.88	0.021

FNBP1L	formin binding protein 1-like	−0.89	0.046

SMC6	structural maintenance of chromosomes 6	−0.92	0.026

SMC4	structural maintenance of chromosomes 4	−0.92	0.024

ROCK2	Rho-associated. coiled-coil containing protein kinase 2	−0.92	0.021

AKAP9	A kinase (PRKA) anchor protein (yotiao) 9	−0.94	0.028

COPS2	COP9 constitutive photomorphogenic homolog subunit 2 (Arabidopsis)	−0.98	0.008

GCC2	GRIP and coiled-coil domain containing 2	−1.02	0.019

ROCK1	Rho-associated. coiled-coil containing protein kinase 1	−1.07	0.028


 	Study sample	 	All first-time fathers in Norway*

 	n	%	n	%	p-value**

Age groups	 	 	 	 	<0.001

25-34 years	11 363	76.6	163 063	77.0

35-39 years	2 693	18.2	34 291	16.2

≥40 years	776	5.2	14 408	6.8

Mother tongue other than Norwegian	1 016	6.9	46 293	21.9	<0.001

Education	 	 	 	 	<0.001

Primary school	288	2.0	29 511	13.9

Secondary school	4 862	33.7	87 850	41.5

Higher education ≤4 years	4 301	29.8	53 193	25.1

Higher education >4 years	4 984	34.5	27 635	13.1

Unknown	397	2.7	13 573	6.4


				p-value+

	CONV	UTR	UCR	Overall

N participants with dry weight reduction	12	17	14

DBP-pre: BCM Measurement [mmHg]	74 ± 15	67 ± 13	76 ± 20	0.23

DBP-pre: Start Intervention Phase [mmHg]	73 ± 14	70 ± 15	85 ± 26	0.09

DBP-post: Start Intervention Phase [mmHg]	70 ± 13	66 ± 13	75 ± 14	0.17

DBP-pre: End Intervention Phase [mmHg]	66 ± 11	64 ± 11	76 ± 13	0.02

DBP-post: End Intervention Phase [mmHg]	57 ± 15	63 ± 12	69 ± 14	0.10

Delta DBP-pre: Start-to-End In Ph. [mmHg]	−7 ± 11	−5 ± 12	−8 ± 31	0.10

Delta DBP-post: Start-to-End In Ph. [mmHg]	−12 ± 14	−3 ± 9	−6 ± 14	0.14


Health Care Organisation Chart

Processes Maps

Procedures for risk classification and reduction

Procedures and Formal Documents (i.e. budgeting, meeting minutes, etc.)

Documents of Reform Projects

Periodic Education Plan

Clinical Care Pathways

Clinical Records

Operating Theatres Registries

Performance Measurement or Appraisal Tools and Procedures

Health Care Professionals Evaluation Forms

HTA Tools and Procedures

Procedures for Privacy Management

Brochures and Booklets for Patients

Customer Satisfaction Questionnaires


Power Level	TXCTRL Register	Output Power	Current Consumption

31	0xA0FF	0 dBm	17.4 mA

27	0xA0FB	−1 dBm	16.5 mA

23	0xA0F7	−3 dBm	15.2 mA

19	0xA0F3	−5 dBm	13.9 mA

15	0xA0EF	−7 dBm	12.5 mA

11	0xA0EB	−10 dBm	11.2 mA

7	0xA0E7	−15 dBm	9.9 mA

3	0xA0E3	−25 dBm	8.5 mA


	Weeks of training (n)	Sessions/week (n)	MCT/session (min)	MCT/week (min)

ES	3	2	6	36

6	3	6	108

Total MCT	144

LP	3	2	2	12

6	3	2	36

Total MCT	48


Algorithm	Average CPU Estimation Time (ms)

ML-RL-DR	631.9

ML-RL-SDR	235.6

MM-RL-DR	368.8

MM-RL-SDR	243.9

WLS	6.8

ML-JE-Wang	245.0

MM-JE-Wang	295.9


Species (Classification) No. of genomes analyzed	Genome size (mb)	Habitat niche	Disease	References

Neisseria meningitidis (Betaproteobacteria) 5	2.2	Upper airway colonizer	Meningitis, septicemia, Waterhouse–Friderichsen syndrome	Parkhill et al. (2000a), Tettelin et al. (2000)

Neisseria gonorrhoeae (Betaproteobacteria) 1	2.1	Urethra	Gonorrhea	Oklahoma University Website

Haemophilus influenzae (Gammaproteobacteria) 6	1.9	Upper airway colonizer	Pneumonia, meningitis, bacteremia, otitis media and more	Fleischmann et al. (1995)

Streptococcus pneumoniae (Bacilli) 3	2.0	Upper airway colonizer	Pneumonia, septicemia, otitis media, peritonitis, pericarditis, meningitis, brain abscess and more	Tettelin et al. (2001)

Helicobacter pylori (Epsilonproteobacteria) 3	1.6	Stomach and duodenum	Peptic ulcer and gastric cancer	Alm et al. (1999)

Campylobacter jejuni (Epsilonproteobacteria) 6	1.6	Gastrointestinal	Main cause of diarrhea in Europe, inducer of the Guillain Barre syndrome	Parkhill et al. (2000b)

Staphylococcus aureus/MRSA (Bacilli) 14	2.8+	Nose and skin	Pneumonia, meningitis, toxic shock syndrome, septicemia and skin infections	Herron-Olson et al. (2007)

Streptococcus pyogenes (Bacilli) 14	1.9	Throat and skin	Diverse pathogenic outcomes/diseases – flesh-eating bacteria	Ferretti et al. (2001)

M. tuberculosis (Actinobacteria) 5	4.2+	Lungs, extrapulmonary locations	Tuberculosis	Cole et al. (1998)

Bacillus subtilis (Bacilli) 1	4.2	Soil	Reference bacterium	Kunst et al. (1997)

Escherichia coli (Gammaproteobacteria) 18	4.6+	Intestine, sewer	Reference bacterium	Blattner et al. (1997)


Session	Module/Topic	Content example

1. Baseline	Blood Pressure and Hypertension Definitions	"Hypertension" is the medical term for high blood pressure. A person with high blood pressure is sometimes described as "hypertensive."

Essential vs. Secondary Hypertension	Normal blood pressure is a systolic pressure of 120 or less. "Systolic" is the top number in a blood pressure reading.

Systolic and Diastolic Normal Readings

2. Seven Day	Hypertension Risk Factors	High blood pressure has many risk factors. Some you can't control. Family history - High blood pressure tends to run in families.

Other risk factors for high blood pressure are within your control: Too much sodium (salt) in your diet which can cause your body to retain fluid, which increases blood pressure.

3. Thirty Day	Tobacco and Alcohol Use	If you drink more than moderate amounts of it, alcohol can actually raise blood pressure by several points. It can also reduce the effectiveness of high blood pressure medications.

Caffeine Use

Cut back on caffeine. The role caffeine plays in blood pressure is still debatable. Drinking caffeinated beverages can temporarily cause a spike in your blood pressure, but it's unclear whether the effect is temporary or long lasting.

4. Ninety Day	BP Complications	Hypertension is frequently called the "silent killer" because it rarely causes symptoms. This is dangerous because untreated hypertension can lead to strokes, heart attacks, kidney disease, and vision loss.

Complications of Uncontrolled Blood Pressure

Very high blood pressure is dangerous. You should call your Healthcare Provider anytime day or night, if your resting systolic blood pressure is over 180 or your resting diastolic blood pressure is over 110.


Type of allergy	No. of studies	Overall accuracy (%)	Application	ANN	SVM	BN	FL

Asthma	18	82.44 ± 23.71	To classify exacerbations [10–14]	1	1	2	1

To classify severity [6, 15, 16]	–	–	1	2

To classify pathologic vs control [4, 17–19]	2	1	–	1

To classify asthma control level [8, 20]	1	–	–	1

To classify how manage their pathology [21]	1	–	–	–

To predict the clinical effect of salbutamol [22, 23]	2	–	–	–

To classify health state[24]	–	–	1	–

ADR	6	94.5 ± 2.12	To predict the posterior probability of a drug (BARDI tool) [28–30]	–	–	3	–

To predict hypersensitivity reaction (AERS database) [25–27]	–	–	3	–

Allergic rhinitis	1	88.31	To classify pathologic vs control [31]	1	–	–	–

Allergic conjunctivitis	1	100	To classify pathologic vs control [32]	1	–	–	–

Atopic dermatitis	1	96.4	To classify pathologic vs control [33]	1	–	–	–


 	Immediately pre coronary angiography	6 months after coronary angiogrpahy	P

Global EF (%)	43 ± 10	44 ± 8	p = NS

The size of infarct area (%)	32 ± 10	30 ± 10	p = NS

Infarct wall movement velocity (cm/s)	1.76 ± 0.76	1.80 ± 0.76	p = NS

End-diastolic volume (LVEDV) (ml)	132 ± 35	136 ± 48	p = NS

End-systolic volume (LVESV) (ml)	75 ± 29	76 ± 29	p = NS

Stroke volume index (SVI) (ml/m2)	29 ± 11	33 ± 15	p = NS

BNP (pg/ml)	155 ± 71	141 ± 69	p = NS

NYHA classification	II-III	II-III	p = NS


Rotated Component Matrix(a)

	Verbal Learning & Memory	Processing Speed	Attention and Working Memory	Verbal Fluency and Naming	Concept Formation

Alpha	0.883	0.731	0.555	0.457	0.179

Word List Trial 1	0.592

Word List Trial 2	0.767

Word Recognition	0.774

Word List Trial 3	0.792

Word List Cued Recall (Total)	0.829

Word List Delayed Free Recall	0.834

Choice RT Score Decile		0.559

Simple RT Right Score Decile		0.865

Simple RT Left Score Decile		0.893

DATE Score			0.373

Digit Span Backward (Span)			0.784

Digit Span Forward (Span)			0.804

President/VP Naming				0.799

F Words (30 Seconds)				0.504

Animal Naming (30 seconds)				0.456

Serial 7's				0.496

4 Word Naming					0.745

Similarities					0.732


Predictor	B	SE B	β	R2

Step 1				.05***

SES	.14	.03	.14***

City	.15	.04	.13***

5th grade	.08	.04	.08*

6th grade	.11	.04	.11***

Step 2				.08***

Gender	-.07	.03	-.08*

Ethnic status	-.15	.03	-.16***

Step 3a				.08*

Gender * ethnic status	-.60	.30	-.12*

Mediator: School Hassles

Step 3b				.20***

Gender * ethnic status	-.30	.28	-.06

School hassles	.35	.03	.35***


Subtype	Location

A	Pancreatic duct into parenchyma∗

B	Pancreatic duct through parenchyma∗

C	Intrahepatic bile ducts into parenchyma∗∗

D	Intrahepatic bile ducts through parenchyma∗∗∗


	Cross-sectional		Longitudinal

	Overweight T1	School Sample	Overweight T1	Overweight T2

n	125	172	80	80

Age	6–16	7–17	6–16	7–18

	11.02 (SD = 2.41)	11.88 (SD = 2.45)	11.29 (SD = 2.29)	12.58 (SD = 2.26)

Sex	61 female	88 female	42 female	42 female

	64 male	84 male	38 male	38 male


	Wild type	CD4−/−

Eosinophilia(cells/mg of lung tissue) (as % of total white cells)	684 ± 132 (6.3 %)	648 ± 161 (4.3 %)

Neutrophilia(cells/mg of lung tissue) (as % of total white cells)	6443 ± 1048 (45.3 %)	7361 ± 2260 (49.1 %)

