Tissue	Content of poncirin (mg/g FW)

flavedo	0.15 ± 0.01

albedo	1.37 ± 0.09

segment membrane	0.52 ± 0.01

juice sac	0.07 ± 0.01


Problem	Possible Reason	Solution

Genome is not fragmented after sonication.	Buffer condition is not adaptable for sonication.	Purify the DNA. We used QIAGEN PCR Purification Kit, eluted in EB to have it work.

Nothing is visible on the gel after 1 hr electrophoresis during library generation.	When the starting amount of DNA is small or there is significant DNA loss during the process for various reasons, it is possible that the DNA is smeared over a wide range after an hour of electrophoresis and not visible on the gel.	It is good to check the gel to see if the DNA is present after ~10 min run when the DNA is not smeared at a wide range.Even though nothing is visible, it is highly possible that the DNA is still present. Proceed to the next step regardless and see if PCR amplifies anything.

Cannot collect ~400 ul after the stripping step.	Gasket slide was re-used.The array slide was lifted up too quickly.Different buffer was used for the 95C stripping process.	Do not re-use the gasket slide.The solution can be flushed to a collection boat and collected.When using multi-array slides like 2×105 K, 4×44 K or 8×15 K, it is still possible to run the capture protocol as indicated. After the stripping, the array slide should be slowly lifted up to prevent contamination. The solution tends to stay within the gaskets.

Not enough DNA amplified after the first stripping.	Stripping was not efficient.	Another stripping process can be done and checked if there were left over genomic fragments hybridized on the probes. Since it does not matter if the stripped solution contains contaminants as long as the contaminants do not have adapters ligated at the end, it is possible to thoroughly continue the stripping process until no products get amplified.


ScheduleTreatment day (TD)Time point (T)	T0 (Screening, baseline and prediagnosis tests)	T1 (Treatment and discharge)	T2 3M	T3 6M	T4 12M	Withdrawal

TD 1*	TD 2	TD 3	TD 4	TD 5	Rescue therapy†	Discharge

Screening with diagnostic algorithm and core investigations including physical examination	X

Patient information and informed consent	X

Eligibility form	X

Registration form	X

Prediagnosis tests—for example, MRI and AQP4	X

Randomisation	X

Biobank samples	X									X

ASIA Impairment Score (A-E)	X						X	X	X	P	X

ASIA Motor and Sensory Score	X						X	X	X	S	X

Neurostatus scoring (Kurtzke functional systems and EDSS)	X							X	X	S	X

8–12 years EQ-5D-Y	X								X	S	X

≥13 years EQ-5D-5L	X								X	S	X

≥13 years SCI QoL Basic data set									X	S	X

CSRI									X	S	X

≥13 years SCI Bladder										T	X

≥13 years SCI Bowel										T	X

5–7 years Peds QL										T	X

2–4 years Peds QL										T	X

Treatment form						X

Concomitant medications								X	X	X	X

Discharge form								X

Rescue therapy form (if needed)†							X

Relapse form (at any time point if needed)†								X	X	X	X

Adverse events‡		X	X	X	X	X

Study Status Form									X	X	X

Withdrawal form (at any time point)†												X


Study	Number of patients	Follow-up (days)	Baseline comparison	Adverse event	Outcomes measure (primary/secondary)	Treatment group dosage	Types of stroke

Cai et al. 2000 [29]	256	14	Y	N	TER, CSS	XNJ 30–60 mL/d + CWM	IS

Chen et al. 2004a [30]	100	14	Y	N	TER	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	IS

Chen et al. 2004b [31]	70	14	Y	N	TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1, ESSS	XNJ 40 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Chen 2013 [32]	202	21	Y	Y	NIHSS, IL-9	XNJ 30 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Lei 2013 [33]	120	28	Y	Y	TER	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Li 2011 [34]	118	14	Y	N	TNF-α, IL-6, NIHSS	XNJ 40 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Liu and Bai 2004 [35]	70	14	Y	N	TNF-α, IL-6, IL-8, ESSS	XNJ 40 mL/d + CWM	ICH/IS

Ming et al. 2010 [36]	91	21	Y	N	ESS,	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Wang 2013 [37]	155	14	Y	N	TER	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	ICH/IS/SAH

Wei and Li 2009 [13]	120	28	Y	Y	TER, CSS	XNJ 10 mL/d + CWM	ICH

Zhang et al. 2012 [38]	65	14	Y	N	NIHSS	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	IS

Zhang et al. 2013 [39]	63	14	Y	N	NIHSS	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	IS

Zhou et al. 2005 [40]	84	28	Y	N	TER	XNJ 20 mL/d + CWM	ICH


	No Bone Graft(n = 18)	Bone Graft(n = 29)	p value

Pain severity, neck	10.37	17.01	0.139

Pain severity, arm	7.22	6.44	0.628

Functional disability	18.78	21.01	0.877

Psychological distress	19.14	38.37	0.024

Physical symptoms other than neck/arm pain	12.96	18.07	0.344

Healthcare utilisation	24.44	22.07	0.415


Locality	Taxon	Site	Latitude	Longitude	Depth (m)	No. of tube fragments*

Antarctic	Sclerolinum sp.	Hook Ridge Site 1	−62.1969	−57.2975	1174	686*

		Hook Ridge Site 2	−62.1924	−57.2783	1054	87*

		Kemp Caldera	−59.6948	−28.35	1432	95*

Arctic	S. contortum	Loki’s Castle CG2009	73.5662	8.1585	2357	33*

		Loki’s Castle CG2008	73.5662–73.5683	8.1585–8.1563	-	8*

		HMMV CG2010	71.9975–71.9999	14.7329–14.7316	1262	1*

		HMMV VICKING 2006	72.0013	14.7225	1270	50+

GoM	S. contortum	Walker Ridge WR269	26.6833	−91.65	1954	21*


		Recalling and understanding (part A)	Applying (part B)	Total (part A & B)

N	M	SD	Min–max	M	SD	Min–max	M	SD	Min–max

Pre-test	7	3.07	1.26	1–5	0.86	0.69	0–2	3.93	1.16	3–6

Post-test	7	5.07	1.15	4–7	1.57	0.98	0–3	6.64	1.27	5–9

Follow-up	7	5.14	1.56	4–8	1.29	0.95	0–3	6.43	2.16	5–11


	Percentage agree or strongly agree (n = 37)

Knowledge translation was hampered by a lack of incentives for KTE activities within organisations that conduct health systems and policy research (HSPR)	38

Organisations that conduct HSPR made available financial and human resources to assist with KTE activities	24

Organisations that conduct HSPR were not seen as a credible source of research	14


 	 	ID code	Sex	Age (Years)	Time in facility (Years)	Staff position

Dyads

 	Dyad 1

 	 	Resident	R1	F	84	6

 	 	Family	F1	F	55

 	Dyad 2

 	 	Resident	R2	F	79	1.5

 	 	Family	F2	F	56

 	Dyad 3

 	 	Resident	R3	M	89	1

 	 	Family	F3	F	43

 	Dyad 4

 	 	Resident	R4	F	84	2

 	 	Family	F4	M	53

 	Dyad 5

 	 	Resident	R5	F	89	3

 	 	Family	F5(a)	F	57

 	 	Family	F5(b)	M	62

Staff

 	Staff 1	S1	F	54	 	Lifestyle manager

 	Staff 2	S2	F	41	 	Personal Care Worker

 	Staff 3	S3	F	50	 	Care Manager

 	Staff 4	S4	F	-	 	Personal Care Worker

 	Staff 5	S5	F	60	 	Enrolled Nurse

 	Staff 6	S6	F	52	 	Diversional Therapist

 	Staff 7	S7	F	30	 	Endorsed Enrolled Nurse


Mitochondrial abnormality	MS	CFS	PD	AUT	MDD	Schiz	BPD

Ultrastructural abnormalities in mitochondria	+	++	+	+	+	+++	+

Evidence to shift in energy production via glycolysis	+	++	++	++		++	++

Mitochondrial dysfunction in peripheral immune cells	+	++	++	++	++	++	+

Mitochondria DNA damage	+					++

Damage to the electron transport chain	++		+++	+		++	+

High lactate in brain or cerebrospinal fluid	+	+	+	+	+	++	+

Bioenergetic impairment Skeletal muscle		+++			+

Decreased mitochondrial membrane potential		+	+


	Age/Gender	Experience in Using EPW	Type of Disabilities

Motor	Cognition

User I	60-year-old male	Yes	Lower body amputation by diabetes	Low cognition/reflexes by dementia

User II	48-year-old female	Yes	Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis	-

User III	32-year-old female	Yes	Cerebral palsy	-

User IV	73-year-old male	Yes	Lack of strength	Weak senile dementia

User V	28-year-old female	Yes	Spinal cord injury	-


 Diagnosis	12 to 14 years old	15 to 17 years old

(n = 9)	(n = 7)

ADHD	3	1

ODD		2

MDD		2

PTSD	1

Social phobia	1

ADHD/DBD	2

ADHD/ODD	1

ADHD/MDD		2

ADHD/PTSD/ODD	1


Genus/subgenus	Species	No. of unique conotoxin precursors	No. of unique mature toxins	No. of gene superfamilies	No. of cysteine frameworks	Most abundant gene superfamily and frequencya	Main diet summarized from [29, 42]

Puncticulis	arenatus	326	256	36	31	O1, (20.3 %)	eunicids, nereids, capitellids

Californiconus	californicus	185	164	30	21	O1, (20.1 %)	molluscs, polychaetes, fish

Virroconus	coronatus	331	286	32	30	O1, (19.6 %)	eunicids, capitellids

Virroconus	ebraeus	75	69	27	23	M, (31.9 %)	eunicids, nereids

Stephanoconus	imperialis	70	66	20	19	P, (16.7 %)	amphinomids

Lividoconus	lividus	244	204	31	25	O1, (10.7 %)	enteropneusts, terebellids

Conus	marmoreus	81	69	14	16	M, (26.1 %)	gastropods

Lividoconus	quercinus	97	78	25	23	O1, (15.4 %)	enteropneusts, sabellids

Rhizoconus	rattus	102	89	28	30	con-ikot-ikot, (18 %)	eunicids

Harmoniconus	sponsalis	401	338	35	29	O1, (28.1 %)	eunicids, nereids

Strategoconus	varius	198	168	29	24	M, (10.7 %)	polychaetes

Virgiconus	Virgo	113	78	25	21	O1, (24.4 %)	terebellids


Symptoms	EG	YG	P

Heartburn	1.6 ± 0.89	2.8 ± 0.76	<0.05

Acid regurgitation	1.6 ± 0.98	2.4 ± 0.91	<0.05

Solid food dysphagia	1.7 ± 0.78	0.6 ± 0.22	<0.05

Chest pain	1.7 ± 0.84	1.5 ± 0.89	>0.05

Respiratory complication	1.9 ± 1.06	1.1 ± 0.47	<0.05


	Cases	Deaths

Cervical cancer	1344	492

CIN2+	4528	–

CIN1	2532	–

Vaginal cancer	14	4

Vulvar cancer	20	6

Anal cancer females	242	75

Anal cancer males	79	34

Genital warts females	33,091	–

Genital warts males	24,258	–

Total	66,108	611


Antimicrobial agents	Breakpoint for resistance (mg/L)	% Resistant	Range (mg/L)	MIC50 (mg/L)	MIC90 (mg/L)

Imipenem	≥8	100	8–128	32	64

Meropenem	≥8	99	4–128	32	64

Amikacin	≥64	87	0.5 – > 512	>512	>512

Ciprofloxacin	≥4	100	32 – > 512	>512	>512

Colistin	≥4	5	0.125–16	0.5	1

Tigecycline	-	-	≤0.125–16	1	8


Mean of self-monitored FPG values from preceding 3 days	Adjust of nocturnal basal insulin dosage (IU/day)

<90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L)	−1

90-130 mg/dL (5.0-7.2 mmol/L)	No adjustment

>130 mg/dL (7.2 mmol/L)	+2

Mean of self-monitored pre-dinner values from preceding 3 days	Adjust of diurnal basal insulin dosage (IU/day)

<90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L)	−2

90-130 mg/dL (5.0-7.2 mmol/L)	No adjustment

>130 mg/dL (7.2 mmol/L)	+2

Mean of self-monitored postprandial values from preceding 3 days	Adjust of prandial insulin dosage (IU/day)

<90 mg/dL (5.0 mmol/L)	−1

90-180 mg/dL (5.0-10.0 mmol/L)	No adjustment

>180 mg/dL (10.0 mmol/L)	+1


System	Prosthetic crown

8 mm	13 mm

Neodent	31.43 ±15.44Aa	28.13 ± 12.66Aa

Bicon	26.18 ± 13.00Ba	30.92 ± 14.89Aa


	Number of patients (percentage of sample in parentheses)

Age

<=60 years	1743 (65.1%)

>60 years	936 (34.9%)

Gender

Female	1439 (53.7%)

Male	1240 (46.3%)

Body mass index

<=25 kg/m2	309 (11.5%)

>25 to < =30 kg/m2	1003 (37.4%)

= > 30 kg/m2	1367 (51.0%)

Smoking status

Current smoker	464 (17.3%)

Ex-smoker	301 (11.2%)

Non-smoker	1914 (71.4%)

Country

Eastern European countries	1763 (65.8%)

Western-central European countries	916 (34.2%)


	Intrathecal morphine (n = 50)	Epidural analgesia (n = 50)	P

Patients with complications	8 (16%)	11 (22%)	.59

 Biloma	1 (2%)	1 (2%)	.89

 Hepatic insufficiency	2 (4%)	3 (6%)	.88

 Wound infection	3 (6%)	4 (8%)	.73

 Pleural effusion	1 (2%)	2 (4%)	.78

 Pneumonia	—	1 (2%)	—

 Urinary tract infection	1 (2%)	—	—


Results of TST	Results of T.SPOT.TB

Negative	Positive	Indeterminate	Total

Negative	79	3	4	86

Positive	4	2	0	6

Total	83	5	4	92


Criteria/Quantitative description	Score

Background blood/clot

Large amount; great compromise in diagnosis	0

Moderate amount; diagnosis possible	1

Minimal; diagnosis	2

Amount of cellular material

Minimal to absent; diagnosis not possible	0

Sufficient for diagnosis	1

Abundant; diagnosis possible	2

Degree of cellular degeneration

Degeneration marked; diagnosis impossible	0

Degeneration moderate; diagnosis possible	1

Degeneration minimal; diagnosis obvious	2

Degree of cellular trauma

Marked; diagnosis impossible	0

Moderate; diagnosis possible	1

Minimal; diagnosis obvious	2

Retention of appropriate architecture

Minimal to absent; non-diagnostic	0

Moderate; some preservation of, e.g., follicle, papillae, acini, etc.	1

Excellent architectural display closely reflecting histology; diagnosis obvious	2


	Strains with Stable ST

Patient	ST of the first CoS strain isolated	Sample type	Sample type of first clinical CoS	ST of CoR strain isolated	Sample type	Time to switch from CoR to CoS (days)

1	554	SRS	Arterial catheter	-	bronchial aspirate	36

2	512	SRS	skin swab	-	urine	26

3	307	SRS	skin swab	-	skin swab	42

4	512	SRS	skin swab	-	SRS	123

5	512	SRS	drainage fluid	-	drainage fluid	28

6	512	urine	urine	-	urine	17

7	512	SRS	bronchial aspirate	-	SRS	74

8	1543	SRS	-	-	SRS	50

9	512	SRS	bronchial aspirate	-	bronchial aspirate	31

10	512	SRS	bronchial aspirate	-	bronchial aspirate	6

11	554	SRS	-	-	bronchial aspirate	na

12	512	SRS	bronchial aspirate	-	blood	24

13	258	SRS	urine	-	urine	8

						Median

29.5 days

	Switched ST

Patient	ST of the first CoS strain isolated	Sample type	Sample type of first clinical CoS	ST of CoR strain isolated	Sample type	Time to switch from CoR to CoS (days)

14	15	SRS	urine	512	SRS	167

15	554	urine	urine	512	SRS	67

16	2581	SRS	skin swab	512	SRS	34

17	554	SRS	arterial catheter	1733 (554 SLV)	drainage fluid	54

						Median:

60.5 days


Cost in CDN dollars Mean (SD)

Total Cost	$49,923 (45,773)

Total Indirect Cost	$13,566 (12,625)

Total Direct Cost	$36,358 (33,501)

Direct Costs per costing Category

 Health Professionals	$2600 (4787)

 Imaging	$1069 (1428)

 Lab	$1923 (1709)

 Nursing	$16,378 (16,735)

 Operating room	$1192 (1819)

 Surgical Implants	$907 (2821)

 Post anaesthesia care unit	$307 (590)

