#	Code	Site Name	Country	N	Latitude	Longitude

1	GRO	Grosbeak Lake	Canada	11	59.792	-111.996

2	FOR	Forgotten Pass Lake	Canada	2	59.58	-111.451

3	HAY	Hay Camp Lake	Canada	3	59.541	-111.465

4	TUR	Estany d'en Turies	Spain	7	42.243	3.103

5	CHI	Salada de Chiprana	Spain	8	41.239	-0.182

6	ERA	Laguna de las Eras	Spain	10	41.202	-4.582

7	SA2	Balsa de Santed II	Spain	10	41.016	-1.542

8	GAL	Laguna de Gallocanta	Spain	5	40.974	-1.508

9	TON	Torreblanca Marsh, Poza Norte	Spain	4	40.148	0.17

10	TOS	Torreblanca Marsh, Poza Sur	Spain	12	40.146	0.168

11	MAN	Laguna de Manjavacas	Spain	9	39.416	-2.866

12	TIA	Tianjin	China	3	39.158	117.176

13	SAL	Laguna del Salobrejo	Spain	5	38.914	-1.469

14	PET	Laguna de Pétrola	Spain	9	38.84	-1.566

15	MOJ	Laguna de Mojón Blanco	Spain	2	38.798	-1.432

16	SLD	Laguna del Saladar	Spain	4	38.789	-1.419

17	HOY	Laguna de Hoya Rasa	Spain	2	38.785	-1.428

18	CAS	Laguna de Casa Nueva	Spain	2	38.776	-1.433

19	ATA	Laguna de Atalaya de los Ojicos	Spain	3	38.773	-1.43

20	CLO	Clot de Galvany	Spain	2	38.246	-0.546

21	FUE	Laguna de Fuente de Piedra	Spain	2	37.109	-4.767

22	CAP	Laguna de Capacete	Spain	5	37.016	-4.842

23	EEL†	Eel Pond	Japan	4	34.717	136.533

24	ATL	Atlit coast	Israel	1	32.703	34.94

25	SAP	Sapelo	USA	1	31.5	-81.219

26	EIL	Eilat	Israel	1	29.56	34.967

27	MEA	Meagher Pond	USA (Caribbean)	1	19.295	-81.232

28	WAN	Lake Wannamal	Australia	2	-31.109	116.049

29	PEA	Pearse's Lake	Australia	3	-31.629	116.914

30	YEN	Yenyenning Lakes	Australia	1	-32.235	117.233

31	HOT	Hotham River	Australia	1	-32.64	116.977

32	BUS	Bushy Swamp	Australia	2	-33.541	117.27

33	DUN	Dunn's Swamp	Australia	1	-33.924	120.155

34	BUL	Lake Bulla	Australia	1	-34.755	142.361

35	COL	Lake Colongulac	Australia	2	-38.173	143.163

36	TOH	Tower Hill Lake	Australia	5	-38.325	142.368


	Number of	BMI	Time of smoking	Average number of smoked cigarettes	Passive smoking at work	Passive smoking at home

Subjects	Women	Men	Women	Men

Urine

 Smokers	26	16	10	22.2	24.9	In the evening	6–10	Yes	Yes

 Passive smokers	25	13	12	23.01	22.32	n/a	n/a	Yes	Yes

 Control group	16	10	6	20.7	22.2	n/a	n/a	No	No

Saliva

 Smokers	11	8	3	22.7	24.2	In the evening	1–5	No	Yes

 Passive smokers	16	11	5	22.4	23.1	n/a	n/a	No	Yes

 Control group	10	7	3	21.8	23.4	n/a	n/a	No	No


LOS-ICU in days, median (IQR)	12 (10–19)	15 (9–24)	0.45

LOS-hospital in days, median (IQR)	30 (17–42)	35 (19–50)	0.79

Hospital mortality, n (%)	12 (34)	3 (20)	0.25


Sr. No. 	Formulation 	Droplet size (nm)	Zeta potential (mv)

1 	AILP – A 	246	-0.232

2 	AILP – B 	213	-0.114

3 	AILP – C 	200	-0.535

4 	AILP – D 	144	-0.596

5 	AILP – E 	136	-0.185

Sr. No.	Formulation	Droplet size (nm)

1	AILP – A	246

2	AILP – B	213

3	AILP – C	200

4	AILP – D	144

5	AILP – E	136


Combination Label	Transfer Function (Hidden Neuron)	Transfer Function (Output Neuron)	No. of Output Neurons

CA	logsig	logsig	4

CB	tansig	logsig	4

CC	logsig	logsig	2

CD	tansig	logsig	2

CE	logsig	purelin	1

CF	tansig	purelin	1

Combination Label	Transfer Function (Hidden Neuron)

CA	logsig

CB	tansig

CC	logsig

CD	tansig

CE	logsig

CF	tansig

Transfer Function (Output Neuron)	No. of Output Neurons

logsig	4

logsig	4

logsig	2

logsig	2

purelin	1

purelin	1


Tracking method – mechanism	Disadvantages	Advantages

GFP, luciferase – DNA transfer can be mediated virally (transduction), via liposomes (lipofection), or by electrical parameters (electroporation/transfection)	- Genetic manipulation of cells may alter their function	- Human ASCs with GFP or luciferase resume proliferation normally

- Since they are cytosolic in location; the vector (mRNA/DNA) and/or the protein (GFP) could be transmitted to host cells via fusion elements and/or microvesicle secretion, resulting in contamination. Hence, there is concern for false positivity and their detection may not equate to viability of donor cells	- Detection is sensitive to in vivo non-invasive bioluminescence imaging

- Technique requires serial passages, not suitable for use with fresh uncultured cells

