On the New Realities of the Global Oil Trade
In: Problems of economic transition, Band 61, Heft 10-12, S. 765-773
ISSN: 1557-931X
7 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Problems of economic transition, Band 61, Heft 10-12, S. 765-773
ISSN: 1557-931X
In: Političeskie issledovanija: Polis ; naučnyj i kul'turno-prosvetitel'skij žurnal = Political studies, Heft 1, S. 67-77
ISSN: 1026-9487, 0321-2017
In: Voprosy ėkonomiki: ežemesjačnyj žurnal, Heft 11, S. 117-135
The article presents the results of an academic reputation survey of Russian economists (N = 6392). The resulting ranking is then compared with their scientometric indicators provided by the Russian Science Citation Index (citations in eLibrary and in RSCI core), as well as calculated by the authors (citations in the RSCI list of distinguished journals). The analysis demonstrates that a robust hierarchy of academic authority exists in Russia, which is, however, only moderately correlated with scientometric indicators. We can classify discrepancies into type I errors (researchers with high citation rates are not enjoying recognition by peers) and type II errors (recognized researchers have poor scientometric records). Type I errors mostly result from (1) misidentification of authors; (2) non-fractionalized authorship of collected volumes; (3) instrumental citing; (4) gaming the metrics. Type II errors arise from ambiguity of the disciplinary boundaries of economics and boundaries of national science, as well as from the ambiguous status of public intellectuals addressing economic issues and politicians responsible for economic policy. Overall, type II errors are less dramatic: it is hard for Russian economists to be widely influential, but little cited. Type I errors are much more widespread. Indicators based on the RSCI list of distinguished journals give the most accurate estimates.
In: The current digest of the post-Soviet press, Band 45, Heft 13, S. 8-12
ISSN: 1067-7542
The current state of affairs in applied and basic research related to hyperbaric medicine is reviewed. Performance characteristics of modern domestically designed diving pressure chambers and diving complects having modular, mobile and ambulatory designs are discussed. The analysis suggests that the performance and design characteristics of available pressure chambers and complexes comprising them to not conform to modern medico-technical requirements and current economic actuals. To develop an adequate practice of hyperbaric medical treatment, it is necessary, along with practicing a systemic approach to solving the problems of medical security of rescue and diving operations, to radically revise the organization of research-and-development work aimed at designing promising technical means for hyperbaric medicine. ; В статье проведен анализ состояния прикладных научных исследований в области гипербарической медицины, а также современных отечественных образцов водолазных барокамер и водолазных комплексов модульного, мобильного и передвижного исполнений. Анализ показал, что функциональные возможности и технические характеристики существующих барокамер и создаваемых на их основе комплексов не соответствуют современным медико-техническим требованиям и сложившимся экономическим реалиям. Показана несостоятельность сформировавшейся в последнее десятилетие тенденции позиционирования создаваемых одноотсечных барокамер, не имеющих систем очистки газовой среды от вредных веществ, как барокамер, пригодных для проведения лечебной рекомпрессии с использованием режима вентиляции по замкнутому циклу. Для создания полноценной системы гипербарической медицинской помощи наряду с системным подходом в решении проблем медицинского обеспечения спасательных и водолазных работ необходим кардинальный пересмотр организации опытно-конструкторских работ по созданию перспективных образцов технических средств гипербарической медицины с перспективой их унификации.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
BASE