 Pharmacy	$3273 (4157)

 Special Care Unit	$7502 (16,929)

 Endoscopy	$72 (223)

 Food Services	$1134 (1247)


Method	Planar objects	Real feet	Main disadvantages

 	Accuracy/Repeatibility	Static/Dynamic

Coudert et al.[13]	NA/NA	NA/NA	Technique requires spraying foot with paint or adding sock

Jezersek & Mazina [14]	0.2 mm/NA	0.4 mm/NA	The system requires several specialized camera-projector-mirror systems

Jezersek et al.[16]	0.5 mm/NA	NA/NA	Similar to Jezersek & Mazina, the system requires expensive specialized equipment

Kouchi et al.[17]	0.5 mm/NA	2.0 mm/NA	System only measures 4 cross-section areas of the foot, which need to be manually marked on the foot surface

Schmeltzpfenning et al.[18]	NA/NA	NA/NA	Camera-projector systems work sequentially thus reducing the acquisition frequency

Mochimaru et al.[20]	NA/NA	NA/NA	Matching random pattern is computationally expensive and can create unpredictable errors

Yoshida & Kouchi [21]	NA/NA	4.0 mm/NA	System uses one generic model for all foot reconstructions; shape deformations during walking cannot be fully accounted by the generic model

Liu et al.[22]	0.25 mm/NA	NA/NA	System provides good visual results, but lacks proper experiments with real feet

Blenkinsopp et al.[25]	NA/NA	NA/NA	Reconstruction is based on painted artifacts on the foot surface


Response to endotoxin administration	Clinical	Autonomic	Immune

Outcome expectancies	Flu-like symptoms (T90)	Epinephrine (T0)	IL-10 (T60)	TNF-α (T90)	IL-6 (T120)	IL-8 (T120)

Generalized outcome expectancies

Optimism (LOT-R)	−.38	.76**	.60*	−.32	−.26	−.32

Neuroticism (BFI)	.10	−.32	−.09	.27	.22	.11

Specific outcome expectancies	−.71**	.28	.33	.00	.16	−.15


Surfactant	Drug loaded	Comments	References

Brij 35, 78, 98, and 700	Atenolol, timolol, betaxololcyclosporine A	Significantly increased the corneal permeability.Significantly increased bioavailability of ophthalmic drugs by using contact lenses.	[52, 76]

Polysorbate 80, polyoxyl 40 stearate, and polyoxyl 60 hydrogenated castor oil	Cyclosporine A	Improve ocular CsA penetration and are clinically useful in the treatment of immune-mediated ophthalmic diseases.	[71]

Pluronic F127	Pilocarpine	Enhanced miotic response to a single instillation of pilocarpine eye drops compared to an aqueous solution of the drug.	[68]

Polysorbates 60 and 80 and Brij 35	Gentamicin sulphate	Effective in the prolongation of drug release from the ocular delivery and observed no irritancy on albino rabbits.	[72]

Polysorbate 20	Cyclopentolate	Promoted ocular absorption.	[23, 25]

Solulan C-24 and span 60	Timolol maleate	Treatment of ocular hypotensive activity. Exhibited sustained controlled ocular drug delivery.	[45, 46]

Spans 20, 40, 60, and 80	Acyclovir	Effective for the treatment of herpes simplex keratitis.	[67]

Acetazolamide	Effective in enhancing the bioavailability of drug and lowered the intraocular pressure.	[43, 45, 73]

Brimonidine tartrate	Improved bioavailability and increased precorneal residence time.Decreased the intraocular pressure for a prolonged period of time and nonirritant effect	[77–80]

Naltrexone hydrochloride	Possessed better ocular tolerability and less ocular irritation.	[74]

Fluconazole	Improved permeability as compared to marketed formulation and nonirritant effect.	[25]

Flupirtine maleate	Improved the low corneal permeability for effective management of trigeminal neuralgia.	[75]

Diclofenac sodium	Nonirritant and safe vesicular system for the effective ocular drug delivery.	[68]

Levofloxacin.	Efficient in prolonging the drug release with reduced side effects.	[69]


	Intention to quit	Quitting smoking

	OR	95 % CI	OR	95 % CI

Province (Hanoi vs Nam Dinh)	0.47***	0.34	0.67	0.50*	0.23	1.08

Location (Urban vs Rural)	1.44	0.90	2.31

Duration of MMT (month)	1.00	0.99	1.02	0.99	0.95	1.03

Outpatient service use last 12 months (yes vs no)	1.98***	1.44	2.72

# of drug rehabilitation				1.03	0.98	1.07

Religion (vs cult of ancestors)

 Buddhism				2.72*	0.84	8.78

Occupation (vs unemployed)

 Other jobs	1.41	0.87	2.28

Age (vs 18–<25)

 35–<40				2.63**	1.30	5.30

 ≥45	0.51***	0.34	0.78

Marital status (vs single)

 Live with spouse	1.23	0.91	1.67

Income quintile (vs poorest)

 Rich	0.78	0.56	1.09

Having pain/discomfort (yes vs no)				0.41	0.12	1.43

HIV status (vs negative)

 Positive	0.58**	0.34	0.99

Body mass index (vs underweight)

 Normal	1.47	0.86	2.52

Level of nicotine dependence (vs very low)

 Low				0.31**	0.12	0.81

 Moderate				0.22**	0.05	0.97

 High				0.37**	0.13	1.04

 Very high				0.22**	0.05	0.99

Year of smoking				0.95**	0.91	1.00


Documentation practice	Description	Number of sites

Paper-based documentation	Documentation on a structured paper-based template and later scanned into the EHR in pdf format. No entries of vital signs were done in the EHR.	2 Sites

Mixed Documentation	Done on a paper-based template and later transferred into a digital EHR template.	3 sites

Digital documentation	Documentation on a digital template	4 sites


 	 Total	 Woman	 Man

Total thyroidectomy	 166	 125 (75.3)∗	 41 (24.7)

Pyramidal lobe present	 109 (65.7)	 82 (65.6)	 27 (65.9)

Pyramidal lobe absent	 57 (34.3)	 43 (34.4)	 14 (34.1)


Parameters	Control group	500 mg/kg·b·wt (A)	1000 mg/kg·b·wt (B)	2000 mg/kg·b·wt (C)

Number of examined fetuses	15	15	15	15

Impairment of skull ossification	—	3 (20%)	5 (33.33%)	8 (53.33%)

Absence or dislocation of sternebrae	—	2 (13.33%)	3 (20%)	5 (33.33%)

Reduction or absence of caudal vertebrae	—	5 (33.33%)	6 (40%)	10 (66.67%)

Absence of digit's bone of fore limb	—	3 (20%)	4 (26.67%)	9 (60%)

Absence of digit's bone of hind limb	—	2 (12.33%)	3 (20%)	7 (46.67%)

Absence of some metatarsal bone	—	3 (20%)	4 (26.67%)	6 (40%)

Absence of some metacarpal bone	—	2 (12.33%)	4 (26.67%)	5 (33.33%)


Criteria	Total n	Normosmic	Hyposmic	Anosmic

TOAST criteria

 Large artery atherosclerosis	11	7	2	2

 Cardioembolism	21	14	4	3

 Small vessel occlusion	14	7	4	3

 Stroke of other determined etiology	1	1	0	0

 Stroke of undetermined etiology	26	11	11	4

OCPS criteria

 PACI	37	18	11	8

 POCI	12	9	2	1

 TACI	4	2	1	1

 LACI	20	11	7	2


Variable	Response	Surgeon 1	Surgeon 2	P

Operative time, no previous abdominal surgery	N, Mean ± SD	59, 45.6 ± 12.9	13, 73.2 ± 13.6	< 0.001

Operative time, previous abdominal surgery	N, Mean ± SD	43, 44.0 ± 12.6	2, 115.5 ± 2.1	0.019


	"0" + EC	"0" + NEC	p

Number of cycles	50	39

Maternal age (mean ± SD)	30.3 ± 4.0	31.6 ± 3.4	>0.5

Total number of embryos transferred	75	75

Mean ± SD embryos/cycle	1.5 ± 0.5	1.9 ± 0.5	0.000

Biochemical pregnancies	30	17

bPR (%)	60	44	>0.5

Clinical pregnancies	28	12

cPR (%)	56	31	0.020

Number of gestational sacs by US	32	20

IR (%)	43	27	0.038


Age, sex	NOAC	Lesion	Prescription (month)	BARC	Other factors

Upper GI

 92 F	D	Gastric ulcer	11	3a	PPI (-)

 96 F	R	Gastric ulcer	42	3a	PPI (-)

 63 M	R	Duodenal ulcer	29	3b	PPI (-)

 74 M	R	Gastric ulcer	32	3a	PPI (-)

 83 F	A	Gastric ulcer	16	3a	PPI (-)

 84 M	A	Ulcers/o	12	3a	PPI (-), steroid

 72 M	A	Duodenal ulcer	25	3b	PPI (-), operation

Lower GI

 78 M	D	Ileal erosion	23	3a	DAPT

 80 M	D	Colon diverticulosis	7	3a	-

 72 F	R	Colon vascular ectasia	8	3a	NSAID, steroid

 75 M	R	Post EMR for colon polyp	24	3a	LDA

 85 F	A	Colon diverticulosis	3	3b	NSAID


New

Risk Factor		Adjusted Odds Ratio	95% Confidence Interval	P-value

Any family member suffering from hepatitis B & C	Yes	14.5	9.5-22.1	0.001

	No	Reference

Dental extract/filling/scaling	Yes	1.9	1.4-2.7	0.001

	No	Reference

Blood transfusion	Yes	2.9	1.2-7.3	0.017

	No	Reference

History of IV/IM injection/year	None	Reference

	< 5/year	2.1	1.3-3.4	0.003

	≥/year	5.8	3.5-9.6	0.001


Case	Age	Gender	HSCT source	Underlying disease	Interval between HSCT and CM analysis (mo)	Interval between DE onset and CM analysis (mo)	Interval between HSCT and DE onset (mo)	DE severity level	CC	Clinically affected cGVHD organs

1	57	Male	PBSC	ML	17	1	16	3	-	Eye, Skin

2	47	Male	PBSC	AML	19	6	13	4	+	Eye, Skin, Mouth, Liver

3	50	Male	PBSC	MM	12	1	11	4	+	Eye, Mouth

4	47	Female	BM	MM	43	1	42	4	+	Eye, Mouth

5	38	Female	BM	AML	12	0	12	2	-	Eye

6	57	Male	BM	MDS	14	N.A.	N.A.	3	+	Eye

7	51	Male	BM	CML	120	48	72	2	-	Eye

8	46	Female	PBSC	MM	116	108	8	2	-	Eye

9	55	Male	PBSC	AML	25	17	8	4	+	Eye, Skin


 	Active partitions MIC values (μg/ml)	Reference antibioticsMIC values (μg/ml)

CSBt	CSEA	Amox	Gent	Vanc

Gram – bacteria

Escherichia coli T20A2	NA	NA	S	R	R

Pseudomonas aeruginosa T41	NA	NA	R	S	R

Pseudomonas aeruginosa ATCC9027	NA	NA	R	S	R

Gram + bacteria

Dermabacter hominis T47A7	312	625	R	S	S

Dermabacter hominis T49B5	312	625	S	S	S

Corynebacterium striatum T40A3	NA	NA	R	R	S

Corynebacterium striatum T46C1	NA	NA	S	S	S

Enterococcus faecalis T37B1	NA	NA	S	S	S

Enterococcus faecalis T47A16	NA	NA	R	S	S

Streptococcus agalactiae T53A4	NA	NA	R	R	R

Staphylococcus aureus T2510	312	625	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T281	NA	NA	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus 8143	312	625	S	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus 8148	312	625	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus 8142	NA	NA	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T61	NA	NA	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T21	312	625	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T11	NA	NA	R	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T306	312	625	S	S	S

Staphylococcus aureus T26A4	625	625	R	S	S

Staphylococcus epidermidis T151	NA	NA	R	R	S

Staphylococcus epidermidis T19A1	NA	NA	S	S	R

Staphylococcus capitis T21A3	NA	NA	S	S	S

Staphylococcus capitis T29A2	NA	NA	S	S	S

Staphylococcus pettenkoferi T282	NA	NA	S	S	S

Staphylococcus pettenkoferi T33	NA	NA	R	S	S

Staphylococcus saprophyticus 8237 	NA	NA	S	S	S

Staphylococcus lugdunensis T36A1	NA	NA	S	S	S

Staphylococcus lugdunensis T47B2	NA	NA	S	S	S


SNV	bp	Conserved Regiona	P-Valueb	Allelesc	MAFd	Unaffected	Scoliosis	Kyphoscoliosis

rs114080324	2947499	Yes	0.116	G/A	0.006	GG	GG	GG	—	GG	AG	AG	AG	AG	AG

rs183225473	3045672	No	0.039	G/C	0.006	GG	GG	GG	CG	GG	CG	CG	CG	CG	CG

rs10068728	3045983	Yes	0.034	T/G	0.27	TT	TT	TT	TG	TT	—	TG	TG	TG	TG

rs146531224	3046004	No	0.039	G/A	0.006	GG	GG	GG	AG	GG	AG	AG	AG	AG	AG

rs117273909	3182971	Yes	0.039	C/T	0.005	CC	CC	CC	CT	CC	CT	CT	CT	CT	CT

rs111916055	3187995	No	0.034	A/G	0.028	AA	AA	AA	AG	AA	—	AG	AG	AG	AG

Novel	3188045	No	0.083	T/G	NA	TT	TT	TT	AT	TT	—	AT	AT	—	AT

rs16871553	3269602	No	0.029	C/T	0.109	TT	TT	TT	CT	TT	CT	CT	CT	CT	—

rs73733752	3278780	No	0.039	A/G	0.03	AA	AA	AA	AG	AA	AG	AG	AG	AG	AG


	Total number of patients(n = 376)

Trials

 Ludman [27]	40 (11%)

 Crimi [28]	76 (20%)

 Garcia-Dorado [30]	177 (47%)

 White [29]	83 (22%)

Randomization

 Intervention	191 (51%)

 Placebo	185 (49%)

Age	59 ± 12

Sex — male	193 (51%)

Risk factors

 Smoking	221 (59%)

 Hypertension	166 (44%)

 Dyslipidemia	117 (31%)

 Diabetes Mellitus	55 (15%)

 Family history of CAD	72 (19%)

 Pre-infarct angina	108 (29%)

Onset to balloon time/min	215 ± 97

Artery involved

 LAD	211 (56%)

 RCA	71 (19%)

 Cx	94 (25%)

TIMI flow pre-PPCI

 0	365 (97%)

 1	11 (3%)

Rentrop collateral flow

 0	287 (76%)

 1	61 (16%)

 2	28 (7%)

TIMI flow post-PPCI

 1	1 (1%)

 2	43 (11%)

 3	330 (88%)

CMR details

 LVEDV	154 ± 36

 LVESV	78 ± 31

 LVEF	50 ± 11

 MI size/%LV	22 ± 11

 AAR/%LV	33 ± 12

 MI size/%AAR	64 ± 21

 MVO/%	111 (53%)


Probe Set ID	Gene Title	Gene Symbol	FC in tumors	GO biological function

99104_at	adiponectin, C1Q and collagen domain containing	Adipoq	-21.75	Lipid metabolism, Organic acid metabolism

99671_at	adipsin	Adn	-35.98

98924_at	ADP-ribosyltransferase 3	Art3	-2.55

92537_g_at	adrenergic receptor, beta 3	Adrb3	-2.88

102327_at	amine oxidase, copper containing 3	Aoc3	-3.66	Cell adhesion

96785_at	ankyrin repeat domain 47	Ankrd47	-2.04

104761_at	anthrax toxin receptor 2	Antxr2	-1.60

160375_at	carbonic anhydrase 3	Car3	-20.83

101539_f_at	carboxylesterase 3	Ces3	-4.06	Lipid metabolism, Organic acid metabolism