- Many mammalian tissues have endogenous fluorescence

BrdU – this nuclear marker is a thymidine analog that replaces (3H) thymidine and can penetrate cell membranes to incorporate into newly synthesized DNA strands of actively proliferating cells	- Optimal labeling requires longer incubation time	- BrdU labeling has no effects on the ASC differentiation/proliferation and is not cytotoxic

- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection

- Does not indicate viability

- Cells lose BrdU rapidly with serial passages

Lipophilic dyes (DiI, DiR) –long-chain carbocyanine dyes with long aliphatic tails that incorporate into the lipid regions of the cell membranes	- Rapidly contaminates neighboring cells by macrophage-mediated phagocytosis, exchange of membrane microdomains, microvesicle and/or exosome transfer	- Easy technique for labeling and identification of cells

- May be cytotoxic to cells

- The dye fades with serial passages

Amine reactive probes (CFSE) – these diffuse into cells and react with cytosolic amine-containing residues to form dye–protein adducts that are retained	- The dye is toxic to ASCs	- Good staining efficiency

- Not suitable for in vivo non-invasive imaging

- Does not correlate with viability

- Contamination of neighboring cells can occur via macrophage-mediated phagocytosis, microvesicle and/or exosome transfer

Nanoparticles – small crystals made up of inorganic molecules; for example, iron oxide, cadmium	- Can be toxic to cells in high concentration and detection is difficult with low concentrations	- Photostable, remain resistant for long periods of time

- Contamination of neighboring cells can occur via phagocytosis, microvesicles and/or exosome transfer	- Can be used for in vivo non-invasive imaging

- Does not correlate with viability

Real-time PCR for endogenous retroviral sequence (ERV-3) – the gene is present as a single copy in the human genome and so can be used to detect the presence of transplanted human cells in animal models	- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection	- Gives a quantitative estimate of number of cells

- False positives can occur by macrophage-mediated phagocytosis but this is very low	- Very sensitive and specific

	- The gene is already present in the human cells, so there is no need to stain the cells

FISH detection of human-specific cell surface markers or Alu sequences	- Alu sequences occur in large numbers in the primate genome, which makes higher likelihood of a false positive detection by transmission to host cells/macrophages via microvesicles/exosomes	- The gene is already present in the human cells, so there is no need to stain the cells

- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection

- Does not correlate with viability

Tracking method – mechanism	Disadvantages	Advantages

GFP, luciferase – DNA transfer can be mediated virally (transduction), via liposomes (lipofection), or by electrical parameters (electroporation/transfection)	- Genetic manipulation of cells may alter their function	- Human ASCs with GFP or luciferase resume proliferation normally

- Since they are cytosolic in location; the vector (mRNA/DNA) and/or the protein (GFP) could be transmitted to host cells via fusion elements and/or microvesicle secretion, resulting in contamination. Hence, there is concern for false positivity and their detection may not equate to viability of donor cells	- Detection is sensitive to in vivo non-invasive bioluminescence imaging

- Technique requires serial passages, not suitable for use with fresh uncultured cells

- Many mammalian tissues have endogenous fluorescence

BrdU – this nuclear marker is a thymidine analog that replaces (3H) thymidine and can penetrate cell membranes to incorporate into newly synthesized DNA strands of actively proliferating cells	- Optimal labeling requires longer incubation time	- BrdU labeling has no effects on the ASC differentiation/proliferation and is not cytotoxic

- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection

- Does not indicate viability

- Cells lose BrdU rapidly with serial passages

Lipophilic dyes (DiI, DiR) –long-chain carbocyanine dyes with long aliphatic tails that incorporate into the lipid re	- Rapidly contaminates 	- Easy technique for labeling

Tracking method – mechanism	Disadvantages	Advantages

gions of the cell membranes	neighboring cells by macrophage-mediated phagocytosis, exchange of membrane microdomains, microvesicle and/or exosome transfer	 and identification of cells

- May be cytotoxic to cells

- The dye fades with serial passages

Amine reactive probes (CFSE) – these diffuse into cells and react with cytosolic amine-containing residues to form dye–protein adducts that are retained	- The dye is toxic to ASCs	- Good staining efficiency

- Not suitable for in vivo non-invasive imaging

- Does not correlate with viability

- Contamination of neighboring cells can occur via macrophage-mediated phagocytosis, microvesicle and/or exosome transfer

Nanoparticles – small crystals made up of inorganic molecules; for example, iron oxide, cadmium	- Can be toxic to cells in high concentration and detection is difficult with low concentrations	- Photostable, remain resistant for long periods of time

- Contamination of neighboring cells can occur via phagocytosis, microvesicles and/or exosome transfer	- Can be used for in vivo non-invasive imaging

- Does not correlate with viability

Real-time PCR for endogenous retroviral sequence (ERV-3) – the gene is present as a single copy in the human genome and so can be used to detect the presence of transplanted human cells in animal models	- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection	- Gives a quantitative estimate of number of cells

- False positives can occur by macrophage-mediated phagocytosis but this is very low	- Very sensitive and specific

	- The gene is already present in the human cells, so there is no need to stain the cells

FISH detection of human-specific cell surface markers or Alu sequences	- Alu sequences occur in large numbers in the primate genome, which makes higher likelihood of a false positive detection by transmission to host cells/macrophages via microvesicles/exosomes	- The gene is already present in the human cells, so there is no need to stain the cells

- Not suitable for non-invasive methods of detection

- Does not correlate with viability


Features	Bt X022	Bt 4.0718

Chromosome size	5,460,989 bp	5,641,982 bp

Number of plasmids	7	6

Predicted CDSs	5888	6797

Hypothetical genes	1592	1826

ncRNAs	148	94

Predicted insecticidal genes	4	6


Signal + harmonic	Frequency estimation (Hz)	Error (Hz)

Mean (μ)	Standard deviation (σ)	Mean (μ)	Standard deviation (σ)

2nd	60.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000

3rd	60.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000

3rd + 5th	60.0000	0.0000	0.0000	0.0000


Clinical observations and epidemiological arguments

(I)	The prevalence rates of OCS in schizophrenia increased after market approval of SGAs such as clozapine.