Tissue mono/macs(cells/mg of lung tissue) (as % of total white cells)	639 ± 132 (4.5 %)	686 ± 179 (9.4 %)

Alveolar macs(cells/mg of lung tissue) (as % of total white cells)	292 ± 48 (2.1 %)	241 ± 25 (1.6 %)

Mast cells (cells/slide)	66 ± 12	77 ± 10


Line item category	Uganda per district (US$)	Kenya per district (US$)	% Uganda	% Kenya

Equipment	3,947	4,015	27.3	25.9

Consumables	502	91	3.5	0.6

 Salaries	5,860	8,753	40.6	56.4

 Per diems	20	84	0.1	0.5

Total personnel	5,880	8,837	40.7	57.0

 Fuel	1,426	316	9.9	2.0

 Maintenance	274	155	1.9	1.0

Total transport (excl. training)	1,700	472	11.8	3.0

Travel & accommodation (for training)	590	64	4.1	0.4

Utilities	623	797	4.3	5.1

Room rental	521	816	3.6	5.3

Fees	93	19	0.6	0.1

Other	585	401	4.1	2.6

TOTAL	14,439	15,512	100.0	100.0


Ref.	Age	Sex	Implementation period	Admission to hospital	Location	Type of plant	Approach to lesions	Healing time

2	64	M	12 h	Immediately	Left distal thigh	R. arvensis	Debridement, topical nitrofurantoin	3 weeks

3	17	M	48 h	2 days	Back, scrotum, penis, chest	R. arvensis	Wet dressing, silver sulfadiazine, collogenase	4 weeks

4	42	M	8 h	1 week	Left foot dorsum and ankle	C. testiculatus	Clorhexidine scrub + split thickness skin graft	7 days

	40	F	4 h	3 weeks	Right foot dorsum and ankle	C. testiculatus	Clorhexidine scrub + paraffin gauze	10 days

	60	F	2 h	10 days	Right foot dosrum and left knee	C. testiculatus	Clorhexidine scrub + paraffin gauze	7 days

	65	F	2 h	1 week	Left knee	C. testiculatus	Clorhexidine scrub+ paraffin gauze	15 days

	48	F	4 h	14 days	Right leg	C. falcatus	Clorhexidine scrub + paraffin gauze	2 weeks

5	52-76	F:6 M:3	12 h	NA	Both knees: 7 One knee: 2	R. constantinopolitanus	Topical antibacterial treatment	10 d

6	55	F	1 day	2 days	Right knee	R. illyricus	Wet dressing and topical antibiotics	4 days

7	58	F	2 days	5 days	Left knee	R. illyricus	Topical antibacterial cream	A few days

	54	F	1 days	3 days	Right knee	R. illyricus	Wet dressing and topical antibiotic	1 week

8	69	M	2.5 h	2 days	Left knee	C. falcatus	Wet dressing and topical fusidic acid	2 weeks

	33	F	1.5 h	2 days	Right distal leg, ankle, dorsal foot	C. falcatus	Wet dressing and topical antibiotic	3 weeks

	18	F	1 h	1 week	Left ankle, dorsal foot	C. falcatus	Wet dressing and topical antibiotic	2 weeks

9	47	F	25 min	NA	Right knee	C. falcatus	Wet dressing and topical mometasone cream	10 days

10	45	F	Overnight	2 days	Abdomen, right leg	R. damascenus	Wet dressing and topical fusidic acid	10 days

11	NA	F	NA	NA	Right ankle	C. falcatus	Wet dressing	2 weeks

Current	48	M	1 h	1 days	Right thumb	R. arvensis	Dressing with fusidic acid	3 weeks

	59	F	Overnight	3 days	Bilateral knee	R. arvensis	Clorhexidine scrub + silver sulfadiazine cream	2 weeks

	70	F	2 days	Immediately	Bilateral knee	R. arvensis	Clorhexidine scrub + silver sulfadiazine cream	10 days


Baseline characteristics	Overall no. of patients (%)	Arm A (%)	Arm B (%)	Arm C (%)

Total	19	5	8	6

Age

 Median	60	51	57.5	61.5

 Range	27–86	27–71	50–86	47–77

Sex

 Male	6 (32)	1 (20)	4 (50)	1 (17)

 Female	13 (68)	4 (80)	4 (50)	5 (83)

ECOG Performance Status

 0	10	2	4	4

 1	9	3	4	2

Stage at Trial Entry

 No evidence of disease	4 (21)	2 (40)	0 (0)	2 (33)

 Locally advanced	1 (5)	0 (0)	0 (0)	1 (17)

 Metastatic*	14 (74)	3 (60)	8 (100)	3 (50)

Prior Therapy

 Chemotherapy alone	5	1	3	1

 Chemotherapy/RT alone	2	0	1	1

 Surgery total	12	4	4	4

Surgery followed by chemotherapy	7	3	2	2

5	1	2	2

Surgery followed by chemo/RT

Prior surgical resection

 Yes	12 (63)	4 (80)	4 (50)	4 (67)

 No	7 (37)	1 (20)	4 (50)	2 (33)

Serum CEA at trial initiation (ng/mL)

 Median	4.8	5.3	4.65	7.95

 Range	1–246.7	1.1–34.2	2.1–246.7	1–18.1

Serum CA-19-9 at trial initiation (ng/mL)

 Median	532	22	1067	27

 Range	3–96,900	3–2,710	3–96,900	3–30,300


 Method 	 Precision 	 Recall 	F1

 SVM only 	 0.6 	 0.12 	 0.2

 With del+WkNN 	 0.7879 	 0.26 	 0.391

 With add+WkNN 	 0.66 	 0.33 	 0.44

 With del+SoftSL 	 0.2140 	 0.64 	 0.3208

 With add+SoftSL 	 0.4653 	 0.47 	 0.4677


	without hot compress	with hot compress

ICG-half-life [min]	5.88 ± 0.49	5.35 ± 0.5

k-value (%/min)	11.8 ± 1.0	13.0 ± 1.2

Room temperature [°C]	21.2 ± 0.8	22.1 ± 0.6

Skin temperature right upper abdomen [°C]	32.8 ± 0.9	40.6 ± 1.6

Heart rate [1/min]	68.0 ± 8.4	68.0 ± 11.0

Systolic blood pressure [mmHg]	132 ± 18	132 ± 21

Diastolic blood pressure [mmHg]	86 ± 11	87 ± 16


siRNA name	sequence

A2-3UTR 1	5′-UUAAUUCUCUCCGUAGCUCCCCC-3′

A2-3UTR 2	5′-UCUUACUGUUCCAUUGGCCCCC-3′

A2-3UTR 3	5′-AUUAUCCUUAAGAACCUAGCCCCC-3′

A2-3UTR 4	5′-UUCUUACUGUUCCAUUGGCCCCC-3′

scrambled siRNA	5′-UAAGCACGAAGCUCAGAGUCCCCC-3′


	Number of patients (%)	Return of spontaneous circulation (n)	P value	Initial survival	Final survival

				n	P value	n	P value

Age			0.027		0.149		0.390

 <1 month	2 (4.5%)	1		0		0

 1–12 months	9 (20.4%)	2		2		0

 1–8 years	13 (29.5%)	10		5		0

 >8 years	20 (45.4%)	15		12		3

Gender			1		0.753		0.290

 Female	16 (36.3%)	18		6		0

 Male	28 (63.6%)	10		13		3

Site of arrest			0.827		1		0.693

 Home	6 (13.6%)	5		3		0

 Public place	13 (29.5%)	7		5		1

 Emergency Department	3 (6.8%)	2		1		0

 Pediatric intensive care unit	18 (40.9%)	11		8		1

 Other hospital areas	4 (9%)	3		2		1

Inhospital versus out-of hospital			1		1		1

 Inhospital	22 (50%)	14		10		2

 Out-of-hospital	22 (50%)	14		9		1

Diagnosis			0.256		0.484		.06

 Heart disease or arrhythmia	18 (40.9%)	13		9		2

 Respiratory disease	1 (2.2%)	1		1		1

 Neurological disease	8 (18.1%)	5		3		0

 Infectious disease	3 (6.8%)	2		1		0

 Drowning	4 (9%)	3		2		0

 Sudden infant death syndrome	4 (9%)	0		0		0

 Traumaa	1 (2.2%)	1		0		0

 Other	2 (4.5%)	1		1		0

 Unknown	3 (6.8%)	2		2		0


Comorbidity	Classification by severity	PCs

		n	n (%)	p

Heart disease	surgical or interventional	19	5 (26)	0.26

	only medication	31	13 (42)

COPD	stage 3 or 4*	8	0 (0)	0.60

	stage 1 or 2	104	17 (16)

CNS disease	paralysis	8	2 (25)	0.69

	no paralysis	31	11 (35)

Liver disease	cirrhosis	8	5 (63)	0.16

	hepatitis	13	3 (23)

Renal dysfunction	dialysis	5	2 (40)	0.65

	no dialysis	49	15 (31)

Diabetes mellitus	regular use of insulin	16	4 (25)	0.46

	oral medication	51	8 (16)


1. Of three influenza reference strains provided to WHO (A/California/7/2009, A/California/4/2009 and A/Texas/5/2009) by NHRC and USAFSAM, the A/California/7/2009 was selected as the seed strain.

2. Two biosafety-level 3 (BSL-3) laboratories were commissioned in 2009 at NHRC in San Diego, Calif., and AFRIMS in Bangkok, Thailand; and two BSL-2 laboratories were commissioned, one at the University of Buea, Cameroon, and one on the campus of the Cameroonian Army installation in Yaoundé, Cameroon, under supervision of the Global Viral Forecasting Initiative.

3. NAMRU-3 partners reported the first definitive evidence of human cutaneous leishmaniasis from Leishmania major infections in Ghana.

4. AFRIMS published the first report of clinically significant Plasmodium falciparum malaria resistance to the potent artemisinin antimalarial drug class, spurring WHO, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and host national malaria control officials to institute aggressive measures to contain and eliminate artemisinin-resistant malaria in Southeast Asia.

5. The first documented cases of Venezuelan equine encephalitis, brucellosis, dengue and Q fever in Ecuador were reported by NMRCD-Lima, and the first laboratory-confirmed cases of leptospirosis in the border areas of Thailand and Myanmar were reported by AFRIMS.

6. AFRIMS provided timely outbreak response services to the Nepali National Public Health laboratory, ultimately characterizing (by pulse-field gel electrophoresis) nearly 6,000 cases of multidrug-resistant typhoid fever originating from a single point source, and uniformly quinolone-resistant.

7. NAMRU-3 worked closely with WHO to conduct novel A/H1N1 laboratory diagnostic training for 73 participants representing 32 different countries in a strategic and timely two-week period in May 2009.

8. NEPMU-2, NAMRU-3, and AFHSC collaboratively supported CENTCOM efforts in establishing in-theatre novel A/H1N1 testing and isolation of servicemembers deployed or deploying to sites around the world.

9. The WRAIR/USAMRU-K Malaria Diagnostics and Control Center of Excellence, established in 2003, having trained more than 600 malaria microscopists, established new malaria diagnostics training capabilities in Nigeria and Tanzania, leading to a visit by the president of Tanzania to WRAIR to establish new collaborations between the U.S. Army and Tanzania.

10. NMRCD, as part of its expansive febrile-disease surveillance network in the Amazon basin, published the first comprehensive study of the etiologies of undifferentiated febrile illness in Ecuador, documenting the first laboratory-confirmed cases of Venezualan equine encephalitis, brucellosis, dengue and Q fever in Ecuador.