102016_at	cell death-inducing DFFA-like effector c	Cidec	-4.79

95415_f_at	complement component 1, r subcomponent	C1r	-2.64

92224_at	C-type lectin domain family 3, member b	Clec3b	-5.87

96346_at	cysteine dioxygenase 1, cytosolic	Cdo1	-9.76	Organic acid metabolism

93996_at	cytochrome P450, family 2, subfamily e, polypeptide 1	Cyp2e1	-3.54

96742_at	dermatopontin	Dpt	-5.06	Cell adhesion

103031_g_at	dynamin 1	Dnm1	-2.21

92535_at	early B-cell factor 1	Ebf1	-1.81

100567_at	fatty acid binding protein 4, adipocyte	Fabp4	-2.31

92441_at	fibroblast activation protein	Fap	-2.27

101991_at	flavin containing monooxygenase 1	Fmo1	-3.20

93040_at	FXYD domain-containing ion transport regulator 1	Fxyd1	-2.69

93750_at	gelsolin	Gsn	-5.43

102373_at	glutamyl aminopeptidase	Enpep	-2.86

99108_s_at	growth hormone receptor	Ghr	-1.99

92833_at	histidine ammonia lyase	Hal	-2.25	Organic acid metabolism

95546_g_at	insulin-like growth factor 1	Igf1	-2.07

103904_at	insulin-like growth factor binding protein 6	Igfbp6	-4.34

92366_at	laminin, alpha 2	Lama2	-3.25	Cell adhesion

103083_at	lipase, hormone sensitive	Lipe	-2.46	Lipid metabolism

160083_at/95611_at	lipoprotein lipase	Lpl	-5.18	Lipid metabolism

93353_at	lumican	Lum	-9.33

97520_s_at	neuronatin	Nnat	-5.92

100120_at	nidogen 1	Nid1	-2.19	Cell adhesion

160481_at	phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 1, cytosolic	Pck1	-2.61	Lipid metabolism, Organic acid metabolism

102763_at	plasma membrane associated protein, S3-12	MGI:1929709	-8.13

93826_at	protein phosphatase 2, regulatory subunit B (B56), alpha isoform	Ppp2r5a	-1.43

102366_at	resistin	Retn	-10.89

97835_at	retinoic acid receptor responder (tazarotene induced) 2	Rarres2	-6.19

96047_at	retinol binding protein 4, plasma	Rbp4	-4.08

104445_at	RIKEN cDNA 4631408O11 gene	4631408O11Rik	-5.20

101861_at	sarcoglycan, epsilon	Sgce	-1.62

102707_f_at	serine (or cysteine) peptidase inhibitor, clade A, member 3C	Serpina3c	-1.94

97429_at	SNF related kinase	Snrk	-1.65

92582_at	solute carrier family 1 (neutral amino acid transporter), member 5	Slc1a5	-1.94

160320_at	sorbin and SH3 domain containing 1	Sorbs1	-2.74	Cell adhesion

94056_at/94057_g_at	stearoyl-Coenzyme A desaturase 1	Scd1	-2.76	Lipid metabolism, Organic acid metabolism

103087_at	sulfotransferase family 1A, phenol-preferring, member 1	Sult1a1	-1.68	Lipid metabolism

103568_at	sushi-repeat-containing protein	Srpx	-2.84

104280_at	synuclein, gamma	Sncg	-4.63

102916_s_at/161907_s_at	tenascin XB	Tnxb	-4.73	Cell adhesion

160547_s_at	thioredoxin interacting protein	Txnip	-2.83

99052_at	zinc finger homeobox 1a	Zfhx1a	-1.63


	STX	Okadaic Acid, DTXS	Domoic Acid

(PSP)	(DSP)	(ASP)

Sampling Date	Multi SPR	ELISA	Multi SPR	ELISA	Multi SPR	ELISA

24.07.2011	−	−	−	−	−	−

08.08.2011	−	−	−	+	−	−

22.08.2011	−	+	−	+	−	−

04.10.2011	−	+	−	+	−	+

20.10.2011	+	+	−	+	−	+


Vitamin D Status	IOM	Endocrine Society

Deficiency	<12 ng/mL (30 nmol/L)	<20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L)

Insufficiency	12–20 ng/mL (30–50 nmol/L)	21–29 ng/mL (52.5–72.5 nmol/L)

Sufficiency	>20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L)	>30 ng/mL (75 nmol/L)

Toxicity	>50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L)	>150 ng/mL (375 nmol/L)


No	Expression system	SAK Productivity [mg/Lbroth]	Cultivation system	Volume [L]	SAK - glycosylation [Yes/No]	Reference

1	E. coli	> 50	(not defined)	2.7	No	[8]

2	E. coli	> 175	Fermenter	10-15	No	[19]

3a	B. subtilis	140	Shake flask	0.25	No	[20]

3b	B. subtilis	337	Fermenter	2	No	[20]

4a	P.pastoris	110	Fermenter	< 5	Partially yes	[13]

4b	E. coli	300-400	Shake flask	0.1	No	[13]

5	E. coli	2800	Fermenter	2	No	[21]

6	P.pastoris	~ 1000	Shake flask (w/o -tunicamycin)	0.05	Yes	[17]

7	P.pastoris	 	Shake flask (w - tunicamycin)	0.05	No	[17]

8	H. polymorpha	~ 1100	Fermenter	80	No	-


Length of training (months)	Total hours of training	Year

22	2996	1989

23	3672	1996

19.5	2719	2001

23	3341	2007


Provinces	No. of samples

	Bovine	Ovine	Caprine	Buffalo	Camel

Tehran	274	100	53	165	33

Isfahan	188	76	148	70	81

Kerman	83	152	102	25	70

Khorasan	75	197	139	112	30

Total	620	525	442	372	214


Number of strain/strain code	Species	Biofilm	Cefoxitin resistance

65/ MSSE 65	S.epidermidis	black (+)	S

62/ MRSE 62	S.epidermidis	black (+)	R

93/ MSSH 93	S.haemolyticus	bordeaux (−)	S

89/MRSH 89	S.haemolyticus	bordeaux (−)	R

ATCC 12493	S. aureus	very black (+)	R


Country	Seroprevalence of HCV in general population [1, 63] (%)	Seroprevalencea of HCV in HIV patients (%)

Argentina	1.9	29.9

Brazil	1.4	18.9

Chile	0.8	2.6

Colombia	1.0	0.8

Cuba	1.8	12.9

Mexico	1.0	12.1

Peru	1.0	4.3

Puerto Rico	6.3	5.2

Venezuela	0.9	0.7


	Group

	STZ + DMH	STZ + DMH + MET

N	13	15

Tumor-bearing rats	11	9

Tumor incidence (%)	84.62	60.00

Number of tumors	40	20

Average tumor number	3.1 ± 0.45	1.3 ± 0.37*

Average tumor number of tumor-bearing rats	3.6 ± 0.28	2.2 ± 0.36*

Volume of tumors (mm3)	94.8 ± 19.77	30.9 ± 8.19*

Inhibition of colorectal tumor (%)		29.08


Study design	Study	Comment

Survey	National TB epidemiological survey 200217	45% (121/272) of patients having interrupted or suspended treatment due to financial difficulty

	Zhang 200712	9% of households with TB suspects (2308) or patients defaulted due to financial burden

	Xu 200920	16% (13/82) of non-adherence patients interrupted treatment because of high medical costs of the treatment

	Ai 201022	2% of patients who interrupted treatment (43) because of financial difficulty

Cohort	Jackson 200611	3% (5/159) was too poor to begin treatment

	Sun 200723	Patients who were charged high medical cost were more likely to interrupt treatment than patients having lower medical costs


Study	Year published	n	MC/SC	Patients	EN/PN	Gln adm	Daily gln dose	Length of treatment*	Treatment benefit

Andrews [53]	2011	502	MC	General ICU	EN+PN	iv	10-20 g	5 (1-10)	None

Beale [29]	2008	55	SC	General ICU	EN	enteral	40 g	<10	Morbidity

Conejero [46]	2002	84	MC	General ICU	EN	enteral	35 g	10 (7-25)	Morbidity

Garrel [47]	2003	41	SC	Burns	EN	enteral	26 g	30 ± 17	Mortality

Goeters [14]	2002	95	MC	General ICU	EN+PN	iv	0.2 g/kg	17 ± 11	Mortality

Griffiths [15]	1997	84	SC	General ICU	PN	iv	25 g	6 (2-91)	Mortality

Hall [48]	2003	363	SC	General ICU	EN	enteral	11-27 g	10 (6-16)	None

Houdijk [30]	1998	72	SC	Trauma	EN	enteral	27 g	12 ± 6	Morbidity

Jones [49]	1999	50	SC	General ICU	EN	enteral	18 (11-21) g	11 (3-47)	Morbidity

Wernerman [17]	2011	284	MC	General ICU	EN+PN	iv	0.28 g/kg	12 (4-47)	Mortality

Zhou [50]	2003	40	SC	Burns	EN	enteral	0.35 g/kg	12	Morbidity


	Timing of initial post-discharge outpatient follow up

	Casesn	≤3 daysn (%)	>3 daysn (%)	p-value

Low-risk*

 Short-stay†	34	22 (65)	12 (35)	0.29

 Longer-stay	44	22 (50)	22 (50)

Higher-risk

 Short-stay	21	17 (81)	4 (19)	0.04

 Longer-stay	74	39 (53)	35 (47)


Nomenclature	Amino acids	Chromosome	Intracellular localization

Zm2G012631_T01	699	II	Nucleus and mitochondrial matrix space

Zm2G112165_T01	698	II	Nucleus and mitochondrial matrix space

Zm2G069651_T01	699	II	Nucleus and mitochondrial matrix space

Zm5G833699_T01	714	V	Nucleus and mitochondrial matrix space

Zm2G141931_T01	804	II	Endoplasmic reticulum and vacuole

Zm2G141931_T03	710	II	Endoplasmic reticulum and vacuole

Zm2G399073_T02	1001	II	Endoplasmic reticulum

Zm2G399073_T03	808	II	Endoplasmic reticulum

Zm2G141931_T04	667	II	Endoplasmic reticulum

Zm2G002220_T01	793	II	Chloroplast stroma and chloroplast thylakoid membrane

Zm5G813217_T01	758	V	Nucleus and chloroplast stroma

Zm5G813217_T03	708	V	Nucleus and mitochondrial matrix space


cDNA	No. of isolates	Characteristics

NIK	58	N terminal deletion

CD30	3	Full length

LT-βR	2	Cytoplasmic region

RIP2	1	Full length


	Cardiac syncope vs non-cardiac syncopen = 142	Cardiac syncope vs chest pain control groupn = 147

Patient characteristics	Cardiac syncopen = 49	Non-cardiacsyncopen = 93	P-value	Cardiac syncopen = 49	Chest paincontrol groupn = 98	P-value

Age, years	60 ± 13	54 ± 12	0.002	60 ± 13	60 ± 12	0.810

Male gender	32 (65)	57 (61)	0.716	32 (65)	64 (65)	>0.999

BMI, kg/m2	26 ± 3	26 ± 4	0.365	26 ± 3	27 ± 4	0.116

Systolic Blood Pressure, mm Hg	143 ± 20	140 ± 21	0.349	143 ± 20	144 ± 16	0.990

Diastolic Blood Pressure, mm Hg	81 ± 13	83 ± 13	0.396	81 ± 13	78 ± 9	0.140

Active smoking	19 (39)	27 (29)	0.256	19 (39)	38 (39)	>0.999

Diabetes mellitus II	3 (6)	4 (4)	0.693	3 (6)	5 (5)	>0.999

Family history of CAD	16 (33)	43 (46)	0.152	16 (33)	27 (28)	0.566

PROCAM risk score	9 (4–21)a	7 (2–16)b	0.131	9 (4–21)a	8 (3–16)	0.280


Main mindfulness instruction	General guidance points	Contemplative movement	Mindful movement

Awareness of sensations	Bodily sensations as objects for the attention (sensations related to autonomic response, skeletal and muscular aspects, pressure, tactile and visceral, proprioception, kinematics)	√	√

Awareness of the present moment (PM)	PM attributes of body, movement sensations, and breath	Implicit	√

PM attribute of mental experience, e.g., emphasis on staying with the present moment (not getting lost in past or future thinking)	Not usually

Awareness of attention	Deliberate awareness of the ways in which to move, shift, narrow, and widen the focus of attention to aspects of body and movement. Commentary on the quality of the attention (vivid, dull, agitated, stable, striving)	Not usually	√

Awareness of mind-wandering	Acknowledgment and suggested management of mind-wandering	Not usually	√

Awareness of intention (on purpose)	Purposeful, deliberate engagement with the intention to move the body, pay attention, be present, mindful	Can be (e.g., Tai Chi, Feldenkrais, continuum movement)	√

Awareness of non-judgment	A deliberate attitude of acceptance and gentleness to mental and physical phenomena. For example, psychological responses to learning new movements (frustration, elation, irritation, pride)	Implicit and in relation to the physical body rather than the mind	√


 Compounds of hydrocarbon	Mean	SD

Pars 1 dispersant	0.126	0.082

 Pars 2 dispersant	0.055	0.049

 Gamlen dispersant	0.011	0.004

 Crude oil	0.072	 0.046

Pars 1 dispersant + petroleum	 0.156	 0.098

Pars 2 dispersant + petroleum	 0.104	 0.087

Gamlen dispersant + petroleum	 0.115	 0.067


Stages	Classification	Macroscopic appearance	Oocyte size (μm)	GSI range

		Testes	Ovary		F	M

I	Immature	Small, flat, translucent to whitish, poorly developed, with reduced fringes.	Small, transparent to translucent and not very voluminous. Oocyte not visible with naked eye.	209.61-592.78 (447.30 ± 99.42)a	<10.9	<2.0

II	Develop	Whitish with voluminous fringes.	Large orange-pale, oocytes may be visible through the ovary tunic.	528.37-867.10 (711.24 ± 63.21)b	11.0-18.9	2.5-5.5

III	Mature	Very large, firm, white in colour.	Very large occupying part of the abdominal cavity. Yellow oocyte turgescency.	604.15-894.33 (780.59 ± 50.71)c	19.0-23.9	5.6-8.0

IV	Ripe	Full developed, turgid fringes, milky-whitish in colour. Milt run out of the fish.	Occupying the entire abdominal cavity. Ovulated oocytes can be fully expelled from the oviduct with gentle pressure.	725.27-991.81 (844.09 ± 57.59)d	>24.0	> 8.0

V	Spent	Bloody and flaccid fringes.	Flaccid, red-brown or bloody in colour. Few remaining large oocytes observed, and smaller size oocytes may be seen.	227.64-770.82 (447.38 ± 139.02)a	2.5-10.9	1.5-3.0


Biotype	Human	Mouse

LincRNA	13245	6473

Antisense	10980	3612

TEC	1072	2759

Sense_intronic	984	294

Retained_intron	517	294

Processed_transcript	368	980

Sense_overlapping	310	50

3prime_overlapping_ncRNA	34	3

Pseudogene	20	24

Bidirectional_promoter_lncRNA	11	118

Non_coding	3	0

Macro_lncRNA	1	2

Total	27545	14609


	FAF (%)	NIA(%)

	hypoFAF	mixedFAF	hyperFAF	hypoNIA	mixedNIA	hyperNIA

Detached area (N = 10)	10	20	70	30	20	50

Leakage spot (N = 13)	23.1	×	76.9	92.3	×	7.7

Window defect area (N = 8)	12.5	12.5	75	62.5	32.5	0

Overall image (N = 17)	17.6	11.8	70.6	58.8	17.6	23.5

PED (N = 22)				63.6	×	36.4


	VAS Measurea	M	SD	95% Confidence Interval	Response Range

Mechanism	Acceptance, equality, and non-judgment	80.1	20.7	[76.83, 83.34]	0–100

	Dignity and self-worth	77.3	21.5	[73.88, 80.65]	1–100

	Reduced experience of stigma	83	20.1	[79.78, 86.15]	10–100

	Independence and self-efficacy	81	19.8	[77.79, 84.04]	8–100

	Relationship to others and reduced isolation	74	23.8	[70.02, 77.63]	0–100

	Sense of connection and belonging	79	21.9	[75.20, 82.24]	0–100

Outcome

	Feeling better and at peace	74	23	[70.31, 77.55]	0–100

	Personhood	83	18.9	[80.00, 85.93]	0–100

	Skills Acquired	75	23.6	[71.53, 79.05]	0–100


Type of strategies	Strategies Medicines	NCMS (China)	National Health Insurance (Ghana)	Jamkesmas (Indonesia)	Seguro Popular (Mexico)

Selection	Formulary	✓	✓	✓	✓

Cost sharing for medicines included in the formulary	✓	✗	✗	✗

Generic substitution	✗	✓	✗	✗

Procurement	Medicines prices negotiation or rebates	✓	✗c	✓	(✓)

Bulk procurement	✓	✓<underline>a</underline>	✓	✓

Generic reference pricing	✗	✓	✗a	✓

Contracting	Fee for service for prescribers	✓

Fixed salary for prescribersa		✓	✓a	✓

Fixed reimbursement rates for medicines	✓	✓	✗	✗

Preferred provider network (accreditation)	✗	✓	✓	✓

Utilization	Standard treatment guidelines	(✓)	✓	✓	✓

Payment for performance	(✓)	✗	✗	✗

Separation of prescribing and dispensing	✓	✓	✓	✓

Disease management programs	✓	No info	✓	✓

Monitoring and evaluation	User satisfaction monitoring	✗	✗	✗	✓

Medicines purchasing monitoring	✓b		✓	✓

Prescription monitoring	✗	✗	✗	✗


Type of epilepsy	No. of patients Males/females	Age ranges	Recording length ranges (mins)	No. of electrodes

