TRENDS IN SCIENCE AND CONFLICT COVERAGE IN FOUR METROPOLITAN NEWSPAPERS
In: Journalism quarterly: JQ ; devoted to research in journalism and mass communication, Band 52, Heft 3, S. 465-471
ISSN: 0196-3031, 0022-5533
68 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Journalism quarterly: JQ ; devoted to research in journalism and mass communication, Band 52, Heft 3, S. 465-471
ISSN: 0196-3031, 0022-5533
In: Australian quarterly: AQ, Band 38, S. 72-87
ISSN: 0005-0091, 1443-3605
Systemwide Program on Integrated Pest Management ; Government of Norway ; Government of Switzerland ; Government of Italy ; Peer Review
BASE
In: Contemporary security policy, Heft 1, S. 5-41
ISSN: 1352-3260, 0144-0381
World Affairs Online
In: IRB: ethics & human research, Band 3, Heft 7, S. 4
ISSN: 2326-2222
OBJECTIVESWe sought the perspectives of lead public health officials working to improve health equity in the USA regarding the drivers of scientific evidence use, the supply of scientific evidence and the gap between their evidentiary needs and the available scientific evidence.DESIGNWe conducted 25 semistructured qualitative interviews (April 2017 to June 2017) with lead public health officials and their designees. All interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed.SETTINGPublic health departments from all geographical regions in the USA.PARTICIPANTSParticipants included lead public health officials (20) and their designees (5) from public health departments that were either accredited or part of the Big Cities Health Coalition.RESULTSMany respondents were using scientific evidence in the context of grant writing. Professional organisations and government agencies, rather than specific researchers or research journals, were the primary sources of scientific evidence. Respondents wanted to see more locally tailored cost-effectiveness research and often desired to participate in the planning phase of research projects. In addition to the scientific content recommendations, respondents felt the usefulness of scientific evidence could be improved by simplifying it and framing it for diverse audiences including elected officials and community stakeholders.CONCLUSIONSRespondents are eager to use scientific evidence but also need to have it designed and packaged in ways that meet their needs.
BASE
OBJECTIVE: The suggestion that breast cancer management is compromised in elderly patients had prompted our review of the results of policies regarding screening and early detection of breast cancer and the adequacy of primary treatment in older women (> or = 65 years of age) compared to younger women (40 to 64 years of age). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although breast cancer in elderly patients is considered biologically less aggressive than similar staged cancer in younger counterparts, outcome still is a matter of stage and adequate treatment of primary cancer. For many reasons, physicians appear reluctant to treat elderly patients according to the same standards used for younger patients. There is even government-mandated alterations in early detection programs. Thus, since 1993, Medicare has mandated screening mammography on a biennial basis for women older than 65 year of age compared to the current accepted standard of yearly mammograms for women older than 50 years of age. Using State Health Department and tumor registry data, the authors reviewed screening practice and management of elderly patients with primary breast cancer to determine the effects of age on screening, detection policies (as reflected in stage at diagnosis), treatment strategies, and outcome. METHODS: Data were analyzed from 5962 patients with breast cancer recorded in the state-wide Tumor Registry of the Hospital Association of Rhoda Island between 1987 and 1995. The focus of the data collection was nine institutions with established tumor registries using AJCC classified tumor data. Additional data were provided by the State Health Department on screening mammography practice in 2536 women during the years 1987, 1989, and 1995. RESULTS: The frequency of mammographic screening for all averaged 40% in 1987, 52% in 1987, and 63% in 1995. In the 65-year-old and older patients, the frequency of screening was 34% in 1987, 45% in 1989, and 48% in 1995, whereas in the 40- to 49-year-old age group, the frequency of mammography was 47% in ...
BASE
In: Journal of marine research, Band 45, Heft 2, S. 427-460
ISSN: 1543-9542
Signatures: A⁸ a⁴ B-X⁸ Z⁴. ; Three pages of Osborne's advertisements at end. ; Some plates signed: B. Cole sculp. ; Appendix. A full account of the late dreadful earthquake at Port-Royal in Jamaica; in two letters written by the minister of that place [i.e., the Rev. E. Heath]. ; Ch. III: A description of Peru and its inhabitants, with their different interests. ; Ch. II: A true and particular relation of the dreadful ruin in which Lima. was involved. It is a translation by Henry Johnson of Pedro Lozano's "Individual y verdadera relacion de la ruyna que padeció. Lima," first published at Lima in 1746. See Sabin (describing 2nd ed.). ; Ch. I: A description of Callo and LIma, as they were before the late earthquake, with an enquiry into the reason why it never rains there, and the cause of earthquakes. It was supplied by "another hand"; see p. xiii. ; Title continued: To which is added, a description of Callao and Lima before their destruction, and of the kingdom of Peru in general, with its inhabitants, setting forth their manners, customs, religion, government, commerce, &c. Interspersed with passages of natural history and physiological disquisitions; particularly an enquiry into the cause of earthquakes. The whole illustrated with a map of the country about Lima, plans of the road and town of Callao, another of Lima; and several cuts of the natives, drawn on the spot by the translator. ; Sabin ; Mode of access: Internet. ; Signatures on t.p. of J. Carlisle, now scratched out, and of M. Byles. ; Binding: modern linen, title & date on spine label in gilt. Traces of red stain on edges.