Protein	Description	Other Aliases

BOD1	biorientation of chromosomes in cell division 1	FAM44B

CENPW	centromere protein W	CUG2

CENPN	centromere protein N	CENP-N

CCNB2	cyclin B2	HsT17299

CDKN3	cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 3	KAP

CKS1B	CDC28 protein kinase regulatory subunit 1B	CKS1

CKS2	CDC28 protein kinase regulatory subunit 2	CKSHS2

ERH	enhancer of rudimentary homolog (Drosophila)	DROER

GMNN	geminin, DNA replication inhibitor	Gem

HAUS1	HAUS augmin-like complex, subunit 1	CCDC5

ITGB3BP	integrin beta 3 binding protein (beta3-endonexin)	CENPR

MAD2L1	MAD2 mitotic arrest deficient-like 1 (yeast)	MAD2

MAD2L2	MAD2 mitotic arrest deficient-like 2 (yeast)	MAD2B

MITD1	microtubule interacting and trafficking domain containing 1	_

NUP37	nucleoporin 37 kDa	p37

RAN	RAN, member RAS oncogene family	Gsp1

SPC25	SPC25, NDC80 kinetochore complex component, homolog (S. cerevisiae)	SPBC25

OIP5	Opa interacting protein 5	MIS18B


Tool	Method	Symbol	Ref.	Time/Gbase

FragGeneScan	Hidden Markov Model	FGS3,FGS5	[11]	6 hours

MetaGeneAnnotator	Codon usage + start site heuristics	MGA	[9]	15 min

MetaGeneMark	Codon usage + gc-content heuristics	MGM	[8]	20 min

Orphelia	Neural network	OPH	[10]	13 hours

Prodigal	Codon usage + dynamic programming	PRD	[12]	30 min


		N =236	MV1	Validation Sample S-QoL 18 matched by age and gender N=236

1. Sociodemographics		N (%)	%	N (%)

Gender	Men	205 (86.9)	0.0	205 (86.9)

Age (years)	M (SD)2	37.9 (10.8)	0.0	37.9 (10.7)

Marital status	Single	218 (94.0)	1.7	NA6

2. Clinical characteristics	M(SD)2	%

MCSI3	Total score	21.6 (12.4)	18.6	NA

RAS4	Personal confidence and hope	31.7 (6.5)	20.8	NA

	Willingness to ask for help	10.0 (2.7)	8.9

	Goal and success orientation	19.4 (3.8)	7.2

	Reliance on others	13.6 (4.1)	12.3

	No domination by symptoms	8.9 (3.2)	11.0

SF-365	Physical Functioning	82.7 (26.4)	0.04	79.1 (22.1)

	Social Functioning	52.7 (33.5)	0.12	54.4 (29.0)

	Role—Physical Problems	74.6 (30.2)	0.12	43.9 (35.6)

	Role—Emotional Problems 	55.8 (33.4)	0.12	39.6 (41.7)

	Mental Health	48.2 (22.0)	0.12	57.2 (20.1)

	Vitality	44.0 (20.1)	0.12	48.4 (19.0)

	Bodily Pain	65.6 (32.6)	0.12	64.7 (27.0)

	General Health	54.4 (21.0)	0.12	54.8 (20.1)

	Mental composite score	34.7 (12.5)	0.12	37.3 (11.1)

	Physical composite score	51.4 (11.1)	0.12	46.9 (7.9)


Medium/Organism	Staphylococcus aureus	Staphylococcus epidermidis	Escherichia coli	Candida albicans

Mueller-Hinton agar	x	x	x	x

Blood agar	x	x	x

Blood agar-NaCl	x	x

CHROMagar Candida				x

Roosvelt-Park Institute Medium 1640 with L-glutamine	x	x	x	x

Sabouraud agar				x

Endo agar			x


Proposed legislation changes	<underline>Utilitarian</underline>	<underline>++</underline>	<underline>+</underline>	<underline>0</underline>	<underline>-</underline>	<underline>--</underline>	<underline>Rights-focused</underline>

Community supervision		<underline>x</underline>

Broad definition of mental disorder		<underline>x</underline>

Detention of DSPD		<underline>x</underline>

More general tribunal members				<underline>x</underline>

Communication amongst services		<underline>x</underline>

Overall assessment			<underline>x</underline>


Variable	Percent (%)

Fitzpatrick skin score grades 4 and 5 	79

Using sunscreen	24.2

Exposure to direct sunlight <15 min/day	71

Milk and milk product (servings/day)

 None	23

 1 to 2	64

 3 to 4	9

 >4	4

Fortified breakfast cereal (servings/week)

 None	73.6

 1 to 2	12.8

 3 to 4	12

 >4	1.6

Fish (servings/week)

 None	23

 1 to 2	46.2

 3 to 4	25.3

 >4	5.5

Cod liver oil 	17.6

Vitamin D supplement 	24.2


Patient	Age	Clinical signs	Metal ions in peripheral blood	CRP (>5 mg/L)	White cell count (>10/nl)	Duration of implantation (years)	Articulating material

 	a) Chrome (>7 μg/L)

 	b) Cobalt (>7 μg/L)

Metallosis

1	62	Pain, osteolysis around cup on x-ray	a) 21.3 μg/L	2.3 mg/L	4.55/nl	8	Metal on metal

 	b) 37.6 μg/L

2	47	Pain	a) 17.7 μg/L	16.6 mg/L	8.96/nl	5	Metal on metal

 	b) 38.90 μg/L

3	42	Pain	a) 4.06 μg/L	3.6 mg/L	9.39/nl	6	Metal on metal

 	b) 5.49 μg/L

4	71	Pain	a) 15.0ug/L	6.9 mg/L	5.89/nl	6	Metal on metal

 	b) 30.0ug/L

5	60	Non	a) 43.0 μg/L	2.0 mg/L	5.70/nl	8	Metal on metal

 	b) 64.0 μg/L

Patient	Age	Clinical signs	CRP (>5 mg/l)	White cell count (>10/nl)	Duration of implantation (years)	Articulating material

Aseptic loosening

1	70	Pain, osteolysis around cup and stem on x-ray	17.3 mg/l	4.91/nl	19	Ceramic on polyethylene

2	71	Pain, osteolysis around stem on x-ray	10.0 mg/l	8.17/nl	3	Ceramic on polyethylene

3	75	Pain, osteolysis around cup on x-ray	2.0 mg/l	5.74/nl	15	Metal on polyethylene

4	59	Pain, osteolysis around stem on x-ray	2.0 mg/l	3.53/nl	2	Ceramic on polyethylene

5	81	Pain, osteolysis around stem on x-ray	2.0 mg/l	6.92/nl	12	Metal on polyethylene

6	84	Pain, osteolysis around stem on x-ray	2.0 mg/l	6.1/nl	6	Metal on polyethylene


Antigen	Species	Source	Number	Dilution (Western)	Dilution (IHC)	Pepsin (IHC)

γ-2	Guinea pig	M. Watanabe	—	1:500	—	—

γ-2b	Rabbit	Cell Signaling Technology	8511	—	1:200	Yesc

γ-3	Guinea pig	M. Watanabe	—	1:500	—	—

γ-4	Rabbit	Abcam	ab81107	1:500	—	—

γ-5	Rabbit	M. Watanabe	—	1:500	—	—

γ-7	Rabbit	Frontiers Institute	Af720	1:500	1:500	No

γ-8	Rabbit	Frontiers Institute	Af1000	1:2000	1:1000	No

GluA1	Rabbit	Abcam	ab31232	—	1:500	Yes

GluA2	Mouse	Millipore	MAB397	1:500	1:500	Yes

c-Fos	Goat	Santa Cruz Biotechnology	sc-52-G	—	1:100	No

Actin	Mouse	Abcam	ab3280	1:5000	—	—

GFP	Chicken	Abcam	Ab13970	—	1:500	No

CGRPb	Mouse	Sigma	C7113	—	1:400	No

vGluT1b	Guinea pig	Synaptic Systems	135 304	—	1:400	No

vGluT2b	Guinea pig	Millipore	AB2251	—	1:4000	No


	PEmb-QoL questions	Number of items	Cronbach’s alpha	Average inter-item correlation (r)

Frequency of complaints	Q1	8	0.90	0.52

Activities of daily living limitations	Q4	13	0.95	0.60

Work-related problems	Q5	4	0.91	0.72

Social limitations	Q6	1	-	-

Intensity of complaints	Q7, Q8	2	0.70	0.54

Emotional complaints	Q9	10	0.92	0.52

PEmb-QoL summary score	Q1, Q4, Q5, Q6, Q7, Q8, Q9	38	0.92	0.44


Patient no.	Diagnosis	Source	PB-blast%	BM-blast%	WBC	FAB	Cytogenetics	Status

1	AML	PB	92	 	 	M1	OD	New

2	AML	PB	 	 	331.08	M1	CD34-ANLL	New

3	AML	PB	82	4.8	81.5	M2b	FLT-ITD	New

4	AML	PB	88	 	29.5	M1	CEBPA mutation; BCR-ABL(9;22)(+)	New

5	AML	PB	 	87.5	43.36	M5a	CBFβ/MYH11(+);BCR/ABL(-)	New

6	AML	PB	 	 	219.79	M1	BCR-ABL(9;22)(+), Ph (+)	New

7	AML	PB	52	 	4.64	M1	OD	New

8	AML	PB	92	 	53.48	M1	46XX[20] CD34-ANLL	Relapsed

9	AML	PB	98	 	156.9	M1	OD	New

10	AML	PB	96	 	143	M1	BCR/ABL	New

11	AML	PB	 	 	12.68	M2	OD	New

12	AML	PB	 	 	229	M1	OD	New

13	AML	PB	55	15.3	14.3	M1	OD	Relapsed

14	AML	PB	96	 	102.5	M1	OD	New

15	AML	PB	 	 	31.0	M1	OD	New

16	AML	PB	63.5	 	181.2	M0	TEL/AML1(+);C-Kit, NPM1, CEBPA, FLT3/ITD(-)	New

17	AML	PB	 	 	3.88	M3	PML-RARa(+)	Relapsed

18	AML	PB	 	>20	1.94	M6	OD	New

19	AML	PB	8	 	19.1	M5b	WT1(+)	New

20	AML	PB	 	<10	14.7	M5	FISH-t (15;17) PML-RARa (bcr3)	New

21	AML	PB	28	 	51.2	M2a	t(9;22) Bcr/abl (+); JAK2V617F(+) MLL/EVI1; MLL+	New

22	AML	PB	 	42	116.3	M4a	WT1 (+); FLT3-ILD (+)	Relapsed

23	AML	PB	 	24.5	77.4	M2b	FISH-AML/ETO (-); FLT3-ILD (+)	New


Statement regarding condition

With a typical asthmatic patient, how often do you actually talk about exercise?	Never or rarely: 12 (4.4)	Sometimes: 85 (31.1)	Usually or always: 176 (64.5)

How relevant do you think talking to asthmatic patients about exercise will be in your intended practice?	Not at all: 8 (3.0)	Somewhat: 95 (35.3)	Highly: 166 (61.7)

How much training have you had on talking to asthmatic patients about exercise?	None: 90 (33.2)	Some: 116 (42.8)	Extensive: 65 (24.0)

Data presented as n (%)

Statement regarding condition	Strongly agree	Agree	Neither agree nor disagree	Disagree	Strongly disagree

	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)	n (%)

Doctors need more training in preventive care	151 (55.1)	111 (39.6)	9 (3.2)	2 (0.7)	1 (0.4)

I will be able to provide more credible and effective counseling if I eat a healthy diet	103 (36.8)	128 (45.7)	29 (10.4)	13 (4.6)	3 (1.1)

I will be able to provide more credible and effective counseling if I exercise and stay fit	116 (42.2)	129 (46.9)	21 (7.6)	8 (2.9)	1 (0.4)

I will be able to provide more credible and effective counseling if I maintain a healthy weight	117 (42.4)	135 (48.9)	19 (6.9)	5 (1.8)	0 (0)


Damage Case	I	D1	D2	D3	D4	D5	D6	D7	D8

Damage quantity of E3 (%)	0	3 	5 	15 	18 	18 	18 	18 	18

Damage quantity of E7 (%)	0	0 	0 	0 	0 	3 	5 	15 	18


Steps	Selected questions and issues raised by the example case study “Maria Morales”

1. Identify and frame in own words: What is the underlying moral conflict?	Can a parents’ right to not have an intervention done with their child be overridden by the state (for someone else’s good)? Furthermore: Can parents exercise their will on behalf of their children?