General epilepsy	7/1	30–45	20–30	22


Independent predictor	Subgroup comparisons	Parameter estimate	95% CI	p Value

Patient expectation of change	Completely recover	0

Much improve	5.21	1.80 to 8.61	0.003

Slightly improve	12.43	8.20 to 16.67	<0.001

No change/worse	−0.94	−8.53 to 6.66	0.809

Pain self-efficacy		−0.36	−0.50 to −0.22	<0.001

Number of additional health problems	None	0

One	3.52	0.30 to 6.75	0.032

Two or more	6.62	1.48 to 9.75	0.008

Anxiety or depression	None	0

Moderate	2.19	−0.99 to 5.37	0.177

Extreme	12.02	1.49 to 22.56	0.025

Frequency of pain medication	None/occasional	0

Most/every day/night	3.85	0.61 to 7.09	0.020

Most strenuous exercise	None	0

Mild	−5.53	−10.32 to −0.74	0.024

Moderate	−8.98	−13.86 to −4.11	<0.001

Strenuous	−6.82	−12.17 to −1.47	0.013

Difference between passive and active abduction	0.07	0.004 to 0.142	0.038

Change during scapular facilitation	Yes	0

No	4.93	2.13 to 7.74	0.001

Severity of pain at rest		1.89	1.26 to 2.51	<0.001

Duration of shoulder symptoms (weeks)	0.02	0.01 to 0.03	0.002

Paraesthesia in the arm	No	0

Yes	−10.08	−18.73 to −1.43	0.022

Current employment status	Employed	0

Retired	2.96	0.10 to 6.02	0.058

Unemployed	14.30	7.72 to 20.87	<0.001


Platoons	Bangolo	Danané	Kahin	Logoualé	Guezon	BleniMéhouin	Dieouzon	Zoukougbeu	Blotile	Duekoue

1			15		3					0.5

2				14			2	2	2

3	4	4			10

4	10				4	4

5	15				3


Characteristics	Male (n = 26) (mean ± SD)a	Female (n = 24) (mean ± SD)a

Continuous variable

 Age (years)	28.2 ± 3.18	30.4 ± 3.67

 Prepregnant body mass index (kg/m2)	22.0 ± 3.43	22.8 ± 4.24

 Gestational age (weeks)	39.0 ± 1.50	38.7 ± 1.49

 Baby birth weight (g)	3,251 ± 382	2,958 ± 393

 Baby birth length (cm)	51.6 ± 2.59	50.9 ± 2.63

 Baby head circumference (cm)	33.9 ± 1.23	33.0 ± 1.46

 Placental weight (g)	629 ± 141	579 ± 184

 Fat content of placenta (%)	0.74 ± 0.12	0.77 ± 0.084

Categorical variable

 Cigarette smoking, n (%)	1 (3.85)	2 (8.33)

 Passive smoking, n (%)	13 (50.0)	11 (45.8)

 Alcohol drinking, n (%)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)

 Potential dioxin-exposed occupation, n (%)	0 (0.0)	0 (0.0)


Gene	Position TGFBR1 TGFBR2 gene	HGVS names	Protein position	Number of patients	rsSNP number

TGFBR1	Exon 1	c.68_76delCGGCGGCG	p.Ala23Ala	4	rs11466445

 	IVS 7 + 24	c.1255 + 24 G > A	 	2	rs334354

TGFBR2	IVS 3 + 7	c.338 + 7 A > G	 	2	rs1155705

 	IVS 5-4	c.455-4 T > A	 	3	rs11466512

 	Exon 4	c.458delA	p.Lys153	8	rs79375991


Subject	Question

Directions	How would you make the directions more clear/easy to understand?

	What does "in the past month" mean to you?

	When you see "the past month", what days did you include?

Items	In your own words, what do you think this question is asking?

	What does this question mean to you? What did you think of when answering this question?

	Was this question easy to understand? Are there any specific words that are difficult to understand?

	How would you change the words to make it more clear?

	Was this item hard to answer? If yes, why?

	How did you choose your answer?

Domains	In your own words, what do you think this group of questions is asking about?

	How do you think these items are related?

	Are there any questions that do not belong in this group?

ResponseChoices	What do you think about the response choices?

	How would you make the response choices clearer or easier to understand?

OverallAssessment	Are there things that we forgot to ask about that you think are important?

	Overall thoughts/opinions of the questionnaire?

	Anything you would change in the questionnaire as a whole?


References	Period of sample collection	Year of publication	Study area	Age of participants

Chandenier et al. [20]	1993	1995	Brazzaville, Niari, Kouilou, Pool	6–10 years

Durand et al. [21]	1998	2003	Pointe-Noire	No limit

Nsimba et al. [22]	1999–2002	2004	Brazzaville, Pointe-Noire	0.5–<5 years

Nsimba et al. [23]	1999–2002	2005	Brazzaville, Pointe-Noire	0.5–<5 years

Mayengue et al. [24]	2003	2005	Brazzaville	≤5 years

Ndounga et al. [25]	2003–2004	2007	Brazzaville	<5 years

Ndounga et al. [13]	2003–2006	2008	Brazzaville	No limit

Van den Broek et al. [26]	2004	2006	Kindamba	0.5–<5 years

Mayengue et al. [27]	2005	2011	Brazzaville	No limit

Ndounga et al. [28]	2005	2013	Brazzaville	No limit

Pradine et al. [29]	2005–2006	2006	Pointe-Noire	1.4–17 years

Tsumori et al. [11]	2005–2006	2011	Brazzaville, Gamboma, Pointe-Noire	No limit

Oguike et al. [19]	2005–2006	2011	Brazzaville, Gamboma, Pointe-Noire	No limit

Moyen et al. [14]	2006	2010	Brazzaville	≤15 years

Ndounga et al. [30]	2006	2012	Brazzaville	0.5–10 years

Murai et al. [31]	2006	2015	Brazzaville, Gamboma, Pointe-Noire	No limit

Mita et al. [32]	2006	2016	Brazzaville, Gamboma, Pointe-Noire	No limit

Culleton et al. [12]	2007	2009	Pointe-Noire	No limit

Koekemoer et al. [33]	2009	2011	Boutoto	Not applicable

Koukouikila-Koussounda et al. [15]	2010	2012	Brazzaville	<10 years

Ibara-Okabande et al. [34]	2010–2011	2012	Brazzaville	<10 years

Ndounga et al. [35]	2010–2011	2015	Brazzaville	<10 years

Ossou-Nguiet et al. [18]	2011	2013	Brazzaville	0.4–14 years

Mbongo et al. [17]	2011–2013	2015	Brazzaville	15–39 years

Ntoumi et al. [9]	2011–2012	2013	Brazzaville, Pointe-Noire	≤15 years

Koukouikila-Koussounda et al. [36]	2012–2013	2015	Brazzaville	12–44 years

 Ntoumi et al. [16]	2012–2013	2016	Brazzaville	12–44 years

Singana et al. [10]	2012–2013	2016	Owando	<12 years


	SAR	SEM

Coef.	z-Value	Coef.	z-Value

Household car ownership	0.35⁎⁎⁎	5.58	0.22⁎⁎⁎	3.42

Prop. of people going to work by public transport	0.39⁎	2.56	0.42⁎⁎	2.92

Prop. of people who are economically active	0.78⁎	2.57	1.07⁎⁎⁎	3.85

Prop. of white	0.22	1.93	0.22⁎	2.06

Median age	0.01⁎⁎⁎	3.91	0.02⁎⁎⁎	7.00

Prop. of households classified as deprived	− 0.01	− 0.06	− 0.19	− 0.98

Fuel poverty	− 0.004	− 0.84	− 0.002	− 0.45

Regions

 London	Reference case

 East Midlands	0.29⁎⁎⁎	4.93	0.02	0.32

 East of England	0.11⁎	2.10	0.02	0.44

 North East	0.11	1.65	0.03	0.51

 North West	0.09	1.70	− 0.09	− 1.41

 South East	0.10⁎	2.01	0.04	0.73

 South West	0.13⁎	2.20	0.06	1.00

 West Midlands	0.13⁎	2.21	− 0.10	− 1.53

 Yorkshire and the Humber	0.20⁎⁎⁎	3.40	0.03	0.55

Constant	− 0.39	− 1.00	− 0.83⁎	− 2.33

λ	− 55.35⁎⁎⁎	− 3.64

ρ			550.47⁎⁎⁎	30.75

Statistics

 N	320		320

 Log-likelihood	247.75		278.91

 AIC	− 459.49		− 521.81


S. No.	Allergen	Mouse MHC class I	Mouse MHC class II	Human MHC class I	Human MHC class II

1	Asp f1	148–156 (VIYTYPNKV)	 	147–155 (RVIYTYPNK)

 	 	 	9–23 (LLAATAVSVLAAPSP)	9–17 (LLAATAVSV)	1–15 (MVAIKNLFLLAATAV)

2	Asp f2	 	5–19 (LRLAVLLPLAAPLVA)	9–17 (VLLPLAAPL)	4–18 (LLRLAVLLPLAAPLV)

3	Asp f5	 	318–332 (LSFKYPYSVSSSPPS)	316–324 (SSLSFKYPY)	308–322 (LNNYRPSSSSLSFKY)

 	 	 	319–333 (SFKYPYSVSSSPPSS)	314–322 (SSSSLSFKY)	305–319 (PSYLNNYRPSSSSLS)

4	Asp f17	 	93–108 (DKFVAANAGGTVYED)	98–106 (AANAGGTVY)

5	Asp f34	 	75–89 (IQDGSLYLYAASATP)	74–82 (YIQDGSLYL)


Patient sizes	Typical nasal trumpet sizes (Fr)

Large man	34, 30

Medium man	32, 28

Small man	30, 28

Large woman	32, 28

Medium woman	30, 28

Small woman	28, 26


Sample ID	Organ	Related microorganism	GenBank accession no.	Similarity %

12Ue0622	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

12Ue1119	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

12Ue1503	Placenta	Uncultured Chlamydiales bacteriumclone HE210023biof	JX083111	99.3

12Ue1510	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	NR_036834	100

13Ue0490	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	94.7

13Ue0499	Placenta	Not interpretable	 –	–

13Ue0815	Placenta	Chlamydiales bacterium cvE71	JF706724	96

13Ue0857	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

13Ue1009	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.3

13Ue1293	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

13Ue1359	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

14A0078	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	98.5

15A0068	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	90.8

15A0076	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0078	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0079	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.8

15A0080	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0082	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	96.2

15A0087	Placenta	Uncultured Chlamydiales bacteriumclone P-9	AF364575	97

15A0091	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	92

15A0092	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

15A0093	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	90.8

15A0096	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0096	Abomasal content	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0099	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0104	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

15A0107	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0111	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0113	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	100

15A0114	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	99.5

15A0117	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0118	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	96.8

15A0121	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	98.1

15A0122	Placenta	Chlamydia abortus	Z49871	97.6

15A0126	Abomasal content	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0129	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0137	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0148	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0155	Placenta	Parachlamydia acanthamoebae strain Bn9	NR_026357	90.3

15A0160	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–

15A0172	Placenta	Not interpretable	–	–


	Out-of-hours GP services	EDs

Usual care	UCC	Usual care	UCC

All employees	12	12	3	3

Physicians	19	20	7	12

Support staff member	33	32	4	4


 	Controls	Welders	P value

 	(n = 21)	(n = 21)

Mean age (years ± SD)	58.6 ± 10.8	58.5 ± 10.7	ns

Gender

Female	6 (28.6%)	1 (4.8%)	0.038

Male	15 (71.4%)	20 (95.2%)	ns

Tobacco smoking

Smoking status	 	 	ns

Current smokers	9 (43.0%)	6 (28.6%)

Former smokers	9 (43.0%)	12 (57.1%)

Never smokers	3 (14.0%)	3 (14.3%)

Cumulative consumption (P-Y ± SD)	24.6 ± 29.0	22.2 ± 15.2	ns

Age at onset (years ± SD)	16.8 ± 3.4	18.3 ± 4.2	ns

Age at cessation (years ± SD)	51.6 ± 14.0	48.8 ± 11.2	ns

Duration (years ± SD)	32.6 ± 16.7	33.7 ± 10.3	ns

Duration since cessation (years ± SD)	5.7 ± 9.3	8.2 ± 10.4	ns

Welding fumes exposure	 	 	-

Positive occupational questionnaire	0	21

Age at onset (years ± SD)	-	19.9 ± 7.6

Age at cessation (years ± SD)	-	48.2 ± 9.9

Duration (years ± SD)	-	27.0 ± 9.2

Duration since cessation (years ± SD)	-	9.2 ± 10.4


Age	Quebec, Geometric Mean (95th Percentile)	Ontario, Geometric Mean (95th Percentile)

4	0.03 (0.13)	0.06 (0.17)

8	0.02 (0.05)	0.05 (0.12)


	First Contact (Admission)	Second contact (Discharge)	Third Contact (Community- based phase)	Defaulted & Loss to follow-up

Children’s Sex (%)

 Male	46	46.2	47	44

 Female	54	53.8	53	56

Children’s Age, months (%)

 6–11	38.7	33.9	25	32

 12–23	45.3	49.2	55	46

 24–35	12	14.4	14	16

 36+	4	2.5	6	6

Mother’s religion(%)

 Hindu	29.3	30.5	30	28

 Muslim	6	5.1	6	4

 Sarna	54	56.8	55	60

 Others	10.7	7.6	9	8

Mother’s caste(%)

 SC	9.3	11	10	10

 ST	68	70.3	71	72

 OBC	15.3	14.4	14	12

 General	7.4	4.2	5	6

Mother’s age (%)

 18–25	46.7	47.5	47	42

 26–30	24	22.9	24	26

 31+	29.3	29.7	29	32

Mother’s education (%)

 No schooling	67.3	66.1	66	70

 1–8	26.1	29	29	28

 9+	6.6	5.2	5	2

Total children and mothers	150	116	100	50


1st author and year	N	ALD	HBV or HCV	Cryptogenic	ALD + HCV	Miscellaneous

Krowka 1999	14	1	1	3	3	1 HCC + HCV, 1 sarcoidosis,2 PBC, 1 Budd Chiari, 1 AIH

Hoeper 2005	11	7	1	0	2	1 biliary atresia

Reichenberger 2006	14	7	3	 	 	3 PBC, 1 Budd Chiari

Sussman 2006	8	4	1	2	1

Fix 2007	35	7	9	3	10	1 HIV, 2 HCC, 2 PBC, 1 AIH

Hoeper 2007 (bosentan)	18	11	3 	1	0	1 PVT, 2 AIH

Hoeper 2007 (iloprost)	13	6	2 	0	0	1 biliary duct atresia, 4 AIH

Gough and White 2009	11	4	2	0	4	1 ALD + NASH

Hemnes 2009	13	1	8	0	0	1 PBC

Melgosa 2010	13	2	7	0	0	1 hemochromatosis, 2 PBC, 1 portal vein thrombosis

Halank 2011	13	8	1	3	0	1 PBC

Hollatz 2012	11	5	1	0	3	1 ALD + NASH + PBC, 1 biliary atresia

Savale 2013	34	20	4	 	3	6 PVT, 1 AIH

Total	 	83 (40%)	43 (20%)	12 (5%)	26 (12%)	41 (20%)


Food Item	Copacabana	Bertioga	Itacimirim	Pântano do Sul	Vitória sland	TOTAL

Algae		1				1

Anything	3	3	3	7	1	17

Bonito	1	4	1	1	1	8

Crabs	1	2	1	2		6

Crustacean	2					2

Deteriorated fish/meat	1	5		7		13

Fish	2		15	8	2	27

Meat			1			1

Mouse/snake				1		1

Octopus		2			1	3

Sardine	3	6	2	2	1	14

Shrimp	1		2			3

Small mollusks	4	1				5

Squid		3		3		6

Interviews	10	11	15	11	2	49


Process	Tool	Parameters	Subject database

Screening of rRNAs	BLASTALL	-p blastn –e 1e-3 –f T – b 1 –v 1 –M BLOSUM62

Identification of tRNAs	tRNA scan SE	-b G

ORF calling	MetaGene Annotator	-m

Known protein identification	BLASTALL	-p blastp –e 1e-1 –F T – b 50 –v 50 –M BLOSUM 62	UNIREF 100

Environmental Protein Identification	BLASTALL	-p blastp –e 1e-1 –F T –b 50 –v 50 –M BLOSUM62	MGOL


Sociodemographic	Total N = 70

N	(%)

Gender of the respondent

 Female	54	77

Type of the respondent

 Compound members	55	79

 Compound manager	15	21

Age of the respondent

 19–35 year	38	54

 Above 36 year	32	46

Education of the respondent

 No education	25	36

 Primary	21	30

 Secondary	17	24

 Above secondary	7	10

Occupation of the respondent

 Housewife	54	77

 School teacher	1	1

 Business	12	17

 Service	3	4


	Simplex Assay	Multiplex Assay

CHIKV	DENV	Leptospira	CHIKV	DENV	Leptospira

Slope	−3.13	−3.19	−3.25	−3.41	−3.15	−3.37

Efficiency	2.09	2.06	2.03	1.96	2.08	1.98


Databases	Contents

National Eye Institute: NEI Bank Project	Transcriptome profiling for different tissues of the eye for a variety of different species including mouse and human

Mouse Retina Serial Analysis of Gene Expression (SAGE)	Gene expression data from the embryonic and postnatal mouse retina.