(II)	The comorbidity rates in later stages of schizophrenia are higher than during the ARMS or at first manifestation of psychosis.

(III)	In parallel to antipsychotic treatment OCS manifest de novo or show a marked aggravation.

(IV)	High prevalence rates of OCS are observed during CLZ treatment.

(V)	Schizophrenia patients with SGA-induced OCS markedly contribute to the entire sample of comorbid patients.

Evidence derived from pharmacological considerations

(I)	Pharmacodynamic properties modulate the risk for OCS: marked difference between samples treated with first generation antipsychotics or mainly dopaminergic SGAs (such as aripiprazole or amisulpride) compared to CLZ.

(II)	OCS manifest as an unfavourable drug effect de novo during treatment with potent antiserotonergic SGAs such as CLZ.

(III)	Indicators of a dose-effect relation: the severity of OCS is positively correlated with duration, dosage, and serum levels of CLZ treatment.

(IV)	OCS severity persists over time in patients under stable CLZ treatment.

(V)	The severity of OCS improves after reduction of CLZ dosage to minimally sufficient levels (due to augmentation or combination).

Clinical observations and epidemiological arguments

(I)

(II)

(III)

(IV)

(V)

Evidence derived from pharmacological considerations

(I)

(II)

(III)

(IV)

(V)

Clinical observations and epidemiological arguments

The prevalence rates of OCS in schizophrenia increased after market approval of SGAs such as clozapine.

The comorbidity rates in later stages of schizophrenia are higher than during the ARMS or at first manifestation of psychosis.

In parallel to antipsychotic treatment OCS manifest de novo or show a marked aggravation.

High prevalence rates of OCS are observed during CLZ treatment.

Schizophrenia patients with SGA-induced OCS markedly contribute to the entire sample of comorbid patients.

Evidence derived from pharmacological considerations

Pharmacodynamic properties modulate the risk for OCS: marked difference between samples treated with first generation antipsychotics or mainly dopaminergic SGAs (such as aripiprazole or amisulpride) compared to CLZ.

OCS manifest as an unfavourable drug effect de novo during treatment with potent antiserotonergic SGAs such as CLZ.

Indicators of a dose-effect relation: the severity of OCS is positively correlated with duration, dosage, and serum levels of CLZ treatment.

OCS severity persists over time in patients under stable CLZ treatment.

The severity of OCS improves after reduction of CLZ dosage to minimally sufficient levels (due to augmentation or combination).


Classification of Theileria gene pairsa	Theileria consecutive gene pairs with orthologs in P. falciparumc	Pairs in Theileria with conserved synteny in Plasmodiumb	Percent conserved pairsd

Opposite strand	940	64	22.66

Opposite strand Overlap	182	64	35.16

Same-strand	805	125	15.53

Classification of Theileria gene pairsa	Theileria consecutive gene pairs with orthologs in P. falciparumc	Pairs in Theileria with conserved synteny in Plasmodiumb	Percent conserved pairsd

Opposite strand Overlap	182	64	35.16

Same-strand	805	125	15.53


Focus groups	Age category	Gender	Relationship

More homogeneous groups

	< 50 yrs	50 + yrs	Female	Male	Spouse	Other

Group A	2	5	5	2	6	1

Asian Indian = 5

Asian Pakistani = 2

Group B	1	6	4	3	2	5

Asian Indian = 7

Group C	0	5	2	3	4	1

White British = 5

Group D	0	3	3	0	3	0

White British = 3

Group E	3	4	5	2	2	5

Black Caribbean = 3

Black African = 4

More heterogeneous groups

Group F	0	5	3	2	4	1

Asian Indian = 1

Asian Pakistani = 2

Black Caribbean = 1

White British = 1

Group G	2	5	7	0	7	0

Asian Indian = 4

Black African = 1

White British = 1

Black Caribbean = 1

Total = 41	8	33	29	12	28	13


% pregnant	27.6

≥ 4 n (%)	24 (60.0)	27 (39.1)

% pregnant	47.1

Embryos transferred (n)	2.1 ± 0.7	1.6 ± 0.8

≥ 2 euploid embryos available2

n (%) pregnant ET x 1	4/35 (11.4)

n (%) pregnant ET x 2	36/74 (48.6)


Factor	Numerator df	Denominator df	F	P

Support level	4	528	5.36	0.0003

Stimulus intensity	9	528	211.62	<0.0001

Background EMG	1	528	0.88	0.3497

Support × Stimulus	36	528	0.83	0.7505

Support × Background	4	528	2.34	0.0542

Stimulus × Background	9	528	1.41	0.1805

Support × Stimulus × Background	36	528	1.10	0.3248

Factor

Support level

Stimulus intensity

Background EMG

Support × Stimulus

Support × Background

Stimulus × Background

Support × Stimulus × Background


Rank	Name and cell line	Mean 	N	Enrichment	P	Specificity

12	Estradiol-ssMCF7	0.700	2	0.989	0.00016	0.0000

31	Estradiol-HL60	0.303	8	0.590	0.00335	0.1585

3091	Estradiol-MCF7	0.222	19	0.485	Null	Null

3580	Estradiol-PC3	-0.040	8	0.223	Null	Null


Walls	Moduli identified (MPa)	Measurements	Model

f1 (Hz)	f2 (Hz)	f1 (Hz)	f2 (Hz)

Wall C	90	11.38 ± 0.10	15.38 ± 0.22	11.38	15.31


CBT	MRT

Treatment focus on perpetuating factors	Treatment focus depending on the relation between the(precipitating, predisposing and perpetuating) factorsand the presented complaints.