2. Identify and frame in ethical words: Which ethical principles are relevant, how can they be specified and might they be in conflict to each other?	Overall, the principles respect for autonomy and health maximisation seem to be affected and seem to mutually exclude each other. But one also has to ask whose autonomy is at stake. Parents’ autonomy – but what about the future autonomy of children? Furthermore, the immunising doctor might be indecisive whether to advocate for autonomy, health maximisation or non-maleficence.

3. Zoom further in: Do I have all relevant information? Can I get more background information to understand all particularities?	What are the potential side effects of measles immunisation? How severe are measles for children? About how many persons (to be vaccinated against their parents’ will) can be protected, which effect would such an immunisation programme have on the incidence of measles and which side-effects could actually be prevented?

4. Are alternative solutions feasible with less moral issues/costs?	Can there be alternative approaches to mandatory measles immunisation? Can one raise immunisation rates by informing, advertising, setting incentives for parents?

5. Further Specification: Do the specifications change with more information?	If there are alternative ways that are less infringing on the respect for autonomy but rather support the health maximisation and the protection of those who cannot be immunised (ensuring non-maleficence), then these alternatives have a higher moral value.

6. Weighing: Are all conflicting principles and their specifications still of equal value?	If other measures (incentive setting, education campaigns for immunisation) can be successfully implemented elsewhere, mandatory immunisation seems less necessary. Yet, autonomy of the parents (who are safeguarding the autonomy of their children) attains even more weight.

7. What do I conclude from the specification and weighing? What would be my solution to the problem?	Mandatory measles immunisation would – in this very particular situation – not be necessary in order to achieve best health and given that it would infringe autonomy of parents (and allegedly of children), it should not be applied.

8. Integrity: Can I personally accept the conclusion drawn?	It seems to be a suitable solution to – at least first – try other measures, rather than being in charge of forcing parents and children to have children’s bodies ‘invaded’ against their ‘guards’ will.

9. Act and convince: I act according to my judgment and convince colleagues and others also based on ethical reasoning.	I try to find resources within my professional budget and start action to promote immunisation with other means.


GenBank Accession Number	Previous name	New name

CAA78718	X. laevis Apx	xShroom1

NP_597713	H. sapiens APXL2	hShroom1

CAA58534	H. sapiens APXL	hShroom2

ABD19518	M. musculus Apxl	mShroom2

AAF13269	M. musculus ShroomL	mShroom3a

AAF13270	M. musculus ShroomS	mShroom3b

NP_065910	H. sapiens Shroom	hShroom3

ABD59319	X. laevis Shroom-like	xShroom3

NP_065768	H. sapiens KIAA1202	hShroom4a

AAK95579	H. sapiens SHAP-A	hShroom4b

DQ435686	M. musculus KIAA1202	mShroom4

ABA81834	D. melanogaster Shroom	dmShroom

EAA12598	A. gambiae Shroom	agShroom

XP_392427	A. mellifera Shroom	amShroom

XP_783573	S. purpuratus Shroom	spShroom


Family	Plant species	Plant part	Extraction	Repellency%

				(minutes post application)

				60	120	180

Asteraceae	Litogyne gariepina	Roots	DCM	75	52	57

Buddlejaceae	Nuxia floribunda	Leaves	DCM/MeOH(1:1)	43	42	35

Chenopodiaceae	Chenopodium opulifolium	Roots	Water	97	17	30

Lamiaceae	Leucas martinicensis	Leaves	DCM	60	57	49

Malvaceae	Sida cordifolia	Whole Plant	DCM/MeOH(1:1)	40	23	10

Negative control			Distilled water	10	20	20

Negative control			Acetone	17	20	33

Positive control			DEET	100	100	100


HD score grade	Breed	Total

Boxer	Doberman	Great Dane	Golden Retriever	German Shepherd	Hungarian Vizla	Labrador Retriever	Rottweiler	Rhodesian Ridgeback

>18	-	1	-	-	77		10	10	-	98

13-18	-	-	1	1	139	1	26	22	3	193

9-12	3	5	2	-	147	-	30	30	6	223

7-8	-	1	-	-	20	-	5	14	1	41

4-6	-	2	-	-	13	-	1	15	4	35

1-3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	1

Total	3	9	3	1	396	1	72	92	14	591


Antibodies	Species	Dilution	Source	Code no.

P2X2	Rabbit	1:100	Alomone	APR-003

IP3R3	Mouse	1:100	Transduction Lab.	610313

Syntaxin-1	Mouse	1:100	Sigma	S0664

Serotonin	Mouse	1:100	Abcam	ab16007


No.	Statement	Rank	Z-score

Defining statements

Agrees strongly with the following statements

12	I value more time for my personal life	3	1.59

16	I want to be in a large city	3	1.53

32	The fact that subspecialists can also be general internists is important to me	2	1.20

20	I want something that pays well given how long we’ve trained	2	1.13

25	I’d like to do a combination of inpatient and outpatient	2	1.12

13	Lifestyle and more control over my practice are important	2	1.10

31	A two-year GIM fellowship is a deterrent	1	1.04

35	I want to be valued in what I’m doing	1	1.02

14	I want to be in a field that is in demand	1	1.01

Disagrees strongly with the following statements

36	GIM is a dumping ground for patients nobody wants	-2	-1.13

9	The negative interactions with attendings were important	-2	-1.21

7	GIM patients are too complex	-2	-1.33

23	I prefer an outpatient-based practice	-2	-1.33

29	I am willing to do as many years as it takes to get the job and subspecialty I want	-3	-1.94

17	I want to work in a smaller community	-3	-2.33

Distinguishing statements

Agrees with the following statements more than other factors

16	I want to be in a large city	3	1.53*

32	The fact that subspecialists can also be general internists is important to me.	2	1.20*

31	A two-year GIM fellowship is a deterrent	1	1.04*

22	Some specialties are not fairly remunerated and this is an important consideration	1	0.76*

Disagrees with the following statements more than other factors

18	The resources of a fellowship program are important	-1	-0.51

11	My decision was predominantly based on experiences as a resident	-1	-0.90*

29	I am willing to do as many years as it takes to get the job and subspecialty I want	-3	-1.93*


Culture days	Control explants	Explants+MNF

Cultured	Lost	Cultured	Lost

3	25	1	13	0

6	25	3	13	1

9	25	4	13	1

	75	8	39	2

Total: 114 explants


 	Multivariate

Odds ratio	95% CI	p

Sm	0.391	0.145-1.056	0.064

Global longitudinal strain	1.457	1.002-2.119	0.049

Global circumferential strain	1.560	0.912-2.669	0.105

Global radial strain	0.952	0.818-1.107	0.533


Average computation times [sec]	Fully automatic	Semi-automatic

CPU	GPU	CPU	GPU

Linear registration	112	109	140	130

Nonlinear registration	172	145	176	173

Combining transformations	42	42	42	42

Warping of image channels	79	78	76	75

Automatic quality assessment	35	35	36	36

Sum [sec]	440	409	470	456

Sum [min]	7	7	8	8


1a/2a/STAB ratio (mmol/mmol/mmol)	Solvent (mL)	Catalyst	Reaction time (h)	Yielda (%)

1/1/1	THF	–	50	42

1/1/1.45	THF	–	50	61

1/1/1	DCE	–	50	91

1/1.5/1.5	DCE	–	50	98

1/1/1.5	DCE	–	4	59

1/1/1.5	DCE	–	24	86

1/1/1.5	DCE	Amberlyst-15	4	89

1/1/1.5	DCE	AcOH	4	98


Characteristics	Number	Percentage (%)

Gender

Male	60	70.6

Female	25	29.4

Age

≤ 60	53	62.4

> 60	32	37.6

Nationality

The Han	60	70.6

The Zhuang	25	29.4

Histology

Squamous carcinoma	25	29.4

Adenocarcinoma	60	70.6

Differentiation

Well and moderate	58	68.2

Poor	27	31.8

Metastasis lymphatics

Yes	28	32.9

No	57	67.1

TNM stage

I + II	48	56.5

III + IV	37	43.5

Surgery status

Lobectomy	79	92.9

Pneumonectomy	6	7.1

Chemotherapy status(74 cases)

GP regimens	34	45.9

NP regimens	29	39.2

TP regimens	11	14.9

ECOG Performance status

0	22	25.9

1	63	74.1


Experiment	Climatea	Land coverb	Managed grassland areac	Atmospheric CO2 concentration	Management strategy

Ehistd	Varied for 1901–2010	Varied for 1901–2010	Varied for 1901–2010	Varied for 1901–2010	Adaptive management change algorithm simulating potential livestock density

Econtrol	Varied for 2011–2100	Constant as in 2010	Constant as in 2010	Varied for 2011–2100 (A1B scenario)	Adaptive management change algorithm simulating potential livestock density

Enoco2	Varied for 2011–2100	Constant as in 2010	Constant as in 2010	Constant as in 2010	Adaptive management change algorithm simulating potential livestock density

EfixD	Varied for 2011–2100	Constant as in 2010	Constant as in 2010	Varied for 2011–2100 (A1B scenario)	Adaptive management change algorithm with constant livestock density


			Log2(ratio)

Accession number	Gene description	Localisation	Treatment comparison

			S/M	MA/M	SA/M

At1g57770	Amine oxidase family	Chloroplast	nde	1.59	0.80

At3g14420	(S)-2-hydroxy-acid oxidase, peroxisomal, putative/glycolate oxidase, putative/short chain alpha-hydroxy acid oxidase, putative Proline oxidase, mitochondrial/osmotic stress-	Peroxisome	-1.08	1.33	nde

At3g30775	responsive proline dehydrogenase (POX) (PRO1) (ERD5)	Mitochondrion	nde	2.51	1.22

At3g53950	Glyoxal oxidase-related	Endomembrane system	nde	1.00	nde

At4g16760	Acyl-CoA oxidase (ACX1)	Peroxisome	0,87	nde	1.48

At5g65110	Acyl-CoA oxidase (ACX2)	Peroxisome	0.91	nde	1.83


Reference	No. of case reports	Patient case conditions	Prophylaxis used	Treatment that cleared infection	Isolate(s) cultured	Geographic location	Year published

Wang et al., 2011	1	Mandibulectomy with planned tissue flap reconstruction, infection and necrosis of the flap	Ciprofloxacin	Cefepime	A. hydrophila	Missouri, USA	2011