Scripps Friedlander Gene Expression	Expression of retinal transcripts for the mouse retina during eight different postnatal stages.

Retinal Information Network	Mapped loci and cloned genes associated with inherited retinal disease.

Retinal International Website	Series of databases listing: retinal diseases, mutations affecting the eye, current animal models, and known proteins involved in retinal disease.

GENSTAT: Retina Project	Cell specific labeling in the retina using BAC transgenic mice.

Retina Central	Integrated platform for gene related information regarding the adult mammalian retina


Immune cells	Enriched genes	References

All T cells	Human: CD3G, CD3D, TRA, CD6, CD5, NPDC1, CD28, CAMK4, GFI1, GATA3, SH2D1A, TRB, TNFRSF25, NK4, TACTILE, BCL11B, CD3E, INPP4B, MAL, NPDC1, ITM2A, ITK, LCK, NFATC3, RORA, MGC19764, TCF7, ZAP70, LEF1, SPOCK2, PRKCQ, SATB1, RASGRP1, LRIG1, DPP4, CD3Z, PDE4D, FYN, WWP1, LAT, DUSP16, KIAA0748, CDR2, STAT4, FLT3LG, IL6ST	78–79

CD8+T cells	Human: FCGBP, C1ORF21, PHEMX, KLRG1, ZNF145, ADRB2, DUSP2, IL2RB, CCL5, GZMC, TBX21, CCL4L, GZMH, PRF1, GNLY, CST7, GPR56, KLRC1, S100B, D12S2489E, CD8B1, CD8A	79, 81, 82

T regulatory cells	Human: AKAP2, ANXA2, C8FW, CALM2, CDH13, ENTPD1, EPSTI1, F5, GBP2, GBP5, HS3ST3B1, HSPCA, ICA1, LAIR2, LGALS3, LOC51191, MKP-7, NINJ2, P53DINP1, PMAIP1, PTPLA, GPR2, HLA-DMA, HLA-DPA1, HLA-DPB1, HLA-DQB1, HLA-DRA, HLA-DRB4, HLA-DRB5, HPGD, PTT1, SAT, SHMT2, TMOD3, TNFRSF6, VIL2, LRRC32, CHAC1, EGR1, PYCR1, IL13, C3AR1, ZBED2, IL10, GAB3, NR4A1, IL1R2, ULBP1, IL17F, EIF4EBP1, RGS16, BCAT1, VEGFA, GIMAP1, GPR44, GPT2, PSPH, NLN, MS4A3, UCK2, TNIP3, TNFRSF9, IL7R, NR4A3, CSGALNA, CT1, SLC43A1, ZBTB32, SCFD2, HK2, C17ORF96, C1ORF186, LYZ, SFXN4, CYP1B1, SLC7A5, C17ORF58, SLC4A5, CD52, KLRB1, S100A4, POLA1, SLC7A1, ATPBD4, UBXN8, CASP8, FAIM3, IL12RB2, MPP7, ZNF831, BNIP3L, LRP8, UTRN, SOCS3, LY9, EVI2B, SFXN3, TNFRSF4, ING4, BLM, TNFSF11, SLFN5, CCR8, CD244, MYO1F, HOMER1, ATF3, AGPAT4, CTH, JAKMIP1, TFRC, RPL26L1, MICAL1, GPRASP1, TMX4, FYB, ZNF792, WDR4, HUWE1, CD83, TRIB2, LARP1B, SLC38A5, AUH, CTPS, CYTH1, APOL3, CHD6, IL1R1, LPCAT4, CITED2, DUSP4, SSBP2, LAYN, ZFAND2B, PIK3R1, GCNT4, PPP3CA, TIMP1, SIRPG, CCR3, PTP4A3, SERINC5, MAGOHB, GIMAP4, KLHL24, CCNG2, WDR70, MYBL1, CNPY4, TIMM8A, CCDC28A, MNAT1, MS4A2, GZMB, E2F5, HIBCH, C9ORF91, NHP2, CDC25B, VDR, CSF1, GPATCH4, NFKBID, TMCO7, EHBP1, FAM173B, FARS2, FLVCR2, NPM3, PNPO, P2RY8, TMEM63A, MXI1, MRTO4, SESN2, C1ORF38, STK38, SLC6A6, ALG14, LXN, TNFRSF18, ACSS1, UBA7, MTSS1, PSMA6, FAM8A1, RAB31, TNRC6B, SESN1, CEP68, LAPTM5, PLAGL2, LRRC33, EIF2B3, URB2, DDX21, ITGA4, RGS2, RORC, IFNAR2, CSDA, SORL1, LRRC37B, IL10RA, PRKACB, CBWD1, SMAD3, C1ORF96, FCER1A, HSP90AB1, EMG1	83–87

B cells	Human: PSEN2, FZD5, PLEKHF2, SIDT2, MTPN, TUBB6, FLJ21127, SMC6L1, KIAA1026, NUP88, GNA12, RNTRE, GSTZ1, RFX5, XYLT1, GL012, EPB41L2, LOC51760, SCRN1, PTD008, CYB561D2, SCAP2, MMP11, ERDJ5, TTC7A, PMAIP1, GARNL4, TMEPAI, SH3BP5, EDD, UCP4, EVI5L, PIK3C2B, SMAD3, LHFPL2, LOC57228, GM2A, HRK, ZNF207, LOC92497, F5, DMXL1, CLIC4, PRCP, DKFZP434C0328, STRBP, PHF16, JUP, TEAD2, PPP3CA, CNR2, ATP5B, ABCA1, BMF, ZCCHC7, KIAA0274, SLC22A3, SPI1, AMFR, ANXA4, EBF, ITPR1, HIST1H2BK, COPS3, COL14A1, SAV1, APOBEC3B, CCNG2, STAG3, LOC348938, POLD4, TBC1D1, MK2S4, APG4A, DAPP1, TNFRSF18, HERPUD1, POU2F2, ADK, CKIP-1, ACTA2, PARP14, MTSS1, DTX1, DDR1, RRAS2, RNF141, SYPL, SSPN, CORO1C, NFKBIE, CHD7, SP140, WDR34, BTNL9, ATP6V0A1, UROS, HLA-DOA, C22ORF13, IFI27, JMJD2B, WEE1, ODC1, KIAA0746, WDR11, SYNGR2, FOXP1, BLR1, MYO1E, MYBL2, GYLTL1B, SETBP1, KLF1, INPPL1, LOC54103, ZNF154, MHC2TA, CD24, ARHGEF3, BIRC3, TRIM56, HLA-DPB1, UVRAG, CD38, PEA15, FLJ10697, TLR10, ARHGAP10, HLA-DRA, SHMT2, LGALS9, FLJ10853, CEBPB, PRICKLE1, LCP21, CR1, KLHL14, TLR7, C20ORF72, HLA-DQB2, CORO1A, PRKCEHECW2, FLJ25604, TRIM26, FBXO41, GCNT1, LRMP, UBE2J1, IGKV3D, PCCA, GLDC, CYSLTR1, BTLA, NET5, HLA-DPA1, BLNK, CD79B, TM4SF8, TFEB, CD11ORF24,ADRBK2, CDKN2A, RIPK2, STX7, NCF4, SRGAP2, SLC2A5, CTSZ, AIM2, TCF4, TPD52, MAP3K8, MOBKL2B, HLA-DOB, IFIT3, MGC24039, BRD4, RALGPS2, SEMA4B, BSG,IGKC, HLA-DRB6, FUBP1, UNC84B, IFNGR2, HSPA5, HLA-DRB5, MARCKS, KYNU, PACAP, RHOBTB2, FLJ12363, TMED8, FGD2, FBXO10, IL4R, CD1C, MGC50844,MRPL49, CTSH, LYN, WASPIP, C3ORF6, EGR1, IGKV15, SPAP1, CHERP, IGHG3, ADAM28, HLA-DMA, HLA-DMB, PALM2-AKAP2, CD86, LAF4, LOC283663, FREB,DKFZP586A0522, UREB1, IGLL1, HLA-DQA2, KIAA1219, PLCG2, MARCH-1, BCNP1, PNOC, CD20, PSCD1, BCL11A, VPS28, SWAP70, SYK, BCL7A, NAP1L, TEM6, BTK,RAB30, FCGR2B, STAT6, BRDG1, LOC201895, ITGB1, CD74, CORO2B, VPREB3, HSPC182, MGC15619, RHOH, IGHA, CYBASC3, KIAA0125, RAM2, CD83, FCRH1, FLII,SNX10, IGHG1, EPHX1, FLJ10979, GTPAP, IGLL3, E2F5, TNFRSF17, BLK, FLJ00332, SNX2, CD200, HLA-DQB1, TRIO, CYBB, PIK3AP1, IRF4, CD22, BACE2, IGJ, PAX5,RGS13, TCL1A, MEF2C, C13ORF18, POU2AF1, HHEX, IRF8, BANK1, OSBPL10, SLC2A1, NCF1, IGL@, IGLC2, SPAP1, IGHG3, HLA-DMA, HLA-DMB, CD79A, HSPA6, IGHD,KIAA0476, SLC7A7, NKG7, CD19, SAMD9, LY86, SPIB, NAPSB, RNASE6, IGHM, LY64, CD72, IRTA2, CD1D, HLA-DQA1, SAS, CTSH, LYN, WASPIP, C3ORF6, EGR1, FREB,DKFZP586A0522	88, 79, 89

Resting NK cells	Human: IL18RAP, PRF1, GZMH, TKTL1	90–92

Macrophages	aMurine: Pecr, Tmem195, Ptplad2, 1810011H11Rik, Fert2, Tlr4, Pon3, Mr1, Arsg, Fcgr1, Camk1, Pld3, Tpp1, Ctsd, Pla2g15, Lamp2, Pla2g4a, MerTK, Tlr7, Cd14, Tbxas1, Fcgr3, Fgd4, Sqrdl, Csf3r, Plod1, Tom1, Myo7a, A930030A15Rik, Sepp1, Glul, Cd164, Tcn2, Dok3, Ctsl, Tspan14	93–95

M1 macrophages	aMurine: Cd38, Cfb, Slfn4, H2-Q6, Fpr1, Slfn1, Gpr18, Ccrl2, Fpr2, Cxcl10, Mpa2IOasl1, Tlr2, Ms4a4c, LOC100503664, Irak3, Hp, Itgal, Herc6, Cd300lf, Isf20, Pstpip2, Cp, Isg15, Herc6, Probe, 1452408_at, Ifi44, E030037K03, Rik, Saa3, Ifit1, Marco, F11r, Rsad2, Ddx60, Pilr1, Cpd, Gngt2, Mx1, Pyhin1, Epb4.1l3, Slfn8, Arhgap24, Nfkbiz, Gbp6, Stat1, Zpb1, D14Erd668e, Ddx58, Tuba4a, H2-T10, Ebi3, Fam176b, Xaf1, Stat2, Sepx1, Ifit2	96

M2 macrophages	aMurine: Ptgs1, Egr2, Olfm1, Flrt2, P2ry1, Vwf, Amz1, Tmem158, Tiam1, Rhoj, Mmp9, Mrc1, Bcar3, Il6st, Tanc2, Mmp12, Tcfec, Clec71, Matk, Myc, Clec10a, Atp6v0a1, Lmna, Chst7, Atp6v0d2, Emp2, Socs6, Atp6v0a1, Plk2, Ptpla	96

Classical monocytes	Human: S100A12, ALOX5AP, PAD14, NRG1, MCEMP1, THBS1, CRISPLD2, F13A1, MOSC1, CYP27A1, CD163, QPCT, ADAM19, ASGR2, RNASE4, ALDH1A1, EDG3, PROK2, CLEC4D, S100A9, OSM, CSPG2, GALS2, ANG, VNN2, EBI2, UTS2, RPPH1, MGST1, IL8, CCR2, SELL, DYSF, MT1F, CD14, RANSE6, CSF3R, STAB1, CYP1B1, ADHFE1, PLA2G7, MMP25, ZNF395, SLC2A3, EGR1, CMTM2, CD9	97, 98

Intermediate monocytes	Human: GFRA2, NKG7, PLVAP, PLAC8, MARCKSL1, E2F2, G8P4, CLEC10A, SCD, COTL1, SLC29A1, DDIT4, TGM2, LILRA3, ATF5, GPA33, C1QC, EVA1, MERTK, MGLL, DDEFL1, MARCO, NR1H3, FBP1, ACP2, GBP1, GPBAR1, SASH1, OLFM1, TIMP1, HLA-DOA, CAMK1, POUFUT1, EPB4IL3, H19, ZNF703, SNX5, CLEC10, AK-ALPHA-1, DPB1, DHRS9, MTHFD2, RGL1, PRDM1, FADS1, SLC2A8, CSK, ISOC2, CD300C, FGD2	97, 98

Nonclassical monocytes	Human: C1QA, HES4, CDKN1C, C1QB, RHOC, CLEC4F, ADA, TAGLN, TCF7L2, CD798, CTSL, SFTPD, ABI3, SETBP1, FGFRL1, CD798, SPRED1, SNFT, EVL, MTSS1, SH2D1B, CYFIP2, NELF, STS-1, SIGLEC10, CKS1B, PTP4A3, LYPD2, SIDT2, INSIG1, LTB, PAPSS2, ABCC3, CASP5, VOM1, HSPB1, GNGT2, HMOX1, RRAS, RNF122, CDH23, FMNL2, RGS12, SGGB3A1, FER1L3, CALML4, IFITM3, CKB, CEACAM3, IFITM1	97, 98

Mature DC’s	Human: ACCL5, CXCL10, CCR7, IL15, IF127, IF144L, IFIH1, IFIT1, MX1, ISG15, ISG20, IRF7, GBP4, DUSP5, NFKB1A, ATF3, TNFSF10, IL6, IL8, IL7R, CCL4, TNFA1P6, IFIT3, OASL, GBP1, HES4, CYP27B1, RIPK2, TNFRSF9, SOD2, CD38, CD44, CD80, CD83, CD86, INDO MT2A, TRAF1, GADD45B, MT1M, MTIP2, BIRC3, USP18, TUBB2A, CCL8, EBI3, IFITM1, MT1B, MT1E, MT1G, MT1H, GADD45A, CD200, LAMP3, RGS1, SAT1	99, 100

Monocyte-derived DC’s	Human: CD1A, CD1B, CD1C, CD23A, MRC1, CD36, HLA-DQA, HLA-DP light chain, HLA-DG protein 41, RIL, RAP1GAP, CCND2, DUSP5, PPIC, STAC, PRKACB, TRIB2, SHB	99–101

Mature neutrophils	Human: ALPL, IL8RB, FCGR3B, SEMA3C, HM74, SOD2, FCGR3A, IL-8, STHM, IL8RA, FCGR2A, CSF3R, NCF2, AOAH	102, 103

Immature neutrophils	Human: AZU1, ELA2, BPI, LCN2, MPO, CTSG, MMP8, DEFA4, DEFA3, CAMP, X-CGD	103–105


Gene	Primer name	Primer sequence

C8J_0133	C8J0133-F	TATTGCTGGGCATAGGAAAGG

	C8J0133-R	TCTAGCAGCTTCTCTTGGAGTA

C8J_0398	C8J0398-F	GCAACATCTACCGTGATGCTAA

	C8J0398-R	ACATATCTACAATCCACCAAATCCA

C8J_0648	C8J0648-F	GTATCAGCAGACATAAGACAAGG

	C8J0648-R	TGCTTTCTTCTAGGTACTCTTTATC

C8J_1333	C8J1333-F	TGAGCTTGCACAAGATGATACC

	C8J1333-R	GCACCAGAATACAAACCCTTCT

C8J_1342	C8J1342-F	GTTGATTTAGTGGCAGTTGGTG

	C8J1342-R	CTCTTTCTACTGCTCCTTGAATACT

C8J_1423	C8J1423-F	AAATTTATGCGCGTGCTTT

	C8J1423-R	AACTATGCCACCAAGCAAA

C8J_1619	C8J1619-F	CCAAAGTGGATAGTATTGCAAGAATTAG

	C8J1619-R	GACGACTTAAAGAACTTGAAACTGG

frdA	qfrdA-F	GTGTGCCTTGGACTAGAGTTAC

	qfrdA-R	CTGCGATATAGCAAGTTCTCCA

ccpA-2	qccpA-2-F	GTGGTATCATTTCTTGTAATACCTGTC

	qccpA-2-R	TGATGAGGATTTGCTGTCCAT

racR	qracR-F	ACGGATACAGCGTTTCAAGAG

	qracR-R	ACTCTTAAGCGACCGATGATAAC

flhB	qflhB-F	GGAAGGAGATCCTCAGGTTAAAG

	qflhB-R	GCATAATGCGTTGGGTTTGT

kpsM	qkpsM-F	TGTGGAACCTTTAAGAACTTTGC

	qkpsM-R	AAGCAAAGGACGAGGAGTTAG

cmeB	qcmeB-F	GCCATAGGGATCGTTGTAGATG

	qcmeB-R	CTATCCAAGCGATGCAAGAAGT

16S rRNA	16S-qF	AGAGATGCATTAGTGCCTTCGGGA

	16S-qR	ACTAAGGATAAGGGTTGCGCTCGT


City(project)	Activities described in final report

Birmingham(Walking Revolution)	Led walks to the park for key stage 2 pupils at one city primary schoolPledge cards for individualsThemed walksCommunity Street AuditsSmall grants fundWalking ChampionsSocial media workStrategic work to share learning

Cambridge(Walk Local)	Promotion of Walk4Life and WfH campaigns (various media), maps and community walks. 7 walks with 108 participantsWalk to work week activities with 17 employersHealth walks in 3 medical centres. 27 participantsBeat the Street piloted in 4 primary schools. 890 participants (3 week intervention)Weekly buggy walks / wild play with young parents and children under 5 years of age. 230 attendances

Leeds and Bradford(Best foot forward)	Themed walksCommunity Street AuditsSmall grants fundTendering delivery to local community organisationsSocial media workStrategic work to share learning3 million steps social reward scheme involved388 people who walked over 15 Million steps in Spring 2015.