Afterwards feedback at next therapy session	Immediately feedback during therapy

Pays no attention to physical sensations	Stimulating awareness of healthy bodily symptoms

CBT	CBT incorporated with principles of mindfulness


Variable	Control group n = 16	RA nonbiological DMARDs n = 16	RA biological DMARDs n = 18


Type of nerves	Outcome variables

Peripheral nerve function (N = 50)	 Number of nerves involved (N = 50)

Normal, n (%)	Abnormal, n (%)	<2, n (%)	≥2, n (%)

Motor nerve	23 (46)	27 (54)	36 (72)	14 (28)

Sensory nerve	14 (28)	36 (72)	23 (46)	27 (54)

Mixed nerve	10 (20)	40 (80)	15 (30)	35 (70)

Type of nerves	Outcome variables

Peripheral nerve function (N = 50)

Normal, n (%)

Motor nerve	23 (46)

Sensory nerve	14 (28)

Mixed nerve	10 (20)


Standard	Mean ± SD of Score	Standard Achieved*(% of notes)

Contents	14.4 ± 2.1	16 (6.8)

Legibility	3.9 ± 0.2	232 (99.1)

ANKLe	18.4 ± 2.1	61 (26.1)

Standard	Mean ± SD of Score	Standard Achieved*(% of notes)

ANKLe	18.4 ± 2.1	61 (26.1)


Normal alleles		Norwegian (present study)	Finnish [43]	Cuban [65]	Indian [66]	Caucasian [67]	French [26]

			No	Sout


Criteria	Exclusion	Method

Significant co-morbid disease that would threaten safety or impair ability to participate in interventions or testing, previous acute knee injury, bilateral severe tibiofemoral OA, severe patellofemoral OA (JSN = 3 using OARSI atlas), no definite medial tibiofemoral OA, severe obesity, low weight.	Symptomatic or severe coronary artery disease; severe HTN; active cancer other than skin cancer; anemia; dementia; liver disease; COPD; peripheral vascular disease; inability to walk without an assistive device; blindness; type 1 diabetes; type 2 diabetes on thiazolidinedione agents; bilateral severe medial tibiofemoral OA (KL = 4), no definite medial tibiofemoral OA (KL = 0, 1), BMI < 20 or > 45 kg.m-2	Medical history; physical exam; PA and skyline knee x-ray; height and weight.

OA disease location and alignment restrictions: predominant knee OA other than medial tibiofemoral OA; valgus, or extreme varus alignment.	Lateral tibiofemoral OA > medial tibiofemoral OA, severe patellofemoral OA; valgus knee alignment > 2°, or varus alignment > 10°	Knee PA and skyline view x-rays, lower extremity long x-ray.

Excess alcohol use	≥ 21 drinks per week	Questionnaire

Inability to finish 18-month study or unlikely to be compliant	Lives > 50 miles from site or planning to leave area ≥ 3 months during the next 18 months	Questionnaire, interview

Conditions that prohibit CT	BMI > 45 kg.m-2	height and weight

Significant cognitive impairment	diagnosis of dementia or a MoCA score <20	Medical history, MoCA

Low Pain	Pain ≤ 3 on a scale from 0-20	WOMAC

Criteria	Exclusion	Method

Low Pain	Pain ≤ 3 on a scale from 0-20	WOMAC


	BASELINE	TIME OF SACRIFICE

	TC(mM/L)	HDL-C(mM/L)	Non HDL-C(mM/L)	TC(mM/L)	HDL-C(mM/L)	Non HDL-C(mM/L)

SALINE	0.86 ± 0.07	0.77 ± 0.09	0.09 ± 0.07	2.64 ± 0.29*	0.65 ± 0.03	1.99 ± 0.28*


Cancer	Mean age ± SD at diagnosis of CD

Non Hodgkin's lymphoma	46.1 ± 13.8

Small bowel	59 ± 10

Colon	51.3 ± 9.4

Stomach	53.5 ± 15.4

Hodgkin's lymphoma	54.3 ± 6

Breast	41.2 ± 12.8

All neoplasms	47.6 ± 10.2


Compound Described	Mechanism of Action	Targeting	References

PRIMA-1Met (APR-246)	Converted to MQ; MQ binds to thiol groups in the core domain of mutp53 to restore wtp53 function	Restoration	Bykov 2002 [66], 2005 [67]Lambert 2009 [68], 2010 [69]

PhiKan083 or PhiKan7088	Binding to p53-Y220C specific core cavity and restore wtp53-like folding	Restoration of p53 Y220C	Boeckler 2008 [70]Liu 2013 [71]

PEITC	Unknown; p53-R172H specific; restores wtp53-like function 	Restoration of p53 R172H	Aggarwal 2016 [72]

ReACp53	Small peptide; blocks amyloid-like aggregation of mutp53 to shift to wtp53-like folding state	Deaggregation, Restoration	Soragni 2016 [73]

pCAP	Small peptide; binds preferentially to mutp53 when it transiently exhibits wtp53-like conformation to shift the equilibrium towards the wtp53	Stabilize wtp53 structure	Tal 2016 [74]

ZMC-1	Metallochaperone; increases intracellular zinc level to restore zinc-deficient p53 mutants such as p53-R175H which allows proper wtp53-like folding	Restoration and activation	Yu 2012 [75]Blanden 2015 [76]