Sartor et al., 2013	1	Infection of skin flap of hand crush injury	Ciprofloxacin	Cotrimoxazole	A. hydrophila	Marseille, France	2013

Giltner et al., 2013	1	Mandibular osteotomy, necrosis of mandibular flap and wound surrounding the distraction arm device	Ciprofloxacin	Vancomycin	A. hydrophila, Morganella morganii	California, USA	2013

Wilmer et al., 2013	1	Amputation of three digits and necrosis of amputation sites	Ciprofloxacin	Co-trimoxazole	A. hydrophila	British Columbia, Canada	2013

Patel et al., 2013	1	Breast reconstruction, infection of the implant	Ciprofloxacin, vancomycin	Aztreonam	A. hydrophila	Washington D.C., USA	2013

van Alphen et al., 2014	2	Replantation of four fingers resulting in flap necrosis after leech therapy, followed by amputation	Ertapenem	Ceftriaxone and co-trimoxazole	A. hydrophila	Minnesota, USA	2014

		Replantation of two fingers failed following leech therapy, amputation	Ciprofloxacin	Cefepime, metronidazole, vancomycin; followed by ceftriaxone	A. hydrophila, Proteus vulgaris, Morganella morganii


Subscale	Group	Baseline score	One month after the onset of intervention	Two months after the onset of intervention	Between groups difference

Irritability	N-Acetylcysteine + risperidone	13.2(5.3)	10.0(4.1)	9.7(4.1)	F1,29= 4.9, P<0.035

Placebo+Risperidone	16.7(7.8)	15.5(7.9)	15.1(7.8)

Hyperactivity and Noncompliance	N-Acetylcysteine + risperidone	29.3(6.4)	21.4(7.7)	18.3(6.9)	F1,29= 2.4, P=0.12

Placebo+Risperidone	31.9(8.9)	26.8(11.0)	24.3(12.1)

Lethargy and Social Withdrawal	N-Acetylcysteine + risperidone	11.9(6.5)	9.0(5.7)	8.5(6.5)	F1,28= 0.4, P=0.53

Placebo+Risperidone	12.2(8.3)	11.0(7.8)	10.9(7.5)6

Stereotypic Behavior	N-Acetylcysteine + risperidone	6.6(4.5)	4.5(3.6)	3.9(2.7)	F1,28= 2.8, P=0.1

Placebo+Risperidone	8.5(6.3)	7.7(6.2)	7.8(6.6)

Inappropriate Speech	N-Acetylcysteine + risperidone	3.9(3.7)	3.8(3.7)	3.2(3.4)	F1,29= 1.8, P=0.1

Placebo+Risperidone	5.7(3.8)	5.3(3.7)	5.2(4.0)


Region	Side	MNI coordinates	T value

Pre-cuneus	R	4	-70	36	32.78

	L	-7	-74	42	32.12

Cuneus	R	10	76	38	32.62

	L	-10	-68	42	31.25

Inferior temporal gyrus area (includes fusiform gyrus)	R	54	-34	-26	11.18

	L	-48	-56	-14	18.78

Pre-central gyrus	R	42	-14	48	15.81

Post-central gyrus	R	44	-26	46	13.96

Superior temporal gyrus	R	50	-44	16	11.18

	L	-50	-44	18	16.92

Basal forebrain	R	22	10	-18	12.87

	L	-24	8	-18	12.87

Inferior frontal gyrus	R	42	28	16	12.18

	L	-42	24	18	12.24

Inferior frontal orbital	L	-34	40	-14	9.71

Lobe occipital Superior	R	22	-80	40	26.90

	L	-18	-80	34	25.88

Superior frontal gyrus	R	20	-8	64	6.69

	L	-20	-6	66	6.70


Characteristics	No. of cases	miR-140 expression	P value

Low (median ≤0.278)	High (median >0.278)

Age	0.667

< 60 years	22	10	12

≥ 60 years	38	18	20

Gender	0.778

 Male	33	16	17

 Female	27	12	15

Tumor size	0.602

< 5 cm	23	12	11

≥ 5 cm	37	16	21

Stage	0.045*

 I/II	28	1	27

 III/IV	32	27	5

Differentiation	0.076

 Well/moderate	24	13	11

 Poor	36	15	21

Metastasis	0.031*

 No	31	7	24

 Yes	29	21	8


Absolute Contraindications	Relative Contraindications

Clinical instability or significant pain suggestive of ruptured EP	Presence of fetal cardiac activity

Heterotopic pregnancy with viable and desired IUP	β-hCG level over 5000 mIU/mL

Liver function tests more than 2 times the upper limit of normal	An ectopic mass size greater than 4 cm in largest dimension

White blood cell count of <1500/uL	Patient refusal of blood transfusion

Platelet count <100,000/uL	Patient inability to follow up

Creatinine ≥1.5 mg/dL

Current breastfeeding

Active pulmonary disease

Active peptic ulcer disease

Moderate to severe anemia

Sensitivity to methotrexate


Item	Details	Intervention

1. Acupuncture rationale	1a) Style of acupuncture	Traditional needle acupuncture and intradermal acupuncture

1b) Reasoning for treatment provided based on historical context, literature sources, and/or consensus methods, with references where appropriate	Selected traditional acupuncture points on the 12 meridian system based on the systematic review by Yeung and clinical experiences

1c) Extent to which treatment was varied	No variation

2. Details of needling	2a) Number of needle insertions per subject per session (mean and range where relevant)	Five needle insertions per 1 session

2b) Names (or location if no standard name) of points used (uni/bilateral)	Neiguan (PC6), Sanyinjiao (SP6), Shenmen (HT7), Zhaohai (KI6), Shenmai (BL62), all unilateral.

2c) Depth of insertion, based on a specified unit of measurement or on a particular tissue level	Depth of needle insertion was at least 5 to10 mm and intradermal acupunctured was 1 to 2 mm

2d) Response sought	De-qi sensation felt by practitioner and subject

2e) Needle stimulation	No stimulation and just retention without movement Intradermal acupuncture fixed with skin tape and subjects educated to self finger-press on them at nighttime

2f) Needle retention time	Twenty-minute retention for needles, intradermal acupuncture patched 48 to 72 hours until next session

2 g) Needle type (diameter, length, and manufacturer or material)	Needles: 0.25 × 40 mm, stainless steel (Dong Bang Medical Co. Ltd, Korea)

Intradermal acupuncture: 0.18 × 1.3 × 1.5 mm, stainless steel (Dong Bang Medical Co. Ltd, Korea)

3. Treatment regimen	3a) Number of treatment sessions	Three sessions

3b) Frequency and duration of treatment sessions	Three times per week, interval of 1 to 4 days between sessions

4. Other components of treatment	4a) Details of other interventions administered to the acupuncture group	Sleep hygiene education

4b) Setting and context of treatment, including instructions to practitioners, and information and explanations to patients	Same practitioner treats every subject at every session in the same outpatient clinic

5. Practitioner background	5) Description of participating acupuncturists (qualification or professional affiliation, years in acupuncture practice, other relevant experience)	Licensed traditional Korean medicine doctor at the Kyung Hee East-West Neo Medical Center at Gangdong with more than 10 years of acupuncture treatment experience

6. Control or comparator interventions	6a) Rationale for the control or comparator in the context of the research question, with sources that justify this choice	Sham acupuncture points

6b) Precise description of the control or comparison group. If sham acupuncture or any other type of acupuncture-like control is used, provide details as for items 1 to 3 above	Same as intervention group except 2b) and 2d)

2b) No acupuncture points located away from acupuncture points at least 10 mm

2d) Without De-qi sensation


Reasons of unwillingness or hesitation	Will not be vaccinated	Indecisive	Total

Possible side effects	267 (74.8)	251 (82.0)	518 (78.1)

Lack of comprehensive field evaluation before marketing	266 (74.5)	241 (78.8)	507 (76.5)

Implementation in our country before wide implementation in other countries	199 (55.9)	184 (60.1)	383 (57.9)

Vaccines which will be administered here are different than the vaccines in the US	153 (42.9)	137 (44.9)	290 (43.8)

Do not have trust in the effectiveness of the vaccine	157 (44.0)	114 (37.3)	271 (40.9)

Do not trust Ministry of Health's practices	147 (41.2)	104 (34.0)	251 (37.9)

Due to the risk of acquiring H1N1 following vaccination	71 (19.9)	66 (21.6)	137 (20.7)

The disease is mild	59 (16.5)	34 (11.1)	93 (14.0)

Contracting the disease is safer	34 (9.5)	13 (4.2)	47 (7.1)

Other	30 (8.4)	15 (4.9)	45 (6.8)


Ionphore of mercury(II) electrodes in FIA system	LR (M)	DL (M)

4,7,13,16-tetrathenoyl-1,10-dioxa-4,7,13, 16-tetraazacyclooctadecane [23]	3.16 × 10−6–1 × 10−3	3.16 × 10−6

7,16-dithenyl-l,4,10,13-tetraoxa-7, 16-diazacyclooctadecane [28]	3.16 × 10−6–1 × 10−3	3.16 × 10−6

[This study]	5 × 10−6–1 × 10−1	5 × 10−6


	Magnesium group(n = 30)	Control group(n = 30)	P-value*

Age (y)	25 ± 3	26 ± 3	0.41

Height (cm)	162 ± 3	162 ± 3	0.42

Weight (kg)	72 ± 4	72 ± 4	0.84

Gestational age (week)	39 ± 1	39 ± 1	0.60

Duration of surgery (min)	45 ± 7	47 ± 7	0.41


Diagnostic characteristics	Two parameters	Three parameters	Four parameters

Sensitivity	96.5%	89.5%	63.2%

Specificity	66.0%	87.2%	95.7%

Positive predictive value	77.5%	89.5%	94.7%

Negative predictive value	93.9%	87.2%	68.2%

Diagnostic accuracy	82.7%	88.5%	77.9%

Youden index	62.5%	76.7%	58.9%

Kappa value	0.641	0.767	0.569


Outcome variables	Total%	Gender (%)

n = 775		Boys(n = 354)	Girls(n = 421)

Physical activity				***

≤ 2 hours MVPA/day (low)	49.4	37.3	59.6

≥ 2 hours MVPA/day (high)	50.6	62.7	40.4

Fruit and vegetable consumption				**

≤ 5 portions/day (low)	47.6	53.1	43.0

≥ 5 portions/day (high)	52.4	46.9	57.0

Groups

High PA/High FV	25.8	28.2	23.8

High PA/Low FV	24.8	34.5	16.6	***

Low PA/High FV	26.6	18.6	33.3	***

Low PA/Low FV	22.8	18.6	26.4	***


Characteristics		Sweden (%)	Italy (%)	p*

Number of respondents		272	149

Gender	Male	166 (61.0)	113 (75.8)

	Female	106 (39.0)	36 (24.2)	.002

	Missing data	0	0

Age	<40 y	28 (10.3)	18 (12.2)	ns

	40- < 54 y	170 (62.7)	87 (58.8)

	≥55 y	73 (26.9)	43 (29.1)

	Missing data	0	0

Living with partner	Yes	235 (88.8)	121 (81.2)	ns

	No	37 (11.2)	28 (18.8)

	Missing data	0	0

Number of children	0	39 (14.6)	40 (27.2)	.000

	1-2	131 (49.1)	86 (58.5)

	3 or more	97 (36.3)	21 (14.3)

	Missing data	5	2

Work-related factors

Recent degrading experiences/harassment at work	Yes	49 (18.0)	45 (30.2)	ns

	No	212 (77.9)	102 (68.5)