Manchester(Get Active)	Active Oldham Outdoors Project:26 Level 1 health walks with 143 participants14 new volunteer walk leadersCapital funding from Public health to improve walking infrastructure in 9 parksActive Trafford Greenspace Project:20 led walks with 278 participants23 new volunteer walk leaders3 GP Surgeries piloting ‘walk prescribing’ or other methods of promoting walking to patients.3 Workplace Walk led walks events held5 new Workplace Walks mapped and promotedBridgewater Canal Walks Project:22 recreational themed walks with 74 participantsSelf-led walking trailPartnership working with a community Leisure TrustFour week Walking FestivalEast Manchester Moving:23 led walks with 163 participants10 led cycle rides with 96 participants8 volunteer action days24 volunteers trained as volunteer walk leaders	Salford Ranger team project:1 new self-guided walking route11 additional recreational walks with 107 participants12 volunteers trained as walk leaders12 led cycle rides with 108 participantsStockport Walkaday Walks Project:13 additional walks with 217 participants4 new volunteer walk leadersTameside Active Outdoors Project:4 new health walks with 30 participants18 new volunteer walk leaders1 new patient from new exercise referral programme5 new self-guided walking routes in production – Proposed launch in 2016The Green Corridor Project:9 led health walks with 91 new participants.5 volunteers trained as walk leaders

Norwich(Walk to)	Group walking champions led walks including 1 km group walk for people with a learning disabilityPledge cards for individualsCommunity Street Audit (1)Small grants fundBeat the Streets project for school children: 1890 participatedSocial media workStrategic work to share learningHealth walks: 185 walks, 12 volunteers and 154 new participantsBeat the Street: 1890 participatedTravel plans: numbers not reported


 	Reference	Nr studies included	Nr subjects included	Pooled effect size (95% CI)

Metabolic dysregulation

Metabolic syndrome	Pan et al. 20121[22]	29	155,333	OR = 1.42 (1.28 to 1.57)

Abdominal obesity	Xu et al. 20111[57]	15	34,832	OR = 1.38 (1.22 to 1.57)

Immuno-inflammatory dysregulation

C-Reactive Protein	Howren et al. 20091[58]	49	51,234	d = 0.15 (0.10 to 0.21)

Interleukin-6	 	61	24,837	d = 0.25 (0.18 to 0.31)

Interleukin-1β	 	14	756	d = 0.35 (0.03 to 0.67)

Interleukin-1RA	 	9	1,214	d = 0.25 (0.04 to 0.46)

Interleukin-6	Dowlati et al. 20102[59]	16	892	MD = 1.8 pg/mL (1.2 to 2.3)

TNF-α	 	13	788	MD = 4.0 pg/mL (2.2 to 5.7)

Interleukin-1β	 	9	533	MD = -1.6 pg/mL (-3.6 to 0.4)

Soluble Interleukin-2R	Liu et al. 20122[60]	8	596	MD = 0.56 pg/mL (0.28 to 0.84)

Interleukin-6	 	18	923	MD = 0.68 pg/mL (0.44 to 0.92)

TNF-α	 	15	995	MD = 0.55 pg/mL (0.13 to 0.99)

Interleukin-1β	 	10	580	MD = -0.53 pg/mL (-1.36 to 0.31)

Autonomic dysregulation

Heart rate variability	Rottenberg, 20072[61]	13	686	d = 0.33 (0.18 to 0.49)

Heart rate variability	Kemp et al. 20102[62]	14	726	Hedges’ g = -0.21 (-0.40 to -0.02)4

HPA-axis dysregulation

Higher cortisol 3	Stetler and Miller 20111[63]	354	18,374	d = 0.60 (0.54 to 0.66)

Higher ACTH	 	96	3,812	d = 0.28 (0.16 to 0.41)

Higher CRH	 	16	888	d = -0.53 (-1.71 to 0.65)

Saliva morning cortisol	Knorr et al. 20101[64]	20	2,318	MD = 2.6 nmol/l (1.0 to 4.2)

Saliva evening cortisol	 	10	1,617	MD = 0.3 nmol/l (0.03 to 0.5)


Gene	BMPR1A	SMAD4	PTEN	STK11

Name	Bone morphogenetic protein receptor, type Ia	Mothers against decapentaplegic, drosophila, homolog of, 4	Phosphatase and tensin homologue	Serine/threonine protein kinase 11

Function of the protein	receptor	signalling protein	phosphatase	kinase

MIM	*601299	*600993	*601728	*602216

Chromosome	10q22.3	18q21	10q23.31	19q13.3

Size	168.5 kbp	38.5 kbp	108 kbp	23 kbp

Exons	13	11	9	10

Amino acids	532	552	403	433

Transcript (bp)	3613	8365	9007	3276

Mass of protein	60 kDa	60 kDa	47 kDa	48.6 kDa


Variable	Cases (n=110)	Controls (n=110)

Average age at blood collection, years (SD)	44.2 (7.3)	44.2 (7.2)

Average age at cancer diagnosis, years (SD)	55.9 (8.6)	n/a

Average time from blood collection to diagnosis, years (SD)	12.6 (5.1)	n/a

Date of blood collection, median, calendar years (range)	1990 (1986-1991)	1990 (1986-1991)

Date of birth, median, calendar years (range)	1948 (1923-1955)	1948 (1923-1955)

Male sex, number (%)	82 (74.5%)	82 (74.5%)

Average sample storage time in freezer, years (SD)	24.7 (1.5)	24.7 (1.5)

Blood collection to glioblastoma diagnosis, number/time period

 0–5 years	8	n/a

 5–10 years	26	n/a

 10–15 years	35	n/a

 15–20 years	37	n/a

 >20 years	4	n/a


Subject area	Frequency	% N = 8619 a

Medicine	5406	62.7

Immunology and Microbiology	3075	35.7

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology	1681	19.5

Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics	533	6.2

Agricultural and Biological Sciences	407	4.7

Veterinary	283	3.3

Multidisciplinary	234	2.7

Social Sciences	179	2.1

Chemistry	170	2.0

Environmental Science	133	1.5

Nursing	123	1.4


Variability of U6 and miR-99b as reference assays

	hsa-miR-99b	U6

	P-value	C of V	P-value	C of V

Nucleus accumbens	0.69	0.40	0.024*	0.71

EDL	0.64	0.22	0.13	0.86

Soleus	0.23	0.23	0.09	0.21


Name	Species	Activity against	Cytotoxic activity	Anticancer activity	Reference

Sesquin 	Vigna sesquipedalis 	MCF-7 and M1	Not tested	Yes	[44]

Limenin	Phaseolus limensis 	L1210 and M1	Not tested	Yes	[41]

Lunatusin	Phaseolus lunatus 	MCF-7rabbit reticulocyte	Yes	Yes	[45]

Purple pole defensin	Phaseolus vulgaris cv. “Extra-long Purple Pole bean”	HepG2, MCF7, HT-29, and SiHa	No	Yes	[46]

Coccinin	Phaseolus coccineus cv. “Major”	HL60 and L1210	No	Yes	[47]

Phaseococcin	Phaseolus coccineus 	L1210 and HL60	No	Yes	[48]

γ-Thionin	Capsicum chinense 	HeLa	No	Yes	[49]

NaD1	Nicotiana alata 	U937	Not tested	Yes	[67]

Mitogenic defensin	Phaseolus vulgaris 	MCF-7, murine splenocytes	Yes	Yes	[68]

Vulgarinin	Phaseolus vulgaris 	MCF-7, L1210, and M1	Not tested	Yes	[69]

Cloud bean defensin	Phaseolus vulgaris cv. cloud bean	L1210 and MBL2	Not tested	Yes	[70]

Nepalese	Phaseolus angularis 	L1210, MBL2	Not tested	Yes	[71]

Gymnin	Gymnocladus chinensis Baill	M1, HepG2, and L1210	Not tested	Yes	[72]


 	Odds ratio	95% CI	p-value

Aortic valve replacement	4.36	2.68–7.07	< 0.001

Chronic heart failure	1.81	1.10–2.99	< 0.001

EuroSCORE (per point)	1.10	1.03–1.17	< 0.001

Age (per year)	1.05	1.03–1.07	< 0.001


Pulse feature	Frequency	Proportion of the total (%)

Rate

Normal	33	76.7

Slow	1	2.3

Fast	6	14.0

Uneven	2	4.6

Left pulse

Slippery	15	34.9

Thin	15	34.9

Soft/weak	23	53.5

Wiry	22	51.2

Right pulse

Slippery	18	41.9

Thin	19	44.2

Soft/Weak	25	58.1

Wiry	15	34.9


Clinical / laboratory characteristic	Number of patients (of n = 99)

Altered level of consciousness	99

Fever	93

Headache	54

Seizures	58

Prodromal symptoms	77

Focal neurological signs	44

 Cerebellar signs	12

 Extrapyramidal signs	6

Neuropsychiatric symptoms	21

Cerebrospinal fluid

 Protein >40 mg/dl	22

 CSF:plasma glucose ratio < 30%	39

 Pleocytosis	26

 Gram stain positivity	0

 Bacterial culture positivity	0


Implementation unit	No. of pools	Average pool size	No. of An. gambiae processed	No. of An. gambiae collected	% of An. gambiae processed	Positive	95% CI

Cinkasse	166	15.9	2646	2782	95.1	0	0–0.073

Kpendjal	172	14.5	2495	2807	88.9	0	0–0.077

Tone	291	13.9	4050	5283	76.7	0	0–0.047

Total	629	14.6	9191	10,872	84.5	0	0–0.021


	Subjects (n = 35)

Age (yrs)	22.6 ± 3.5

Height (cm)	177.1 ± 7.1

Weight (kg)	77.0 ± 11.0


 	Time period	Findings

1	Any time-point	Brain death.

2	<24 h from ROSC	Early myoclonus status# and bilateral absence of N20 peak on SSEP after rewarming.

3	72 h after rewarming	GCS-M 1–2 and bilateral absence of N20 peak on SSEP performed 48–72 hours after rewarming, or later.

4	72 h after rewarming	A treatment refractory status epilepticus* and GCS-M 1–2.


Percentage of biobanks which get specimens from...	n	%

Direct from individuals donating them	343	75

Residual specimens acquired from clinical care in hospitals, clinical laboratories, or pathology departments	261	57

Research	60	13

Residual specimens from public health departments or programs	19	4

Vendors	8	2

Organ/body donation organization	7	2

Other repositories	7	2

Other	6	1

Orphaned collections	4	1


Strategy	Intervention	Comments

Formulary restriction	Only certain agents available for use	Effective, minimal effort to maintain, usurps prescriber autonomy, ‘squeezing the balloon’

Pre-authorization	Certain agents available if specific criteria are met	Effective, allows education, requires designated call person, creates tension between prescriber and stewardship program, clinician may circumvent the system

Audit and feedback	Review of ordered antimicrobials or culture results	Customizable, educational, maintains prescriber autonomy, recommendations specific to clinical situation, optional, time intensive, requires reviewer with broad knowledge

Guidelines/clinical pathways	Development of institution specific recommendations for management of specific disease states	Ability to standardize practice and meet quality measures; customized to institutional needs, resources and formulary, compliance usually not mandatory; perception of ‘cookbook medicine’

Education	Education to clinicians regarding appropriate antimicrobial use	Alters behavioral patterns, improves compliance with guidelines, decreased misuse, poor efficacy of passive education, diminishing effect over time, rotation of personal means repeated education needed

Biomarkers	Use of laboratory information (procalcitonin, etc.) to assist in therapy decisions	Objective marker, well validated in certain situations, must be used with overall patient evaluation, false positive and negative results can occur, clinicians must be able to interpret to use correctly

Antibiotic cycling	Scheduled removal and substitution of antimicrobial or class	May decrease resistance rates, compliance difficult due to patient allergies, national guidelines, and adverse events

Combination therapy	Use of two or more agents to prevent resistance and improve clinical outcomes	Evidence for improvement in clinical outcomes is variable, minimal data to support decrease in resistance, increased risk of allergy and toxicity, increased cost

Streamlining/de-escalation	Narrowing of broad spectrum therapy when no pathogen isolated or targeting of pathogen isolated	Decreases antimicrobial use and costs, allows narrowest effective therapy if culture data available, possible under-treatment if no culture data acquired, treatment of colonizers

Dose optimization	Use of pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) parameters to optimize dosing	Improves likelihood of achieving PK-PD targets, may allow use of agents against resistant pathogens, may decrease selection of resistant strains, some data improves clinical outcomes, requires expertise and time, may be limited by microbiologic data available (MIC), limited data on clinical outcomes

Computerized decision support	Use of information technology to assist clinicians in antimicrobial decision making	Can be integrated into EHR, integrates local data for customized recommendations, requires significant technology and personnel input to set up, alert fatigue, requires constant updating

IV to oral conversion	Agents with excellent oral bioavailability are switched from IV to oral	Decreases cost and need for IV access, may decrease length of stay, only certain agents have excellent oral bioavailability


Days post CD instillation	Reactors

PC (GC mL−1)	TDC (GC mL−1)

0.25	7.4	7.3

1	5.7	6.2

2	4.4	5.1

3	ND	ND

4	ND	ND

5	ND	ND

6	ND	ND

7	ND	ND

8	ND	ND

9	ND	6.0

10	ND	6.0

11	ND	6.4

12	ND	6.9

13	ND	7.1

14	ND	7.5

15	ND	7.8

16	ND	7.8


Variable	Pre-study	Post-study	Treatment interaction p-value

Saliva IgA concentration (μg . mL-1)			0.461

 Low	333 ± 181	314 ± 152

 Medium	292 ± 143	302 ± 151

 High	315 ± 159	289 ± 158

Saliva protein IgA concentration (μg . mg-1)			0.675

 Low	471 ± 162	484 ± 156

 Medium	444 ± 170	419 ± 155

 High	535 ± 224	499 ± 187

Saliva IgA secretion rate (μg . min-1)			0.476

 Low	173 ± 135	220 ± 163

 Medium	185 ± 118	233 ± 129

 High	207 ± 118	212 ± 74


			Gene set = G	Centroid set = C

Data set	S	D	j	Description	cj0	cj1	vjP

Colon cancer	Swirl	1	1772	myosin heavy chain	44	125	61

			249	desmin	1958	467	793

			1582	p cadherin	53	174	83

			1423	myosin reg light chain 2	763	196	213

			745	ORF, xq terminal portion	188	226	179

Leukemia 1	Swirl	1	3532	glutathione S-transferase	37	1460	569

Medulloblastoma	Swirl	1	977	zinc finger protein HZfq	38	-102	87

Prostate cancer	Swirl	1	8850	cDNA DKFZp564A072	24	215	110

Leukemia 2	Swirl	1	8828	HLA class II alpha	785	41345	7280


Features analysed	P. aeruginosa pangenome

Genomes	181

Total genes	1,117,803

Average genome size	6175 genes

Pangenome size (non-redundant genes)	16,820

Core genome	2503 genes

Accessory genome	9108 genes

Unique genes	5209

Average unique genes/strain	16

Gene families under positive selection	233


	N (%)

Median age at diagnosis (range)	63 (20–92)

Histological subtype

 High-grade serous	90 (92.7)

 High-grade endometrioid	5 (5.2)

 Clear cell	2 (2.1)

FIGO stage at diagnosis

 I	7 (7.2)

 II	4 (4.1)

 III	73 (75.3)

 IV	13 (13.4)

ER-status

 Positive	50 (51.5)

 Negative	1 (1)

 Unknown	46 (47.4)

PR-status

 Positive	20 (20.1)

 Negative	11 (11.3)

 Unknown	66 (68)

Primary Surgery status

 Complete debulking	37 (38.1)

 Suboptimal debulking (>1 cm residual disease)	44 (45.3)

 No surgery	16 (16.5)

Platinum-sensitivity

 Platinum-sensitive	39 (40)

 Platinum-resistant	58 (60)

Number of lines of prior chemotherapy

 1	18 (18.6)

 2	15 (15.5)

 3	21 (21.6)

 4	17 (17.5)

 5	10 (10.3)

 ≥ 6	16 (16.5)


Variable	Breakpoint-Specific PCR	Concordance, %

CN1	CN2+	Fail	Total

Sequence read depth: Thailand

 CN1	57 (22a)	13 (13)	1	71	...