RETRA	Not well known; disrupts mutp53/p73 complexes 	Activation of p73	Kravchenko 2008 [77]

Prodigiosin	Not well known; induces TAp73 expression and disrupts its interaction with mutp53	Activation of p73	Hong 2014 [78]

Chetomin (CTM)	Binds to Hsp40 and increases the binding of Hsp40 to p53 R175H which leads to restoration of wtp53 conformation	Restoration of p53 R175H	Hiraki 2015 [79]

Hsp90 inhibitors	e.g., 17AAG and Ganetespib; disrupt chaperone complexes to release and activate MDM2 and/or CHIP which degrade mutp53	Mutp53 degradation	Esser 2005 [35]Li 2011 [37]Alexandrova 2015 [15]

Statin	e.g., Lovastatin inhibits Hsp40 (by decreasing mevalonate-5-phosphate) or Cerivastatin (more potent) inhibits Hsp90 (by inhibiting HDAC6) to release and reactivate CHIP and MDM2 leading to mutp53 degradation	Mutp53 degradation	Parrales 2016 [60]Ingallina 2018 [59]

Compound Described	Mechanism of Action	Targeting	References

RETRA	Not well known; disrupts mutp53/p73 complexes	Activation of p73	Kravchenko 2008 [77]

Prodigiosin	Not well known; induces TAp73 expression and disrupts its interaction with mutp53	Activation of p73	Hong 2014 [78]

Chetomin (CTM)	Binds to Hsp40 and increases the binding of Hsp40 to p53 R175H which leads to restoration of wtp53 conformation	Restoration of p53 R175H	Hiraki 2015 [79]

Hsp90 inhibitors	e.g., 17AAG and Ganetespib; disrupt chaperone complexes to release and activate MDM2 and/or CHIP which degrade mutp53	Mutp53 degradation	Esser 2005 [35]Li 2011 [37]Alexandrova 2015 [15]

Statin	e.g., Lovastatin inhibits Hsp40 (by decreasing mevalonate-5-phosphate) or Cerivastatin (more potent) inhibits Hsp90 (by inhibiting HDAC6) to release and reactivate CHIP and MDM2 leading to mutp53 degradation	Mutp53 degradation	Parrales 2016 [60]Ingallina 2018 [59]


Attribute and level	Available coloura

Treated (T) or untreated (U)	Shape	Size (feet)	Price (000 TSH)

T (Olyset brand)	Rectangular	4 × 6	2, 4, 6, 8	Aqua blue

T (Olyset brand)	Rectangular	6 × 6	2, 4, 6, 8	Navy blue and whiteb

U (Safinet brand)	Rectangular	4 × 6; 6 × 6	2, 4, 6, 8	White

U (Safinet brand)	Conical	3.5 × 6c; 6 × 6	2, 4, 6, 8	White


Source of variation	df	SS	MS	Est. variance	Variation (%)	P

Among individuals	83	2276.02	27.42	8.36	70.7	< 0.001

Within individuals	157	543.45	3.46	3.46	29.3

Total	240	2819.47		11.83	100


Cancer. related Function	PLS predicted Target genes in the respective functions	The nos. of cancer related miRNAs associated with the mRNA targets

Cancer	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, CAPG, COTL1, CYBA, DDIT4, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, S100A11, SLC12A8, SLC7A11, SOX4 and UBE2I (20)	15

Tumorigenesis	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, CAPG, COTL1, CYBA, DDIT4, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, NUDT1, OAZ1, ODC1, PRDX2, S100A11, SLC12A8, SLC7A11, SOX4 and UBE2I (22)	15

Carcinoma	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GSTP1, IFITM1, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, S100A11 and SLC7A11 (13)	12

Malignant tumor	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, S100A11, SLC7A11 and SOX4 (16)	12

Primary tumor	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, PRDX2, S100A11, SLC7A11 and SOX4 (17)	12

Angiogenesis	ANXA2, CANX and GPX1 (3)	8

Cancer. related Function	PLS predicted Target genes in the respective functions	The nos. of cancer related miRNAs associated with the mRNA targets

Carcinoma	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GSTP1, IFITM1, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, S100A11 and SLC7A11 (13)	12

Malignant tumor	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, S100A11, SLC7A11 and SOX4 (16)	12

Primary tumor	ANXA2, BHLHE40, CANX, COTL1, CYBA, FTL, GPX1, GSTP1, IFITM1, MIF, MMP11, OAZ1, ODC1, PRDX2, S100A11, SLC7A11 and SOX4 (17)	12

Angiogenesis	ANXA2, CANX and GPX1 (3)	8


Severity of inflammatory cell infiltration	Score 1 (n=7)	Score 2 (n=10)	Score 3 (n=17)	Score 4 (n=12)

Patients without TBM-IgG3	4	3	2	6

Patients with mild deposited TBM-IgG3	3	7	9	4

Patients with strong deposited TBM-IgG3	0	0	6	2

Severity of inflammatory cell	Scor	Score	Score 3 (n=17	Sco

 infiltration	e 1 (n=7)	 2 (n=10)	)	re 4 (n=12)

Patients without TBM-IgG3	4	3	2	6

Patients with mild deposited TBM-IgG3	3	7	9	4

Patients with strong deposited TBM-IgG3	0	0	6	2


Target	Primer	Sequence (5′ → 3′)	Ta (°C)	Reference

Total bacteria	UniF	GTGSTGCAYGGYYGTCGTCA	60	[23]

UniR	ACGTCRTCCMCNCCTTCCTC

Bifidobacterium	BIF-F	TCG CGTC(C/T)GGTGTGAAAG	58	[24]