BASE
In: Springer eBook Collection
Hydropower -- Lesotho Highlands Water Project: design and layout of underground works for 'Muela Hydropower Project -- Design and construction of the cooling water intake tunnel system for Point Aconi generating station, Nova Scotia -- Comparison of two classification systems as applied to the Alpe Devero tunnel, Italy -- Metro/Rail -- Planning and design of tunnels for the Jubilee Line extension, London -- New St Clair River tunnel, Canada-USA -- Application of NATM to design of underground stations in London Clay -- Water/Waste -- Underground works on Third Nairobi Water Supply Project -- Design and construction of caverns for an underground sewage treatment plant, Hong Kong -- The Snake: a rock tunnel for storing combined sewage water, Stockholm -- Tunnelling on the Penzance and St. Ives sewerage scheme, Cornwall, England -- Tunnel-boring Machines -- Two tunnel-boring machines for Lesotho: a design and case history -- Open TBM tunnelling in complex geology for railroad in Sweden -- Use of sedimentary rock impact indices in evaluation of tunnel-boring machine performance -- Development and performance of tunnel-boring machines on Phase II of the London Water Ring Main -- Environmental Issues -- Environmental planning for the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority's MetroWest water supply tunnel -- Palais Bernheimer in Munich: tunnelling for parking space under a historic building -- Limiting the damage to historic buildings due to tunnelling: experience at the Mansion House, London -- Compensation grouting to limit settlements during tunnelling at Waterloo Station, London -- Ground movement model validation at the Heathrow Express trial tunnel -- Case Histories -- Gjøvik Olympic Mountain Hall, Norway -- Construction of new escalator shaft and passageways at London Underground's Waterloo Station -- Water in TBM drives, Delivery Tunnel South, Lesotho Highlands Water Project -- Tunnel-boring Machines -- CEN safety standards for tunnelling machines and air locks -- Tunnels below waste disposal tips -- Machine tunnelling in the northwest of England -- EPB-shield tunnelling for the Taipei Metro, contract 201A -- TBM drive management by use of computerized systems -- Research -- Long-term measurements of loads on tunnel linings in overconsolidated clay -- Non-destructive investigation of tunnels -- Case Histories -- Design, construction and performance of a 700-m 'cover and cut' tunnel in soft clay, Norway -- Shotcrete in the construction of Pen-Y-Clip tunnel, North Wales -- Face support for a large Mix-Shield in heterogeneous ground conditions -- Design -- Tunnel ring design, development, testing and manufacture for the London Water Ring Main -- Medway tunnel detailed design -- Developments in precast concrete tunnel linings in the United Kingdom -- Case Histories -- Channel tunnel: French undersea crossover design and construction -- Design and construction of Metsovon road tunnel, Greece -- Construction of the 'Passante Ferroviario' link in Milan, Italy, lots 3P, 5P and 6P: excavation by large earth pressure balanced shield with chemical foam injection -- Pen-Y-Clip road tunnel, North Wales: achieving a dry lining through a pervious rock formation -- Hydropower -- Tunnel design in the design and construct context—the Pergau experience, Malaysia -- Serra da Mesa project, Brazil: excavation of shafts and penstocks -- Tunnel Machinery -- Rock cutting with roadheaders -- Increased productivity in construction of civil and mining tunnels through the use of high-capacity tunnel-boring machines and continuous belt conveyor muck haulage.
We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC, and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST, and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR, and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE, and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF, and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Horizon 2020, and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Région Auvergne, and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes cofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF, and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN, the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK), and BNL (USA), the Tier-2 facilities worldwide and large non-WLCG resource providers. Major contributors of computing resources are listed in Ref. [74]
BASE
We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Région Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom.
BASE
We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF, DNSRC and Lundbeck Foundation, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEADSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZS, ˇ Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition, individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE, CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Horizon 2020 and Marie Sk lodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d'Avenir Labex and Idex, ANR, Region Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Germany; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF, GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN and the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (U.K.) and BNL (U.S.A.) and in the Tier-2 facilities worldwide.
BASE
We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions, without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC, and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST, and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR, and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF, DNSRC, and Lundbeck Foundation, Denmark; EPLANET, ERC, and NSRF, European Union; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, DFG, HGF, MPG, and AvH Foundation, Germany; GSRT and NSRF, Greece; RGC, Hong Kong SAR, China; ISF, MINERVA, GIF, I-CORE, and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, The Netherlands; BRF and RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; GRICES and FCT, Portugal; MNE/IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MSTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SER, SNSF, and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; NSC, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom; and DOE and NSF, United States of America. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular, from CERN and the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (The Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK), and BNL (USA) and in the Tier-2 facilities worldwide.
BASE