 CN2+	0	17 (7)	0	17	...

 Total	57	30	1	88	85

qPCR: Thailand

 CN1	33 (11b)	3 (2)	1	37	...

 CN2+	1 (0)	9 (4)	1	11	...

 Total	34	12	2	48	91

qPCR: Indonesia

 CN1	25	0	2	27	...

 CN2+	0	0	0	0	...

 Total	25	0	2	27	100


							Yield (%)

Entry	Catalyst	Additive (equiv.)	Solvent	Temp.(K)	O2 (MPa)	Time (h)	FDCA	DFF	HFCA	FFCA	Comments	Reference

1	Ru(OH)x/CeO2	—	Water	413	0.25	6	38	12	50	—	Reuse (3 times)	[173]

2b	Ru(OH)x/MgAl2O4	—	Water	413	0.5	18	56	4	30	—	Reuse (4 times), leaching (Mg: 0.9%, Ru: 0.02%)	[174]

3c	Ru(OH)x/La2O3	—	[EMIm] [OAc]	373	3	5	48	—	12	—	Leaching (9.9%)	[175]

4	Au/CeO2	NaOH (4)	Water	338	Flow (1)	8	>99	—	—	—	Au/CeO2: reuse (3 times), leaching (no)	[176]

	Au/TiO2	NaOH (4)	Water	338	Flow (1)	8	>99	—	—	—		[176]

5	Pt/C	NaOH (2)	Water	295	0.68	6	79	—	21	—	Pt/C: reuse (3 times),	[177]

	Pd/C	NaOH (2)	Water	295	0.68	6	71	—	29	—	Au/C: leaching (no)	[177]

	Au/C	NaOH (2)	Water	295	0.68	6	8	—	92	—		[177]

6	Au/hydrotalcite	—	Water	368	Flow (0.1)	7	>99	—	—	—	Reuse (3 times), leaching (no)	[178]

7d	Au/TiO2	HTFA (18–21)	AcOH	403	1	3	—	—	—	78	—	[179]

8	Au/HY zeolite	NaOH (4)	Water	333	0.3	6	>99	—	—	—	Reuse (4 times)	[180]

9	Ru/C	—	Water	383	2	—	—	29	—	<1	Reuse (5 times, decrease in activity), leaching (no)	[181]

10e	Ag/OMS-2	—	IPA	438	1.5 (air)	6	—	99	—	—	Reuse (6 times)	[182]

11	Au–Cu/TiO2	NaOH (4)	Water	368	1	4.5	95	—	5	—	Reuse (5 times), leaching (≤2% after 5th reuse)	[183]

12	Pt–Bi/C	NaHCO3 (4)	Water	373	4 (air)	6	98	—	1	—	Reuse (5 times), leaching (<0.5%)	[184]

13f	Au8Pd2/AC	NaOH (2)	Water	333	0.3	2	99	—	1	—	Reuse (5 times), leaching (no)	[185]

14	Au–Pd/CNT	—	Water	373	0.5	12	94	—	—	2	Reuse (6 times)	[186]


Antimicrobial	MIC (μg/ml)

Nisin A	12.5

Nisin V	6.25

M21A	6.25

Citric Acid	2340

99% cinnamaldehyde	625

Lactoferrin	>2500

Sodium acetate	250,000

Sodium benzoate	25,000

Carvacrol	310

Potassium sorbate	37,500

Nisaplin®	393


Number of region	Color	Maximum number of correctly sequenced syllables	Minimum number of correctly sequenced syllables

1	dark red	90	75

2	red	74	61

3	light red	60	45

4	light blue	44	31

5	blue	30	15

6	dark blue	14	0


EZ Metric Endpoint	Weighting factor

24 hpf mortality	1.0

120 hpf mortality	0.95

Heart malformation	0.12

Brain malformation	0.12

Yolk sac edema	0.1

Notochord malformation	0.08

Curved axis	0.08

Trunk malformation	0.06

Delayed developmental progression	0.06

Occluded circulation	0.04

Eye malformation	0.04

Jaw malformation	0.04

Lack of spontaneous movement	0.04

Somite malformation	0.02

Motility	0.02

Lack of touch response	0.02

Snout malformation	0.02

Otic malformation	0.02

Caudal/pectoral fin malformation	0.02

Atypical pigmentation	0.02

Atypical swim bladder inflation	0.02


Parameter	Symbol	Nominal value

Maximal firing rate	Qmax	250 s−1

Average spike-threshold	θ	15 mV

Spike-threshold deviation	σ	3.3 mV

Synaptic decay rate	α	50 s−1

Synaptic rise rate	β	200 s−1

Synaptic strength from e to e neurons	νee	1 mV s

Synaptic strength from i to e neurons	νei	−1.8 mV s

Synaptic strength from s to e neurons	νes	3.2 mV s

Synaptic strength from i to i neurons	νii	−1.8 mV s

Synaptic strength from e to i neurons	νie	1 mV s

Synaptic strength from s to i neurons	νis	3.2 mV s

Synaptic strength from r to s neurons	νsr	−0.8 mV s

Synaptic strength from e to s neurons	νse	2.2 mV s

Synaptic strength from s to r neurons	νrs	0.6 mV s

Synaptic strength from e to r neurons	νre	1.6 mV s

Average noise level	νsnφn	2.0 mV

Noise standard deviation	σn	0.2 mV

Cortico-thalamic delay	τ	0.04 s

Cortical damping rate	γ	100 s−1


Gene set/pathway	NTk q value	NEk q value

Regulation of cell growth (GO:0001558)	0.0	0.0

Nuclear pore complex (GO:0046930)	0.0	0.03

Negative regulation of cellular metabolism (GO:0031324)	0.0	0.04

Chromatin remodeling (GO:0016568)	0.0	0.055

PI3K-AKT signaling pathway (humanpaths)	0.0	0.1

Histone acetyltransferase binding (GO:0035035)	0.0	0.2

cAMP/Ca2+ signaling (humanpaths)	0.0	0.3

Spliceosome complex (GO:0005681)	0.0	0.9


			No. of individuals with genotype (%)

Population and disease	No.	VariantAllele Frequency (%)	Ser/Ser	Ser/Leu	Leu/Leu	P valuea

Ghana, delivering women

 P. falciparum positive	541	0.1	540 (99.8)	1 (0.2)	0 (0)	0.49

 P. falciparum negative	554	0	554 (100)	0 (0)	0 (0)

Germany

 Sepsis patients	223	18.1	170 (76.2)	43 (19.3)	10 (4.5)	0.19

 Controls	188	19.2	138 (74.4)	48 (25.5)	2 (1.1)b

Bangladesh

 Leprosy patients	263	16.3	186 (70.7)	68 (25.9)	9 (3.4)	0.22

 Controls	280	17.2	188 (67.1)	88 (31.5)	4 (1.4)

Turkey						0.11

 Leprosy patients	60	10.8	47 (78)	13 (21)	0 (0)

 Controls	100	6.5	88 (88)	11 (11)	1 (1)


	Healthy	Milder fibrosis	Significant fibrosis	Early Cirrhosis

Number	42	24	32	12

Age (Mean ± SD)	32.9 ± 9.2	37.4 ± 12.4	34.4 ± 11.7	38.5 ± 14.4

Gender (Male/Female)	42/0	22/2	28/4	10/2


GEO ID	Description

GSE43559 (gene expression)

GSM1065332	PGC E13 F3-Control biological rep1

GSM1065333	PGC E13 F3-Control biological rep2

GSM1065334	PGC E13 F3-Vinclozolin biological rep1

GSM1065335	PGC E13 F3-Vinclozolin biological rep2

GSM1065336	PGC E16 F3-Control biological rep1

GSM1065337	PGC E16 F3-Control biological rep2

GSM1065338	PGC E16 F3-Vinclozolin biological rep1

GSM1065339	PGC E16 F3-Vinclozolin biological rep2

GSE59510 (promoter methylation)

GSM1438556	E16-Vip2/Cip2

GSM1438557	E13-Vip2/Cip1

GSM1438558	E13-Vip1/Cip1

GSM1438559	E16-Vip1/Cip1

GSM1438560	E16-Vip2/Cip1

GSM1438561	E13-Vip2/Cip2


Variables	Total cholesterol<150 mg/dL(n = 68)	Total cholesterol>150 mg/dL(n = 97)

Age in years	39.8 ± 7.9	41.1 ± 7.2

Men	72%	68%

Women	28%	32%

Black	65%	55%

Hispanic	33%	29%

White	0%	16%

Annual income

Less than $10,000	89%	88%

$11,000-$20,000	9%	10%

More than $20,000	2%	2%

Cigarette smoker	81%	80%

Hazardous alcohol use	64%	48%

Drug use	42%	39%

Albumin in mg/dl	4.0 ± 0.4	4.1 ± 0.5

Body mass index in kg/m2	26.2 ± 6.2	27.4 ± 6.7

Number of years diagnosed with HIV	9.7 ± 6.6	8.7 ± 5.6


	EG mean (SD)	CG mean (SD)

H1: General self-care managementa

 Baseline	46.19 (13.13)	46.31 (8.97)

 1 month	50.57 (4.89)	50.76 (6.73)

H2: Self-care specific to HFa

 Baseline	49.37 (20.37)	46.25 (14.50)

 1 month	75.23 (10.60)	69.48 (16.66)

H3: Perceived competence to manage HFa

 Baseline	20.13 (4.08)	19.06 (5.30)

 1 month	23.29 (3.27)	23.85 (4.02)

H4: Behavioral Questionnaire of the Elderly-Health activities

 H4a A-motivationb

 Baseline	7.88 (3.98)	5.87 (3.46)

 1 month	4.14 (2.18)	6.08 (3.64)

H4b: External extrinsic motivationb

 Baseline	13.00 (4.77)	15.13 (4.73)

 1 month	16.29 (6.40)	13.85 (5.32)

H4c: Internal extrinsic motivationa

 Baseline	16.65 (2.93)	16.38 (3.16)

 1 month	19.29 (1.77)	17.54 (3.23)

H4d: Intrinsic motivationa

 Baseline	11.13 (5.58)	9.63 (4.26)

 1 month	10.86 (7.55)	9.77 (5.48)

H5: Family Care Climate Questionnaire-Patient versiona

 Baseline	57.56 (7.97)	60.19 (5.24)

 1 month	61.86 (6.63)	62.46 (6.57)

H6: Family Care Climate Questionnaire-Family versiona

 Baseline	58.13 (4.94)	57.94 (6.69)

 1 month	60.21 (4.93)	57.85 (6.45)


Factors	Odds ratio	95% confidence interval

Nicardipine vs. labetalol	2.73	1.113-6.698

Female	3.311	1.36-8.064

No history of stroke	5.38	1.565-18.468


Strains	Clinical signs first evident	No. leisions/total	Mortalitye	Main clinical signs	Salient gross lesions

 	 	 	 	SPF chickens

Herts/33	2 dpi	12/12	8/8	severe depression, lethargy, ruffled feathers, eyelid edema, diarrhea, open-mouth breathing	Spleen, Atr; Intestene, Hem; Proventriculus, Hem; Pancreas, Nec; Thymus, Hem; Larynx and trachea, Hem;

ZJ1	2 dpi	12/12	8/8	severe depression, lethargy, ruffled feathers, eyelid edema, diarrhea, open-mouth breathing	Spleen, Nec; Intestene, Hem + Nec; Proventriculus, Hem; Pancreas, Nec; Thymus, Hem; Larynx and trachea, Hem;

JS-5-05-Go	2 dpi	12/12	8/8

XJ-2/97	2 dpi	12/12	8/8

JS-3-05-Ch	2 dpi	12/12	8/8

 	 	 	 	Geese

Herts/33	4 dpi	12/12	4/8	morderate depression, diarrhea, crouch, nasal discharge, eyelid edema	Spleen, Atr; Intestene, Hem, Proventriculus, Ed + Hem; Pancreas, Nec;Thymus, Hem; Larynx and trachea, Hem;

ZJ1	3 dpi	12/12	5/8	morderate to severe depression, diarrhea, crouch, nasal discharge, eyelid edema	Spleen, Nec; Intestene, Hem + Nec; Proventriculus, Ed + Hem; Pancreas, Nec; Thymus, Hem; Larynx and trachea, Hem;

JS-5-05-Go	3 dpi	12/12	6/8

XJ-2/97	3 dpi	12/12	5/8

JS-3-05-Ch	3 dpi	12/12	6/8


	PKS/NRPS	LuxRI	Bacteriocin	Siderophore	Terpene	Ectoine

Leisingera sp. ANG-Vp	1	1	0	1	0	1

Leisingera sp. ANG-M1	1	1	0	0	0	1

Leisingera sp. ANG1	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-DT	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-S	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-S3	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-M6	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-S5	1	1	0	1	0	0

Leisingera sp. ANG-M7	1	1	0	1	0	0

Ruegeria sp. ANG-R	1	2	3	0	0	1

Ruegeria sp. ANG-S4	2	2	3	0	0	0

Tateyamaria sp. ANG-S1	0	1	2	1	1	0


 	Veterinary rating of pet owner compliance in endemic regions

 	Number clinics responding (% responding)

 	Excellent	Good	Reasonable	Poor	Non-compliant	Responders

France	10 (21)	7 (15)	19 (40)	4 (9)	7 (15)	47

Spain	0 (0)	21 (51)	17 (41)	3 (7)	0 (0)	41

Italy	26 (24)	76 (71)	2 (2)	3 (3)	0 (0)	107

Total	36 (18)	104 (53)	38 (19)	10 (5)	7 (4)	195


	Gene features	Clinical covariates	Samples

UPP	44,928	21	251

MAINZ	22,283	21	200

TransBig	22,283	21	198

VDX	22,283	21	344

TCGA	19,420	5	3096


Outcome	Model A	Model B	Model C

BMI z-score increment

LMW metabolites	0.07 (0.02, 0.13)*	0.03 (–0.03, 0.09)	0.03 (–0.03, 0.09)

HMW metabolites	–0.003 (–0.05, 0.05)	–0.01 (–0.06, 0.04)	–0.01 (–0.06, 0.04)

DEHP metabolites	–0.01 (–0.06, 0.04)	–0.02 (–0.07, 0.03)	–0.01 (–0.06, 0.03)

Overweight OR

LMW metabolites	1.08 (0.97, 1.19)	1.01 (0.90, 1.14)	1.01 (0.90, 1.13)

HMW metabolites	0.97 (0.86, 1.10)	0.96 (0.85, 1.08)	0.96 (0.86, 1.09)

DEHP metabolites	0.95 (0.84, 1.08)	0.95 (0.84, 1.06)	0.95 (0.85, 1.07)

Obesity OR

LMW metabolites	1.12 (0.99, 1.25)	1.02 (0.89, 1.16)	1.02 (0.90, 1.17)

HMW metabolites	1.02 (0.89, 1.17)	1.03 (0.88, 1.20)	1.04 (0.89, 1.22)

DEHP metabolites	1.01 (0.88, 1.16)	1.02 (0.88, 1.19)	1.04 (0.89, 1.20)

Model A adjusts only for urinary creatinine; model B alsoincludes sex, poverty–income ratio, parental education, serum cotinine,age, and race/ethnicity category; model C includes model B covariatesplus caloric intake and television watching. All associations are withthe natural log of the phthalate metabolite concentration. Resultsrepresent increase in odds of BMI z-score per unit log increase inphthalate metabolite. *p < 0.05.