BIF-R	CCACATCCAGC(A/G)TCCAC

Clostridium leptum group	sg-Clept-F	GCACAAGCAGTGGAGT	53	[25]

sg-Clept-R3	CTTCCTCCGTTTTGTCAA

Bacteroides-Prevotella-Porphyromonas	BPP-F	GGTGTCGGCTTAAGTGCCAT	56	[24]

BPP-R	CGGA(C/T)GTAAGGGCCGTGC

Clostridium coccoides group	g-ccoc-F	AAATGACGGTACCTGACTAA	58	[26]

g-ccoc-R	CTTTGAGTTTCATTCTTGCGAA

Lactobacillus	Lac1F	AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA	58	[27]

Lab667	CACCGCTACACATGGAG

Target	Primer	Sequence (5′ → 3′)	Ta (°C)	Reference

Bacteroides-Prevotella-Porphyromonas	BPP-F	GGTGTCGGCTTAAGTGCCAT	56	[24]

BPP-R	CGGA(C/T)GTAAGGGCCGTGC

Clostridium coccoides group	g-ccoc-F	AAATGACGGTACCTGACTAA	58	[26]

g-ccoc-R	CTTTGAGTTTCATTCTTGCGAA

Lactobacillus	Lac1F	AGCAGTAGGGAATCTTCCA	58	[27]

Lab667	CACCGCTACACATGGAG


Prognostic factors	n	Median survival	Hazard Ratio	95% Confidence Interval	P

Age, yrs

< 70	24	17.4

≥ 70	9	5.1	1.81	1.165–2.813	0.008

Gender

Male	12	13.0

Female	21	20.0	0.346	0.142–0.844	0.020

Smoking history


	Mean 24-week change from baseline

	9.5 mg/24 h patch	Capsule (3–12 mg/day)	Placebo

Primary outcomes

ADAS-cog	−0.6**	−0.6**	1.0

ADCS-CGIC	3.9**	3.9**	4.2

Secondary outcomes

MMSE	1.1**	0.8**	0.0

ADCS-ADL	−0.1**	−0.5*	−2.3

Trail making test part A	−12.3***	−9.8***	7.7

Adverse events, %

Nausea	7.2	23.1***	5.0

Vomiting	6.2	17.0***	3.3


	n	%	Mean	LCI	UCI

Maternal outcomes from most recent pregnancy

 Unplanned pregnancy (n = 2039)	657	32.2

 Early booking (n = 2038)	886	43.5

 Late booking (n = 2038)	1037	50.9

 Unbooked (n = 2042)	114	5.6

 Low birth weight (n = 2007)	173	8.6

 Mean birth weight in grammes (n = 2007)			3036	3016.66	3055.85

 Premature (n = 2009)	31	1.54

 Caesarian Section (n = 2002)	65	3.25

 Extended hospital Stay (4+ days during delivery)	149	7.6

Maternal outcomes from previous pregnancies

 Age at first pregnancy (mean) n = 2042			20.22	20.09	20.35

 Gravidity (mean no. of lifetime pregnancies) (n = 2042)			2.22	2.17	2.27

 History of miscarriage (n = 2039)	234	11.5

 History of a stilbirth (n = 2038)	30	1.37

 History of a premature baby (n = 2037)	35	1.72

 History of a neonatal death (n = 2007)	188	9.37


Variable	L2–4 BMD	Femoral neck BMD

	r	p	r	p


Item	Wanted to know the sex of the baby	Did not want to know the sex of the baby	p value

Mean age, years	29.4	29.4	0.80

	n (%)	n (%)

Age groups			0.99

 17–24 years	214 (16.1)	160 (15.9)

 25–34 years	923 (69.4)	697 (69.4)

 35–47 years	193 (14.5)	148 (14.6)

Origin			0.45

 Nordic	1245 (92.1)	950 (92.3)

 Non-Nordic	107 (7.9)	79 (7.7)

Education			0.32

 Low	584 (43.3)	465 (45.5)

 High	764 (56.7)	558 (54.5)

Previous children			0.43

 No previous childen	624 (46.0)	456 (44.3)

 Has previous children	732 (54.0)	573 (55.7)

Income			0.53

 Low	620 (46.9)	485 (48.2)

 High	703 (53.1)	521 (51.8)

Pregnancy planning			0.34

 Very/fairly planned	1004 (74.7)	781 (76.4)

 Neither planned nor unplanned	180 (13.4)	139 (13.6)

 Very/fairly unplanned	160 (11.9)	102 (10.0)

Gone through another method of fetal diagnostics	594 (43.8)	388 (37.7)	<0.001

Importance of religion			0.44

 Great importance	146 (10.9)	127 (12.4)

 Neither important nor unimportant	296 (22.0)	231 (22.5)

 Little importance	903 (67.1)	667 (65.1)

Item	Wanted to know the sex of the baby	Did not want to know the sex of the baby

Mean age, years	29.4	29.4

	n (%)	n (%)

Age groups

17–24 years	214 (16.1)	160 (15.9)

25–34 years	923 (69.4)	697 (69.4)

35–47 years	193 (14.5)	148 (14.6)

Origin

Nordic	1245 (92.1)	950 (92.3)

Non-Nordic	107 (7.9)	79 (7.7)

Education

Low	584 (43.3)	465 (45.5)

High	764 (56.7)	558 (54.5)

Previous children

No previous childen	624 (46.0)	456 (44.3)

Has previous children	732 (54.0)	573 (55.7)

Income

Low	620 (46.9)	485 (48.2)

High	703 (53.1)	521 (51.8)

Pregnancy planning

Very/fairly planned	1004 (74.7)	781 (76.4)

Neither planned nor unplanned	180 (13.4)	139 (13.6)

Very/fairly unplanned	160 (11.9)	102 (10.0)

Gone through another method of fetal diagnostics	594 (43.8)	388 (37.7)