	Missing data	11	2

Perpetrator, superior	Yes	27 (9.9)	38 (25.5)	.000

	No	245 (90.1)	111 (74.5)

	Missing data	0	0

Perpetrator, colleague	Yes	23 (8.5)	17 (11.4)	ns

	No	249 (91.5)	132 (88.6)

	Missing data	0	0

Hours on night call, mean (SD)		8.82 (13.1)	5.93 (4.57)	.028

Taken care of in the organisation, mean (SD)		2.49 (1.03)	1.60 (0.93)	.000

Regular meetings to discuss situations at work, mean (SD)		2.92 (0.88)	2.66 (0.90)	.005

Role conflict, mean (SD)		2.93 (0.88)	3.04 (0.95)	ns

Empowering leadership, mean (SD)		2.92 (1.13)	2.57 (1.23)	.004

Work/home interface and behavioural factors

Work demands interfere with family life, mean (SD)		3.71 (0.95)	3.77 (1.01)	ns

Family life interferes with work, mean (SD)		2.66 (1.13)	2.50 (1.03)	ns

Sickness presenteeism, mean (SD)		3.19 (1.16)	3.34 (1.09)	ns

Compensatory leave, mean (SD)		1.33 (0.77)	1.25 (0.68)	ns

Psychological distress

Suicidal ideation in last 12 months, number (%)	Yes	32 (11.8)	26 (17.4)	ns

	No	235 (86.4)	120 (80.5)

	Missing data	5	3

Depression, mean (SD)		2.09 (0.47)	2.01 (0.44)	ns

Burnout exhaustion, mean (SD)		2.57 (0.51)	2.49 (0.58)	ns

Burnout disengagement, mean (SD)		2.28 (0.52)	2.17 (0.57)	ns


Scenario	Intervention	Baseline	2020 coverage targets	2025 coverage targets	2030 coverage targets

1. Sustain	All	Maintain coverage of all interventions at 2011–2013 levels

2. Accelerate	Vector controlLLINIRS	Means of 2011–2013 country-specific coverage	80% with LLIN replaced every 3 years	90% with LLIN replaced every 2 years	Maintain coverage

	Other measures	10% additional coverage with complementary control measures for resistance management

	SMC	0%	80%	95%	Maintain

	IPTp	0%	80%	90%	Maintain

	Blood tests, using RDTs or microscopy	20%		90%

		10% G6PD testing		90%

	Treatment of uncomplicated cases	2013 country-specific coverage	90% at public facilities, 50% in communities	.	75% community based treatment

	Treatment of severe cases	100% hospitalised cases treated with quinine	100% hospitalised cases treated with injectable artesunate	50% severe cases with rectal artesunate in communities	75% severe cases with rectal artesunate in communities


Dataset	# Total genes (T)	# Instances (n)	# Classes (C)

Colon tumor	2000	62	2

Central nervous system 	7129	60	2

Leukaemia	6817	72	2

Breast cancer	24481	97	2

Ovarian cancer	15154	253	2

MLL	12582	72	3

SRBCT	2308	83	4

Lung cancer	12533	181	5


 	Regression coefficient	S.E	Odds ratio	95% C.I	P value

Retrovirus status

(positive vs negative)	1.67	0.70	5.68	1.35 - 21.20	0.02

Gender (male vs female)	0.85	0.47	2.30	0.96 - 6.00	0.07

Age (years)	0.12	0.05	1.10 1	1.01 - 1.25	0.02

Constant	−1.34	0.40	 	 	<0.02


	Number	pAkt	P value

		Median	Range

Total	141	36.0	0–255.0

Ethnicity

 African-American	72	35.7	0–174.0

 Latina	69	36.6	0–255.0	0.992

Age at diagnosis

 <50 years	73	31.0	0–255.0

 ≥ 50 years	68	39.0	0–174.0	0.678

Tumor size

 <5 cm	90	32.2	0–174.0

 ≥ 5 cm	51	36.6	0–255.0	0.117

Lymph node status

 Positive	89	45.0	0–255.0

 Negative	52	27.5	0–135.0	0.001

AJCC stage

 0–II	88	33.3	0–174.0

 III–IV	53	42.0	0–255.0	0.160

Histological grade

 Well to moderately differentiated	44	30.0	0–174.0

 Poorly differentiated	97	40.8	0–255.0	0.094

ER/PR status

 ER/PR+	81	30.0	0–255.0

 ER/PR-	60	47.3	0–170.0	0.164

HER2/neu status (IHC)

 Positive	46	44.5	0–255.0

 Negative	95	30.0	0–168.9	0.009


Plant	Tissue	InsP6 (μM)	Ins(1,2,4,5,6)P5 (μM)

Zea mays	leaves	101–198 (3)	nd

Oryza sativa	leaves	9–49 (6)	nd

Arabidopsis thaliana	leaves	29–89 (9)	2–22 (5)

Arabidopsis thaliana	seedlings	47–110 (4)	nd

Nicotiana tabacum	leaves	11–24 (3)	nd

Solanum lycopersicum	leaves	39–65 (3)	nd

Trifolium repens	leaves	21 (1)	6 (1)

Acer rubrum	leaves	35 (1)	2 (1)

Ginkgo biloba	leaves	61 (1)	nd

Camelina sativa	leaves	70 (1)	6 (1)

Glycine max	leaves	nd (1)	nd

Pueraria labata	leaves	nd (1)	nd


Gene Symbol	Gene name

MBD2	Methyl-CpG binding domain protein 2

FMO3	Flavin containing monooxygenase 3

RORC	RAR-related orphan receptor C

SGCG	Sarcoglycan, gamma (35kDa dystrophin-associated glycoprotein)

PNKD	Paroxysmal nonkinesigenic dyskinesia

RNASE1	Ribonuclease, RNase A family, 1 (pancreatic)

NKRF	NFKB repressing factor

PFKM	Phosphofructokinase, muscle

MOCS1	Molybdenum cofactor synthesis 1

TRA2A	Transformer 2 alpha homolog


First author	Year	Country	Patient (M/F)	Age (year)	Technology	Lgr5 positive threshold	HR (95 % CI) of OS	HR (95 % CI) of DFS	Quality score

Liu	2014	China	363 (200/166)	59mean	IHC	NA	2.604 (1.894–3.584)	NA	7

He	2014	China	53 (29/24)	NA	IHC	NA	2.482 (1.52–4.283)	NA	7

Gao	2014	China	44 (22/20)	59median	IHC	The percentage of stained cells ≥ 10 %	2.299 (0.922–5.714)	NA	6

Wu	2012	China	192 (120/72)	62median	IHC	Multiplying the intensity and the quantity score > 5	2.768 (1.619–4.732)	NA	8

Hsu	2013	China	296 (169/127)	63.5mean	IHC	The percentage of stained cells multiplied by the intensity scores ≥180	NA	2.21 (1.11–4.37)	7

Saiqusa	2012	Japan	52 (41/11)	64.5median	IHC	The percentage of stained cells ≥ 50 %	1.061 (0.299–3.771)	4.942 (1.39–17.577)	6

Ziskin	2012	America	891 (467/424)	71.4mean	ISH	Intensity score >1	1.15 (0.95–1.4)	NA	7

Valladares-Ayerbes	2012	Spain	54 (33/21)	62.7mean	QRT-PCR	11.6	2.517 (0.924–6.858)	2.995 (1.192–7.527)	8

Takahashi	2011	Japan	180 (105/75)	NA	QRT-PCR	Median value	0.909 (0.535–1.543)	3.3 (1.49–7.33)	6

Bao	2012	China	246 (131/115)	63mean	IHC	The percentage of stained cells ≥ 5 %	1.122 (0.866–1.448)	NA	4

Peng	2010	China	169 (101/68)	57mean	IHC	The percentage of stained cells ≥ 10 %	2.16 (1.35–3.45)	NA	7

Takeda	2010	Japan	60 (32/28)	65.7mean	IHC	The percentage of stained cells ≥ 5 %	NA	NA	7


Probe set	Gene symbol	Locus	Description	Fold difference	q-value

209735_at	ABCG2	4q22	ATP-binding cassette, sub-family G (WHITE), member 2	−1.29	0.031

208868_s_at	GABARAPL1	12p13.2	GABA(A) receptor-associated protein like 1	−1.17	0.043

208813_at	GOT1	19q24.1-q25.1	glutamic-oxaloacetic transaminase 1, soluble (aspartate aminotransferase 1)	−1.17	0.043

212878_s_at	KLC1	14q32.3	kinesin light chain 1	−1.14	0.044

208002_s_at	ACOT7	1p36	acyl-CoA thioesterase 7	−1.14	0.033

213897_s_at	MRPL23	11p15.5	mitochondrial ribosomal protein L23	−1.10	0.043

211382_s_at	TACC2	10q26	transforming, acidic coiled-coil containing protein 2	−1.10	0.033

214365_at	TPM3	1q21.2	tropomyosin 3	−1.10	0.037

213738_s_at	ATP5A1	18q21	ATP synthase, H+ transporting, mitochondrial F1 complex, alpha subunit 1, cardiac muscle	−1.10	0.031

221909_at	RNFT2	12q24.22	ring finger protein, transmembrane 2	−1.10	0.033

201322_at	ATP5B	12q13.13	ATP synthase, H+ transporting, mitochondrial F1 complex, beta polypeptide	−1.10	0.049

203272_s_at	TUSC2	3p21.3	tumor suppressor candidate 2	−1.09	0.049

218332_at	BEX1	Xq22.1	brain expressed, X-linked 1	−1.09	0.033

201077_s_at	NHP2L1	NA	NHP2 non-histone chromosome protein 2-like 1 (S. cerevisiae)	−1.09	0.041

201410_at	PLEKHB2	2q21.1	pleckstrin homology domain containing, family B (evectins) member 2	−1.08	0.033

219760_at	LIN7B	19q13.3	lin-7 homolog B (C. elegans)	−1.08	0.049

221315_s_at	FGF22	19p13.3	fibroblast growth factor 22	−1.08	0.042

221706_s_at	USE1	19p13.11	unconventional SNARE in the ER 1 homolog (S. cerevisiae)	−1.07	0.042

202967_at	GSTA4	6p12.1	glutathione S-transferase alpha 4	−1.07	0.049

207839_s_at	TMEM8B	9p13.3	transmembrane protein 8B	−1.07	0.042

221746_at	UBL4A	Xq28	ubiquitin-like 4A	−1.07	0.033

208971_at	UROD	1p34	uroporphyrinogen decarboxylase	−1.07	0.043

202486_at	AFG3L2	18p11	AFG3 ATPase family gene 3-like 2 (S. cerevisiae)	−1.06	0.044


Purchase status	Condition

Loss	Near-miss

Non-purchasers	20.18 (20.41)	34.74 (25.15)

Purchasers	19.43 (9.64)	61.00 (17.94)*


	HSFD	HUFD	HDSD	HRSD

	g/Kg	g/Kg	g/Kg	g/Kg

Protein

	Casein	254.1	254.1	212.9	212.9

Lipid

	Corn oil			11.1	11.1

	Olive oil		364.5

	Lard	364.5

Carbohydrates

	Corn starch	305	305	675

	Banana starch				675

	Sucrose	33.8	33.8	67	67

Vit. & Min.	15	15	15	15

Caloric value (Kcal/g)	5.6	5.6	3.9	3.9


Normal endothelial cells	Vasculogenic mimicry cells

Similarities

VE-cadherin positive

E-selectin positive

CD34 positive

Differences

TIE-2 positive	TIE-2 negative

VEGFR-1, 2 positive	VEGFR-1, 2 negative

P-selectin positive	P-selectin negative

VCAM-1/CD106 positive	VCAM-1/CD106 negative

CD31/PECAM-1 positive	CD31/PECAM-1 negative *13 (Subpopulations PECAM-1 positive melanoma cells)