Features for Event Detection	Results	Ref

Spatio-temporal of Markov Random Field (MRF) for motion vectors and object tracking	Overall success rate is 94.6% for horizontal and vertical traffic	[110]

Discrete Cosine Transform (DCT) coefficient feature vector with traffic detections using Gaussian mixture HMM	HMM classifier correctly detected 91% to 94% under different illumination situations	[107]

Spatio-temporal motion trajectories using MRF	Able to detect accidents at a very high recall rate, which is more than 90%	[114]

Blob tracker using Kalman filter	Results reported that the percentage of falsely classified vehicle modes was about 3%	[100]

Extracted features: shape, position, motion and track object using Kalman filter	Correctly classify five types of vehicle behavior and pedestrians with 86% to 96% accuracy	[105]

Motion trajectories and hierarchical clustering	Half total error rate (HTER) = 11% and area under the curve (AUC) > 0.8	[109]

Motion trajectories; velocities of motion vector	The accuracy increases up to 95%, tested on two video clips (277 frame sequences)	[116]

Target trajectories with context free grammar (CFG) representations	Results reported using (1) stochastic CFG, TP = 86%, TN = 14%; (2) HMM, TP = 55%, TN = 45%	[117]

Optical flow and K-means clustering	Only visual sample results; no empirical analysis	[102]

Local motion patterns to initialize the Gaussian mixture model (GMM)	Accuracy of detection measured = 83.23%, and the error rate is 16.77%	[113]

Motion trajectories and C-means clustering	Results reported that the false rejection rate (FRR) = 6%, and the false acceptance rate (FAR) = 8.3%	[111]

Track target trajectories and learn rules using grammar representations	The accuracy increased from 73% to 98.6% when tested on five traffic sub-events with different parsing parameters, θ and ω	[94]

Lane tracking using particle swarm optimization (PSO) particle filters (PF)	Results indicated that particle filter output is smoother than the PSO-PF algorithm	[103]


The pair of parameters	R Spearman	p

Number of metastases & WBC	0.795611	0.000000

Number of metastases & LYM	0.785315	0.000000

Number of metastases & MON	0.788080	0.000000

Number of metastases & GRA	0.755175	0.000001

Number of metastases & MCV	0.632756	0.000102

Number of metastases & MCH	0.515611	0.002525


Characteristics	Private health facilities	Public health facilities	p value

Frequency (%)	Frequency (%)

Location

 Urban	194/241 (81)	25/52 (48)	<0.01*

 Rural	47/241 (19)	27/52 (52)	0.02*

Level of facility

 Health centre II		31/52 (59.6)

 Health centre III	–	16/52 (30.8)	–

 Health centre IV		3/52 (5.8)

 Hospital		2/52 (3.8)

Type of facility		Ownership

 Drug shop	170/241 (71)	Government 39/52 (75)

 Private clinic	59/241 (24)	Private for profit 6/52 (12)	–

 Pharmacy	12/241 (5)	Private not for profit 7/52 (13)

Drug shop/private clinic registered			–

 Yes	191/241 (79)	–

 No	50/241 (21)

Days when facility is open

 Monday to friday	241/241 (100)	53/53 (100)	–

 Saturdays	232/241 (96)	49/53 (92.4)

 Sundays	191/241 (79)	39/53 (74)

Number of Children with fever seen on atypical day	Median 4 (IQR 3)	Median 8 (IQR 6)

Children with cough seen on atypical day	Median 5 (IQR 7)	Median 10 (IQR 11)

Children with diarrhoea seen on atypical day	Median 2 (IQR 2)	Median 3 (IQR 3)

Patients’ register present

 Yes	93/241 (39)	53/53 (100)	<0.01*

 No	148/241 (61)	–


Outcome	LMWH (D or E) vs. Control	SE	P-Value	Impact on Risk

<underline>VTE Risk in Placebo Trials</underline>	<underline>Relative Risk</underline>

Both drugs vs. placebo	0.50 (0.40 - 0.61)		<0.001	↓by 50%

RR difference between drugs (E vs. D)	0.23 (i.e. 12%)	0.25	0.36	NS

<underline>Region (vs. North American)</underline>

European trial	0.33	0.49	0.50	NS

Global trial	0.20	0.58	0.73	NS

LMWH dosing1	-0.09	0.53	0.87	NS

LMWH treatment duration2	-0.21	0.31	0.51	NS

Year of publication	0.04	0.04	0.34	NS

<underline>Risk of Major Bleeds</underline>

Both drugs vs. placebo	1.19(0.39 - 3.55)		0.76	NS

Risk difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	-0.94	1.25	0.45	NS

<underline>Risk of HIT</underline>

Both drugs vs. placebo	1.13 (0.36 - 3.53)		0.83	NS

RR difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	-0.85	2.0	0.48	NS

<underline>Risk of Death</underline>

Both drugs vs. placebo	0.72 (0.22-2.34)		0.59	NS

RR difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	0.22	1.28	0.86	NS

<underline>VTE Risk in UH Trials</underline>

Both drugs vs. UH	0.83 (0.66-1.05)		0.12	NS

RR difference between drugs (E vs. D)	-0.24 (i.e. - 22%)	0.61	0.66	NS

<underline>Risk of Major Bleeds</underline>

Both drugs vs. UH	0.70 (0.35-1.38)		0.30	NS

RR difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	NA

<underline>Risk of HIT</underline>

Both drugs vs. UH	0.61 (0.21-1.77)		0.36	NS

RR difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	0.56	1.53	0.71	NS

<underline>Risk of Death</underline>

Both drugs vs. UH	0.59 (0.12-3.1)		0.53	NS

RR difference between Drugs (E vs. D)	NA


Quality indicators of colonoscopy	Patients included in primary analysis1	Patients included in secondary analysis2	Recommended	Provincial endoscopist performance, 2015

Cecal intubation rate, %	98	97	≥ 95	97 - 99

PR, screening, men %	36	45	-	34 - 50

PR, screening, women %	34	34	-	34 - 50

ADR, screening, men, %	25	40	≥ 25	-

ADR, screening, women, %	19	30	≥ 15	-

Inadequate bowel preparation, %	7	6	≤ 10	3 - 7

Withdrawal time3 (SD)	6 (5)	6 (5)	6-7	-

Complications

 Bleeding rate, %	0.0	0.0	≤ 0.1	0.1 - 0.5

 Bowel perforation rate, %	0.0	0.0	≤ 0.1	0.1 - 0.8

 Other rate, %	0.0	0.0	-	-


Respondent profile (%)	Child profile (%)

Relationship to child	Sex

Mother	67.3	Male	53.8

Father	15.7	Female	46.2

Grandmother	15.7	Age group (years)

Grandfather	1.2	1-2	32.7

Occupation	3-5	32.9

PMEB	28.7	6-10	34.4

Other white collar	19.7	Race

Blue collar	7.4	Chinese	64.4

Housewife	37.6	Malay	16.7

Unemployed	2.9	Indian/other	18.9

Other	3.7

Education

None	2.0

Primary	13.3

Secondary	37.3

Tertiary (polytechnic)	19.7

Tertiary (university)	27.8


Promoter	Line name	Replica	Total plant #	Total GUS+	Total GUS−	%GUS+

pLeExt1	<underline>LIG29-2</underline>	3	18	18	0	100

LIG31A-19	2	11	11	0	100

LIG26-7	2	11	9	2	81.82

pAtCortex	<underline>CoG11-6</underline>	3	13	13	0	100

CoG29-1	2	10	10	0	100

CoG5b-23	2	10	0	10	0

pAtE29	<underline>29G4b-5</underline>	3	15	15	0	100

29G7-32	2	15	15	0	100

pAtS13	<underline>13G26b-28</underline>	3	14	14	0	100

13G3b-100	2	11	11	0	100

pAtS18	<underline>XG5A-5</underline>	3	19	19	0	100

XG2C-7	2	10	0	10	0

pCaMV35S	<underline>SG15A-2</underline>	2	11	11	0	100

SG19b-5	2	10	0	10	0

Control vector	NEG15B-5	3	18	0	18	0


Personal	Community–related	Service-related

• Age	• Presence of and links to NHCs	• Training

• Gender	• Distance between CHW and TBA families	• Experience

• Education	• Distances among , CHW and rural health center	• Supervision and support by relevant community and health system structures

• Socio-economic status	• Payment or in-kind compensation

• Language	• Motivation

• Tribal affiliation	• Availability of means of transport (e.g. bicycle)

• Religion	• Possession of a cell phone

 •Employment	• Availability of various supplies and drugs that the CHW and TBA might need to provide the defined services

• Membership in an association


	Physiotherapist	Patient

Timing of data collection	Before training	At follow-up

Measurements	Questionnaire	Questionnaire	Observation video/audio	Assessing patient files	Reflection report	Questionnaire

1a. To what extent is the PSG performed as intended?

 Performance and recording of the PSG steps			X	X

 Patients’ involvement in the PSG						X

1b. How satisfied are patients about the PSG?

 Patients’ satisfaction with the PSG						X

1c. What are physiotherapists’ experiences with the PSG?

 Physiotherapists’ experiences with the PSG					X

2. Did the physiotherapists’ intention to use the PSG, the actual use of the PSG, and their client-centred competences improve after training?

 Intention to use the PSG	X	X

 Actual use of the PSG	X	X

 Client-centred competences	X	X


Food Group	Factors	B	β	P-value

Grain

	Activity	0.334	0.235	0.018

	Tobacco use	−0.866	−0.168	0.090

Vegetable

	Age	−0.038	−0.192	0.057

	Diet related chronic disease	−0.353	0.164	0.033

Fruit

	Education level	0.164	0.177	0.079

	Diet related chronic disease	−0.326	−0.173	0.085

Dairy

	Gender	0.410	0.262	0.006

	Rural/urban	−0.257	−0.180	0.059

Meat/Beans

	No statistically significant model


		95% Confidence Interval

	Odds Ratio	Low	High	P value

Race/ethnicity

 White	Reference

 African American	1.34	0.88	2.05	.17

 Hispanic	0.92	0.57	1.47	.73

 Other	0.82	0.53	1.25	.35

Graduated college	1.09	0.92	1.31	.32

Employed	0.88	0.73	1.07	.21

Prescription coverage	1.49	1.22	1.82	< .001

Income ($25,000 unit)	1.08	1.01	1.15	.04

Out-of-pocket spending on prescriptions as a proportion of income	2.42	1.21	4.84	.01

Cost cutting actions	0.95	0.77	1.16	.60

Ask for generic	1.06	0.90	1.24	.48

Children in home	0.92	0.81	1.05	.21

Marital status

 Married	reference	reference	reference

 Single	1.49	1.02	2.20	.04

 Divorced/separated	1.11	0.91	1.36	.31

Widowed	1.20	0.97	1.50	.10


Treatment regimens	Main results	References no.

1. Heatstroke rats received intravenous or intracerebroventricular injection of HUCBCs	MSCs attenuate cerebral ischemic damage by reducing overproduction of TNF‐α, IL‐1β, and IL‐6, but stimulating production of IL‐10.	Chen et al. (2005) Chen et al. (2006) Liu et al. (2009)

2. Heatstroke rats received intravenous injection of HICBC‐derived CD34+ cells	MSCs reduce cerebral ischemic damage by reducing overproduction of both TNF‐α and ICAM‐1, but stimulating production of IL‐10.	Hwang et al. (2008) Chen et al. (2007) Tseng et al. (2014)

3. Heatstroke rats received subcutaneous injection of granulocyte‐colony stimulating factor	The factor attenuates cerebral ischemic damage by reducing overproduction of both TNF‐α and ICAM‐1, but stimulating production of IL‐10, EPSs, GDNF, and VEGF.	Yung et al. (2011)

4. Heatstroke mice received intravenous injection of human dental pulp‐derived stem cells or HUCBCs	MSCs attenuate cerebral ischemic damage by reducing overproduction of TNF‐α, intercellular adhesion molecule 1, and oxidative damage markers, but promoting both hypothalamo–pituitary–adrenocortical axis activity and IL‐10 production.	Tseng et al. (2014) Tseng et al. (2015)


Polymer type	Applications	Reference

Bio-PE	Plastics bags, milk and water bottles, food packaging films, toys	Vona et al. 1965; Aamer et al. 2008

Bio-PE and blends	Agricultural mulch films	Kasirajan and Ngouajio 2012


EC name	definition	gene name	Microarray available	ORF

4.1.2.13	Fructose-bisphosphate aldolase	fbaI	x	Ot01g03020

		fbaI	x	Ot03g00610

		fbaII	x	Ot10g01490

3.1.3.11	Fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase		x	Ot03g00330

			x	Ot14g01140

5.3.1.1	Triosephosphate isomerase		x	Ot09g00080

5.3.1.9	Glucose-6-phosphate isomerase		x	Ot11g02980

5.4.2.2	phosphoglucomutase		x	Ot15g02630

2.7.7.27	ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase	AGPLU1		Ot07g03280

		agpsu1	x	Ot07g02930

		agplu2		Ot20g00490

2.4.1.21	Soluble Starch synthase	SSIII-C		Ot06g03410

		SSIII-B	x	Ot13g01250

		SSII	x	Ot16g02790

		SSI	x	Ot13g01230

		SSIII-A	x	Ot16g01560

2.4.1.242	Granul-bound starch synthase	gbssI	x	Ot06g03200

2.4.1.18	Starch branching enzyme	SBEII(?)	x	Ot03g00840

		SBEI	x	Ot04g04110

2.4.1.1	starch phosphorylase			Ot11g00280

			x	Ot04g02110

		SPho1		Ot11g01020

2.4.1.25	disproportionating enzyme	DPE1	x	Ot02g05750

				Ot11g02290

				Ot11g02300

3.2.1.1	α-amylase	Aamy1	x	Ot16g00380

			x	Ot02g05490

		Aamy2	x	Ot10g00260

		Aamy3	x	Ot07g02010

3.2.1.2	β-amylase		x	Ot02g06980

		Bamy2	x	Ot03g03190

		bamy1		Ot03g03170

3.2.1.68	Isoamylase (debranching enzyme)	dbe1 (Isa1)	x	Ot14g02550

		Isa2		Ot02g07230

		dbeII (Isa3)	x	Ot12g00310

3.2.1.142	Pullulanase	spu	x	Ot01g03030

2.7.9.4	α-glucan, water dikinase (GWD)	SR1-A	x	Ot13g01510

		R1 C		Ot16g02370

				Ot04g04170

	Glucose transporter			Ot03g05590

	Glucose transporter			Ot14g01870

	Glucose transporter			Ot08g01260

	Maltose transporter	MEX1	x	Ot09g03160


	n	%

Disease stage

 Indeterminate	32	64

 Advanced (cardiomyopathy)	13	26

 No data	5	10

Treatment history*

 Received etiological treatment	40	80

Benznidazole	19	47.5

Nifurtimox	17	42.5

Benznidazole and nifurtimox	4	10

Discontinued treatment (side effects)	6	15

 Untreated	10	20

Due to advancement of the disease	5	50

Other (patient declined or unable)	5	50


Variable	Men N = 52	Women N = 87

 	Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)

Duration of arthritis* (years)	4.8 (2.9)	5.6 (2.8)

 	Median (IQR)	Median (IQR)

Number of swollen joints	2.0 (1.0, 8.0)	5.0 (2.0, 11.0)

Number of tender joints	5.0 (2.0, 8.5)	6.0 (2.0, 15.0)

Number of both swollen and tender joints	1.0 (0.0, 3.5)	2.0 (0.0, 5.0)

Larsen score1	27.5 (13.0,31.0)	11.0 (1.0, 21.0)

HAQ score (0–3)	0.5 (0.1, 1.1)	0.8 (0.4, 1.3)

 	%	%

Rheumatoid factor + ve	39.1	33.8

Erosions1	75.0	56.5

Satisfied ARA RA criteria (4/7 definition)	22.9	45.8

Satisfied ARA RA criteria (tree definition)	41.7	60.2

Steroid use for at least 3 months	5.8	17.2