Importance of religion

Great importance	146 (10.9)	127 (12.4)

Neither important nor unimportant	296 (22.0)	231 (22.5)

Little importance	903 (67.1)	667 (65.1)


Cluster	Cluster	Voxel	Voxel

P	Size	P	T	x	y	z	Side	Location

0.008	22	0.004	5.15	−56	−18	40	L	IPL

0.011	16	0.008	5.16	−38	−42	60	L	aIPS


Demographic group	% of survey respondents who travelled to the mainland in previous 8 weeks in 2013 (N)	% of survey respondents who travelled to the mainland in previous 8 weeks in 2014 (N)

Overall	8.1% (20,536)	8.7% (20,880)

Children aged 2-14	6.2% (7,555)	6.1% (8,039)

Aged 15 or over	9.6% (11,498)	10.9% (11,436)

Living in urban sites	10.9% (12,080)	11.9% (12,309)

Living in rural sites	4.0% (8,456)	4.1% (8,571)

Highest SES quintile	9.8% (4,686)	14.3% (5,496)

Lowest SES quintile	3.9% (2,499)	4.6% (2,974)


S.N.	Name of genotype	Pedigree/source

 I. Elite coffee genotypes used for genetic diversity in the cultivated genepool

1	Taferikela	C. arabica; Pureline from Ethiopian collections

2	HdeT	C. arabica; Amphidiploid coffee, a natural hybrid from C. arabica and C. canephora

3	S2790	C. arabica; HdeT × Tafarikela, selection

4	S2792	C. arabica; Tafarikela × HdeT, selection

5	S10	C. arabica; Double Cross Hybrid; Caturra with Cioccie and S.795 (both arabica)

6	S11	C. arabica; Amphidiploid, C. liberica × C. eugenioides

7	BM	C. arabica; Blue Mountain Pure line

8	Agaro-Sln4	C. arabica; Pureline from Ethiopian collections

9	Kagganahalla	C. canephora; Selection

10	BR9	C. canephora; Selection

11	BR11	C. canephora; Selection

12	CXR	C. canephora; Hybrid of C. congenis × C. canephora

13	L1Valley	C. canephora; Selection

14	S3329	C. canephora; Selection

15	S3334	C. canephora; Selection

16	Sln27	C. canephora; Pure line

 II. Parents and mapping population used for testing utility in mapping analysis

 Parents: CXR (12) and Kagganahalla (9); Mapping population: 175 segregating progenies

 III. Species of Coffea and Psilanthus (related taxa of cultivated coffee) used for transferability studies

a	C. congensis	Erythrocoffea (W. & C. Africa)

b	C. excelsa	Pachycoffea (Srilanka)

c	C. liberica	Pachycoffea (W. & C. Africa)

d	C. abeokuteae	Pachycoffea (Srilanka)

e	C. dewevrei	Pachycoffea (USDA)

f	C. arnoldiana	Pachycoffea (SanMarino)

g	C. aruwemiensis	Pachycoffea (SanMarino)

h	C. eugenioides	Mozambicoffea (C. Africa)

i	C. racemosa	Mozambicoffea (E. Africa)

j	C. salvatrix	Mozambicoffea (E. Africa)

k	C. kapakata	Mozambicoffea (C. Africa)

l	C. stenophylla	Melanocoffea (W. Africa)

m	P. wightiana	Paracoffea (India)

n	P. bengalenis	Paracoffea (India)


Description	Answers	p-value model	ORb	95 % CIc

Work sequence depending on healthy before sick pigs (Ref.a Yes)	No	<0.01	16.68	3.4-81.8

Working on other farms (Ref. No)	Yes	<0.01	0.05	0.006-0.4

Distance to the next pig farm (Ref. ≥ 500 metres)	<500 metres	0.01	9.88	1.7-57.1

Visitor boots available (Ref. No boots available)	Yes, clean	0.97	1.03	0.2-4.7

	Yes, dirty	0.01	0.06	0.006-0.5

Analysis of production parameters (Ref. by others (external))	By farmer (program, computer, written, none)	0.01	0.12	0.02-0.6

Application of homoeopathic agents (Ref. Yes)	No	0.02	10.49	1.4-78.8

Mixing pigs of different suppliers within the same pen (Ref. No mixing)	Yes	0.05	4.16	1.0-17.4


Categories	Sepsis/SS group(n = 50)	Non-sepsis group(n = 20)	p value


Age group (years)	Sex	Number of AWE (%)

M (%)	F (%)


Zebrafishglucose-related immune protein	p-value	GO annotation

gpia	0.004833	humoral immune response

hif1ab	0.0065	inflammatory response

ins	0.006833	glucose transport/T cell activation

Zebrafishglucose-related immune protein	p-value

gpia	0.004833

hif1ab	0.0065

ins	0.006833

GO annotation

humoral immune response

inflammatory response

glucose transport/T cell activation


Genus	Species	Name	Feeding Strategy	Genome Size (Mb)	Proteome size	CWDE’s Identified

Bursaphelenchus	B. xylophilus	Pine wood nematode	Stem/Bulb Nematodes	73.09	18,074	119

Globodera	G. pallida	Potato cyst nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	123.63	16,417	100

Meloidogyne	M. floridensis	Peach root-knot nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	96.67	21,038	102

M. hapla	Northern root-knot nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	53.01	14,420	78

M. incognita	Southern root-knot nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	82.1	20,365	131

Genus	Species	Name	Feeding Strategy	Genome Size (Mb)	Proteome size	CWDE’s Identified

Meloidogyne	M. hapla	Northern root-knot nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	53.01	14,420	78

M. incognita	Southern root-knot nematode	Sedentary Endo-parasites	82.1	20,365	131


	Overall (%)

Returned home with the presence of adults	42.3

Returned home without the presence of adults	12.5

Returned home with the presence of siblings	10.9

Participated in extracurricular activity	23.5

Socializing with friends without the presence of adults	9.9

Wandering the streets alone	0.9

	Overall (%)

Returned home with the presence of adults	42.3

Returned home without the presence of adults	12.5

Returned home with the presence of siblings	10.9

Participated in extracurricular activity	23.5

Soci	9.