TIE-1 negative	TIE-1 positive

VEGF-C negative	VEGF-C positive

Neuropilin 1 negative	Neuropilin 1 positive

Endoglin negative	Endoglin positive

Tissue factor pathway inhibitor 1 (TFPI1) negative	Tissue factor pathway inhibitor 1 (TFPI1) positive

Laminin 5 gamma 2 chain (LAMC2) negative	Laminin 5 gamma 2 chain (LAMC2) positive

EphA-2 negative	EphA-2 positive


Agent	Normal dose	Estimated GFR (creatinine clearance: CrCl)

Zidovudine	300 mg twice a day orally	100 mg thrice a day orally

Lamivudine	150 mg twice a day orally	30–49 mL/min = 150 mg once a day orally15–29 mL/min = 100 mg once a day orally5–14 mL/min = 50 mg once a day orally<5 mL/min = 25 mg once a day orally

Stavudine	30 mg twice a day orally	26–50 mL/min = 15 mg twice a day orally<26 mL/min = 15 mg once a day orally

Didanosine	>60 kg: 200 mg twice a day orally <60 kg, 125 mg twice a day orally	30–59 mL/min = 200 mg once a day orally10–29 mL/min = 150 mg once a day orally<10 mL/min = 100 mg once a day orally30–59 mL/min = 150 mg once a day orally10–29 mL/min = 100 mg once a day orally<10 mL/min = 75 mg once a day orally

Tenofovir	300 mg once a day orally	30–49 mL/min = 300 mg every second day10–29 mL/min = 300 mg every third day<10 mL/min = 300 mg once weekly


ASIC channel type	pH sensitivity (pH50) [21]	Predominant localization	Likely cellular localization	Potential function	References

ASIC1A	5.8–6.8	Central and peripheral nervous systems	Axons, cell bodies, dendrites	Cell death following injury, epilepsy, pain signaling, neuroinflammation, neurodegeneration, fear behavior	[21–35]

ASIC1B	6.1–6.2	Peripheral nervous system	Axons, cell bodies		[21, 36]

ASIC2A	4.5–4.9	Central and peripheral nervous systems	Axons, cell bodies, dendrites	Modulate ASIC1, ASIC2b, and ASIC3 function, autonomic circulatory control	[21, 37–40]

ASIC2B	Associates with other channels to have pH sensitivity	Central and peripheral nervous systems	Axons, axons terminals, cell bodies	Modulate ASIC1 function, autonomic circulatory control, acidosis-induced neuronal death	[37, 38, 41]

ASIC3	6.4–6.6	Peripheral and central nervous systems	Axons, axons terminals, cell bodies	Pain signaling, fear conditioning with exogenous expression, anxiety and aggression	[21, 42–50]

ASIC4	Not pH sensitive	Central nervous system		Fear and anxiety through ASIC1a antagonism	[51]


Component 	Slices 	LUTs 	FFs 	Freq.

 Network stack 	1788 	 1380 	 2790 	127.6 MHz

 Adapters 	 624	 643 	 981 	 186.4 MHz

 Bus 	 284 	210 	335 	 220 MHz


Gene name	Protein description	Cellular component	Biological process	Predominant normal tissue expression	Spectral counts	Position in B596 NAS fraction (sorted by spectral counts)

CCDC86	Cytokine-induced protein with coiled-coil domain	Nucleus	Unknown	Testis	106	22/236

H2AFY	Core histone macro-H2A.1	Nucleus	Chromatine Structure	Lung	42	44/236

MECP2	Methyl-CpG-binding protein 2	Nucleus	Chromatine Structure	Brain	16	85/236

NUMA1	Nuclear mitotic apparatus protein 1	Nucleus	Cell cycle	Lung	14	90/236

LYAR	Cell growth-regulating nucleolar protein	Nucleus	Cell cycle	Testis	10	106/236

STMN2	Stathmin-2	Cytoskeleton	Microtubule polymerization	Brain	1	219/236


Sequence	Length (aa)	Position(s) in HXB2 (aa)	Positions in HIVconsv (aa)	Presence of exact match in LANL-HSD	NetMHC binding affinity (nM)	HLA allele	PEAKS score (−10logP)	Sample collection time(s) (h)

YKRWIILGLNK	11	Gag 262–272	58–68	No	11,608	A*03:01	15.30	1.5

KRWIILGLNK	10	Gag 263–272	59–68	Yes	6,379	A*03:01	16.35	2.5

IYKRWIILGLNK	12	Gag 261–272	57–68	No	1,472	A*03:01	15.32	3.5

IILGLNK	7	Gag 266–272	62–68	No	NA	A*03:01	14.82	2.5, 3.5

FPISPIETVPVKL	13	Pol 155–167	194–206	No	163 (WB)	B*07:02	56.52	3.5, 6

SPIETVPVKL	10	Pol 158–167	197–206	Yes	191 (WB)	B*07:02	41.33	2.5, 3.5, 6

AIFQSSMTK	9	Pol 313–321	351–360	Yes	20 (SB)	A*03:01	47.95	2.5, 3.5, 6

RKGGIGGYSAG	11	Pol 902–912	663–673	Yes	20,750	B*07:02	14.82	6

RTWKSLVK	8	Vif 19–26	412–419	No	39 (SB)	A*03:01	28.89	6

KIWPS-RWKPKa	10	Gag/Pol	131–140	NA	71 (WB)	A*03:01	19.25	6

KLTP-WVPAHKa	10	Env/Pol	518–527	NA	19 (SB)	A*03:01	40.52	6


No. of embryos (repeat)	Cleavage (%)	Blastocyst (%)	No. of cells in blastocysts

1356 (6)	846 (76.3 ± 4.0)	367 (26.7 ± 3.9)	54.6 ± 13.6


Cycle Rate(Hz)	AveragePhase 0%Displacement(mm)	SD ofPhase 0%Displacement(mm)	AveragePhase 50%Displacement(mm)	SD ofPhase 50%Displacement(mm)

0.2	20.01	0.04	−19.65	0.08

0.33	19.96	0.05	−19.64	0.11

1	20.73	.08	−18.87	0.59


Food Ingestion Rate (FIR) Limitation (g/day)	As	Cd	Cr	Cu	Pb	Zn

Based on target hazard quotients (THQ)

Cultured fish	Muscle	/	/	339,296	3027	1253	1018

Mixed tissues	/	5162	526,225	1057	2227	452

Wild fish	Muscle	/	10,707	49,497	6168	4894	1183

Mixed tissues	1529	1352	135,527	1506	1420	396

Based on carcinogenic risk (CR)

Cultured fish	Muscle	/	/	/	/	3684	/

Mixed tissues	/	/	/	/	6550	/

Wild fish	Muscle	/	/	/	/	14,396	/

Mixed tissues	340	/	/	/	4178	/

Based on estimated weekly intake (EWI)

Cultured fish	Muscle	/	/	465	36,284	1072	3253

Mixed tissues	/	4950	721	12,673	1907	1445

Wild fish	Muscle	/	10,267	68	73,932	4190	3780

Mixed tissues	10,475	1297	186	18,052	1216	1265


Strategy in small animal models	Advantages	Disadvantages

Knockout mice	Susceptible to a wide range of clinical isolates of viruses	Cannot study immune responses properly due to abnormal innate immunity

Can study pathogenesis of a new pathogen rapidly	Some viruses may not cause disease in knockout mice

	Cannot test drugs and vaccines effectively

	Can be age-sensitive: older mice may lose their susceptibility to the pathogen

Virus adaptation to host via sequential passaging	Can cause uniform lethality	Not always successful in creating a lethal variant

Good for screening drugs and vaccines	Can be time consuming to create a lethal variant

Wild-type mice are widely available	Not clinical isolate of virus and thus may harbour important differences in pathogenesis

Transduction with adenoviral vectors encoding the entry receptor to confer sensitivity	Useful when no other known small animal models exist (i.e., MERS)	Need to know the identity of the receptor

Can test with clinical isolate of virus	Time consuming to create the recombinant adenovirus


Patient nr	Gender	Age of onset	PMD (hours)	Disease duration (years)	ALS type

1	F	66	6	4.5	Sporadic ALS

2	F	61	Unknown	1	Sporadic ALS

3	M	56	10	3.5	Sporadic ALS

4	F	80	Unknown	2	Sporadic ALS

5	M	68	Unknown	3.5	Familial ALSa

6	F	57	9.5	3.5	Sporadic ALS

7	M	62	Unknown	4	Sporadic ALS

8	M	72	Unknown	X	Sporadic ALS

9	M	68	Unknown	3.5	Sporadic ALS

10	M	54	Unknown	1.5	Familial ALSa

11	F	58	10–11	2	Sporadic ALS


Protein	# Unique peptides	% Coverage

CUL4A	6	10.2

DDB1	4	7.9

TOP2A	14	10.1

MCM6	1	1.8

MCM7	1	1.2


Weight management services and products	Perceived availability of services and products (‘Are the following services or products available at the community pharmacy that you go to?’)	Utilization of services and products obtained (‘Have you ever used the following services or bought the following products at the community pharmacy that you go to?’)

Yes n (%)	No n (%)	Not sure n (%)	Yes n (%)	No n (%)	Not sure n (%)

Pharmacy services

 Measurement of weight	409 (56.0)	276 (37.8)	45 (6.2)	234 (32.1)	396 (54.2)	100 (13.7)

 Measurement of height	367 (50.3)	313 (42.9)	50 (6.8)	194 (26.6)	453 (62.1)	81 (11.1)

 Calculation of body mass index	337 (46.2)	337 (46.2)	56 (7.7)	157 (21.5)	494 (67.7)	79 (10.8)

 Measurement of waist/hip circumference	261 (35.8)	401 (54.9)	68 (9.3)	118 (16.2)	560 (76.7)	52 (7.1)

 Measurement of body fat percentage	250 (34.2)	395 (54.1)	83 (11.4)	89 (12.2)	586 (80.3)	55 (7.5)

 Measurement of blood pressure	591 (81.0)	127 (17.4)	12 (1.6)	260 (35.6)	306 (41.9)	164 (22.5)

 Measurement of blood glucose	581 (79.6)	133 (18.2)	16 (2.2)	234 (32.1)	338 (46.3)	158 (21.6)

 Measurement of blood cholesterol	532 (72.9)	166 (22.7)	32 (4.4)	194 (26.6)	394 (54.0)	141 (19.3)

 Advice on physical activity to achieve weight loss	353 (48.4)	312 (42.7)	64 (8.8)	211 (28.9)	402 (55.1)	117 (16.0)

 Advice on healthy eating to achieve weight loss	337 (46.2)	324 (44.4)	68 (9.3)	206 (28.2)	429 (58.8)	95 (13.0)

 Referral to doctors and/or dieticians for weight loss	189 (25.9)	439 (60.1)	102 (14.0)	43 (5.9)	645 (88.4)	42 (5.8)

 Referral to slimming centers for weight loss	141 (19.3)	477 (65.3)	109 (14.9)	35 (4.8)	653 (89.5)	41 (5.6)

 Referral to other programs	25 (3.4)	479 (65.6)	85 (11.6)	9 (1.2)	505 (69.2)	99 (13.6)

Weight management products and resources

 Supplements (e.g. powdered drinks, herbal products and other non-drug products)	553 (75.8)	151 (20.7)	26 (3.6)	181 (24.8)	385 (52.7)	164 (22.5)

 Creams	323 (44.2)	270 (37.0)	137 (18.8)	55 (7.5)	648 (88.8)	27 (3.7)

 Oral medications	388 (53.2)	238 (32.6)	104 (14.2)	76 (10.4)	553 (75.8)	100 (13.7)

 Information materials (e.g. brochures, leaflets, popular diet books and video CDs)	283 (38.8)	308 (42.2)	139 (19.0)	80 (11.0)	589 (80.7)	61 (8.4)


Therapeutictarget	Treatment	Route ofadministration	Result

Indeterminate	Hypothermia	IV	−

	Hypothermia	Peritoneal	−

MMTP	Delcasetrib	IV before reperfusion	−

	TR040303	IV before reperfusion	−

	Bendavia	IV before reperfusion	−

	Ciclosporin A	IV before reperfusion	+ −

Nitric oxidesignaling	Nitrite sodium	IV	−

	Nitrite sodium	Intracoronary	−

	Nitric oxide	Inhaled	−

Pro-survivalkinase	Copertide	IV	+

	Exenatide	IV	+

Indeterminate	Metoprolol	IV	+

Indeterminate	Post-conditioning	IC balloon inflations	+ + − −

Indeterminate	RIC	Limb ischemia	+ + + ++ + + −


DFTD	CTVT

∼ 16 years old	∼ 10 000 years old

Passed by biting	Passed during coitus

Close to 100% mortality	Not fatal (Progression, Stationary and Regression phases)

No significant infiltration of lymphocytes	Significant infiltration of lymphocytes during regression

Schwann cell origin	Haematopoietic origin (perhaps a macrophage cell)

MHC class I and class II negative	MHC class I and class II negative during progression

Epigenetic regulation of MHC genes	Epigenetic regulation of MHC genes

Sensitive to interferon-γ	Sensitive to interferon-γ

Unknown role of immunosuppressive cytokines	Cytokine regulation of immune response by transforming growth factor-β and interleukin-6

Low genetic diversity of host	Host is outbred


Cytokine	Luminex	Affymetrix

IL-1α	2.1	5.4

IL-1β	5.4	2.6

IL-2	Spore only, low expressed	Spore only, low expressed

IL-3	Spore only, low expressed	Not expressed

IL-4	Spore only, low expressed	Not expressed

IL-5	Not expressed	Mock only, low expressed

IL-6	23.7	27.2

IL-7	1.4	0.7

IL-8	0.9	1.5

IL-10	4.6	2.5

IL-12p40	1.4	3.1

IL-12p70	2.0	Not available

IL-13	Spore only, low expressed	1.4

IL-15	Not expressed	1.5

GM-CSF	3.6	1.6

IFN-γ	5.8	3.8

TNF-α	51.6	10.6

Eotaxin	Spore only, low expressed	1.1

MCP-1	2.0	1.7

RANTES	4.7	3.3

MIP-1α	1.7	3.0

IP-10	1.7	Not available

IFN-α	0.8	2.0


Interventions	Mean difference	Standard error	p-value	95% confidence interval

FISA&DM	FIS	−6.80	3.60	0.59	−16.93 to 3.34

 	Promotion of the survey	−11.11*	3.57	0.02	−21.21 to −1.01

 	Multiple letters	−16.65*	3.63	<0.001	−26.89 to −6.40

 	Control	−10.02	3.60	0.06	−20.19 to 0.15

FIS	Promotion of the survey	−4.32	3.47	1.00	−14.13 to 5.50

 	Multiple letters	−9.65	3.53	0.06	−19.82 to 0.12

 	Control	−3.22	3.50	1.00	−13.11 to 6.67

Promotion of the survey	Multiple letters	−5.53	3.51	1.00	−15.46 to 4.40

 	Control	1.10	3.50	1.00	−8.76 to 10.95

Multiple letters	Control	6.63	3.54	0.62	−3.38 to 16.63


BaselineUsual Activities	Specific "usually enjoyed activity" identified

	No	Yes

	n (%)	n (%)	Importance(IQR)	Total

No problems	46 (48.9)	142 (45.7)	76 (30)	188

Some problems	45 (47.9)	142 (45.7)	88 (30)	187

Unable	3 (3.2)	27 (8.7)	93 (21)	30

Total	94	311		405

12 monthsUsual Activities	12 months "able to take part in usually enjoyed activity"

	no	yes	Total

No problems	21 (42.0)	120 (63.5)	141

Some problems	24 (48.0)	66 (34.9)	90

Unable	5 (10.0)	3 (1.6)	8

Total	50	189	239


	Cohort N = 151

Age (mean years ± SD)	30 ± 11

<18 years of age	43 (28)

Range (years)	13–61

Race

African-American	57 (38)

Caucasian	57 (38)

Hispanic	37 (24)

County of residence

Dallas	130 (86)

Out of county (TX)	18 (12)

Out of state	3 (2)

Mode of transport to the hospital

Emergency medical services	16 (11)

Police	69 (46)

Self	64 (42)

Unknown	2 (1)

Trauma service evaluation	15 (10)


	Estimate	Standard Error	Z Value	P(>|Z|)

Clean and Income	−0.00	0.00	− 0.75	0.45

Clean and White	−0.95	1.52	−0.63	0.53

Clogged and Income	0.00	0.00	0.85	0.40

Clogged and White	0.64	1.70	0.38	0.70

Bottle and Income	−0.00	0.00	−0.89	0.37

Bottle and White	−0.31	1.47	−0.21	0.83

Handicap and Income	−0.00	0.00	−2.09	0.04

Handicap and White	1.42	1.65	0.86	0.39


Factors	ReactivationN = 97	No ReactivationN = 189	UnivariateP value	MultivariateP Value	Odds ratio(95% CI)

Hematological malignancy			0.332	NA

 AML	29	46

ALL	3	10

Lymphoma	46	96

CML/MPN	1	5

CLL	2	3

Myeloma	10	21

MDS/AA	6	8

Age > 65 year			0.052	0.198

 Yes	11	57

 No	86	132

Gender			0.781	NA

 Man	55	106

 Woman	42	83

Hepatitis C			0.180	0.453

 Yes	4	4

 No	93	185

Liver cirrhosis			0.906	NA

 Yes	4	7

 No	93	182

Hepatocellular carcinoma			0.032	<0.001	0.101(0.029–0.355)

 Yes	3	1

 No	94	188

Diabetes mellitus			0.388	NA

 Yes	10	20

 No	87	169

Allogeneic transplantation			0.113	0.269

 Yes	28	31

 No	69	158

Antiviral prophylaxis			<0.001	<0.001	4.631(2.902–7.390)

 Yes	26	145

 No	71	44


Author	 Design	Subjects	Most common sport	Cardiovascular disease found

Corrado et al. [1]	Prospective	23/300 athletes, ages 12–35 	(1) Soccer(2) Swimming	(1) CADa(2) ARVC

de Noronha et al. [6]	Prospective	118 cases, mean age 28	(1) Soccer(2) Running	(1) Isolated LVHb(2) Normal heart(3) ARVC

Maron et al. [3]	Retrospective	60 international athletes (ages 19 ± 3) and 213 US Athletes (ages 14 ± 9 years)	Soccer	Commotio Cordis

Maron et al. [2]	Retrospective	1866 athletes (ages 16 ± 4)	(1) Basketball(2) Football(3) Soccer	(1) HCMb (2) CCA

Bille et al. [4]	Retrospective	388 athletes 	(1) Soccer(2) Running(3) Basketball	(1) HCMb (2) CCA

Allouche et al. [7]	Retrospective	32 athletes	(1) Running(2) Soccer	(1) HCMb (2) ARVC

Suárez-Mier and Aguilera [8]	Retrospective	61 athletes, mean ages 31.9 ± 14	(1) Cycling(2) Soccer	(1) ARVCc (2) Isolated LVH

McConnell and Collins [9]	Case study	24 y.o. female	Soccer	Hypoplastic left coronary artery

Chen and Sheppard [10]	Case study	22 y.o. male	Soccer	Ebstein anomaly due to hemangioma

Zeller et al. [11]	Case study	26 y.o. male	Soccer	Marked early repolarization on ECG two weeks prior to SCD; autopsy was normal

Pellissier et al. [12]	Case study	15 y.o. male	Soccer	Left coronary artery arising from the right anterior sinus with an oblique course between the aorta and the pulmonary artery trunk

Pacchioni et al. [13]	Case study	18 y.o. male	Soccer	ARVC

Ronneberger et al. [14]	Case study	8 y.o. male	Soccer	Myxomatous mitral valve with lacerations of the posterior cusp and the left vestibular endocardium and left ventricular hypertrophy

Ottaviani et al. [15]	Case study	13 y.o. male	Soccer	Abnormal origin of left coronary artery from the right aortic sinus of Valsalva

Iskandar and Thompson [16]	Case study	14 y.o male 	Soccer	Acute angle takeoff of the left main coronary artery and a transverse slit-like opening with a fibrous cushion, which created a kink near its origin

Meel [17]	Case study	22 y.o. male	Soccer	Abnormal origin of the left coronary artery from the right sinus of Valsalva


Participanta	Classifications for sensory profile quadrantsb	Number of quadrants affected

Low registration	Sensation seeking	Sensory sensitivity	Sensation avoiding

1	More than most	Less than most	More than most	More than most	4

2	More than most	Similar to most	More than most	More than most	3

3	More than most	Less than most	Much more than most	More than most	4

4	More than most	Similar to most	More than most	More than most	3

5	More than most	Similar to most	More than most	More than most	3

6	More than most	Similar to most	More than most	Similar to most	2

7	Similar to most	Similar to most	Less than most	Similar to most	1

8	More than most	Less than most	Similar to most	Similar to most	2

9	Similar to most	Less than most	Similar to most	Similar to most	1

10	Similar to most	Less than most	Much more than most	Similar to most	2

11	More than most	Less than most	More than most	Similar to most	3

12	More than most	Similar to most	More than most	More than most	3

13	Much more most	Similar to most	Much more than most	More than most	3

14	Much more most	Similar to most	More than most	Similar to most	2

Percentage of participants scoring outside the normal range	79	43	93	50

Average quadrant scores, ranges and standard deviations	M = 43 (26–57)	M = 44 (35–54)	M = 42 (22–55)	M = 43 (28–55)

SD = 7.48	SD = 6.22	SD = 8.84	SD = 8.57


Arthrosis grade on MRI	Preoperatively	Postoperatively

0	8	7

1	17	13

2	23	25

3	7	8

4	6	8

P Value	Z = − 0.911	P = 0.36


	True	Healthy Control	sALS Patient	ALS Mutation Carrier	fALS Patient

Prediction

healthy Control	14(16)	6(-)	0(1)	0(0)

sALS Patient	3(-)	8(-)	2(-)	0(-)

ALS Mutation Carrier	0(1)	2(-)	8(7)	1(2)

fALS Patient	0(0)	2(-)	2(4)	5(4)


Nr.	Effect	Effect type	Estimate	Std-Error	P-value	N

a	Age class (mother = 0)	Fixed	−0.1	0.25	0.672	2

Site (Tuanan = 0)	Fixed	−0.52	0.25	0.035	2

Individual	Random	-	-	-	15 (32)

b	Age	Fixed	0.02	0.1	0.863	cont.

Site (Tuanan = 0)	Fixed	−0.69	0.3	0.021	2

Individual	Random	-	-	-	8 (17)