	Overall (%)

alizing with friends without the presence of adults	9

Wandering the streets alone	0.9


Type of Tool	Respondents	Number of Interviews (Key Informat Interviews)	Number of participants per interview	Total number of participants

Key Informat Interviews	Medical Officers, Clinical Care Experts and Maternal and Child Health Cordinator	12 (3 in each of the 4 districts)	1	12

Health Facility in-charge	4 (1 in each of the 4 districts)	1	4

Focus Group Discussions	Mothers of children below one year	4 (1 in each of the health facilities from each district)	8–10	38

Community Health Volunteers (CHWs, NHC, TBAs)a	4 (1 in each of the health facilities from each district)	6–8	30

Total	24	84

Type of Tool	Respondents	Number of Interviews (Key Informat Interviews)	Number of participants per interview	Total number of participants

Total	24	84


Type of organization	Organization/department	Position	No. of interviewees

National Ministry of Health	Monitoring and Evaluation	Head, M&E	1

	Health information system	Head, HIS	1

	Health Financing	Head, Health financing division	2

National Treasury	IFMIS		2

	e-PROMIS	Director	1

Social Insurance Agency	National Hospital Insurance Fund		1

University of Nairobi	School of Economics	Senior Lecturer	1

	School of Public Health	Head, Health system and policy department	1

Tertiary Hospital	Kenyatta hospital		1

Multilateral organizations	WHO	Health System Advisor	1

	World Bank	Regional Health Specialist	1

	DFID	Secretary, Health & Education departments	1

USAID or PEPFAR funded	Abt Associates		1

 implementers	i-TECH		1

	Futures group		3

Nairobi County	Mbagathi District Hospital		4

Kajiado County	County administration		2

	Hospital	Health administration officer	1

Muranga County	County administration		2

	Muranga County Hospital	Medical Superintendent	1

Nakuru County	County administration		1

	Nakuru Regional Hospital		2

TOTAL			32

Type of organization	Organization/department	Position	No. of interviewees

	World Bank	Regional Health Specialist	1

	DFID	Secretary, Health & Education departments	1

USAID or PEPFAR funded	Abt Associates		1

implementers	i-TECH		1

	Futures group		3

Nairobi County	Mbagathi District Hospital		4

Kajiado County	County administration		2

	Hospital	Health administration officer	1

Muranga County	County administration		2

	Muranga County Hospital	Medical Superintendent	1

Nakuru County	County administration		1

	Nakuru Regional Hospital		2

TOTAL			32


CT score	CT status	Morphology features on CT	EMVI status

0	Definite No	Absence of tumor extension beyond the colon wall/ Tumor extension through the colon wall but no adjacent vessels (Mesenteric contralateral side)	Negative

1	Suspicious No	Stranding in proximity of vessels but no tumor density in vessels (Mesenteric side)	Negative

2	Suspicious Yes	Similar tumor density in adjacent vessels; vessel expansion by tumor (Mesenteric side)	Positive

3	Definite Yes	Similar tumor density in adjacent vessels; Irregular vessel contour by tumor (Mesenteric side)	Positive

CT score	CT status	Morphology features on CT	EMVI status

1	Suspicious No	Stranding in proximity of vessels but no tumor density in vessels (Mesenteric side)	Negative

2	Suspicious Yes	Similar tumor density in adjacent vessels; vessel expansion by tumor (Mesenteric side)	Positive

3	Definite Yes	Similar tumor density in adjacent vessels; Irregular vessel contour by tumor (Mesenteric side)	Positive


Characteristics	Total	HOXA1 expression	P value	Cyclin D1 expression	P value

Negative (120)	Positive (144)	Negative (127)	Positive (137)

Age(years)				0.457			0.845

<65	121	58	63		59	62

≥65	143	62	81		68	75


	United States	United Kingdom	Canada	International

Source	U.S. government	The Medical Letter	U.K. government	Canadian government	World Health Organization

Primaquine as Primary Prophylaxis	As an alternative to suppressive options or:With travel where malaria is primarily P. vivaxShort-term travelShort-notice travel	Only as an alternative to suppressive options	Not recommended	Only as an alternative to suppressive options	None specified except for special risk groups (infants, pregnant women, vulnerable children in seasonal high transmission)

Primaquine following a diagnosis of P. vivax	Recommended	Recommended	Recommended	Recommended	Strongly recommended

Primaquine following suppressive prophylaxis	Recommended	No recommendation	Not recommended	Recommended for high risk groups	No recommendation

References	[21]	[22, 23]	[24, 25]	[26]	[27]


Number	Act	PLS	EN-PLS

Pred.	REP	PRESS	Pred.	REP	PRESS

1	108.33	100.04	−8.29	68.72	95.66	−12.67	160.53


	Number (%) of facilities assessed in evaluation

	2010	2012

Total	52	50

Region:

Tanga	6 (12)	6 (12)

Arusha	5 (10)	5 (10)

Lindi	3 (6)	3 (6)

Morogoro	5 (10)	5 (10)

Manyara	5 (10)	4 (8)

Iringa	4 (8)	4 (8)

Tabora	6 (12)	6 (12)

Kilimanjaro	5 (10)	5 (10)

Kigoma	3 (6)	3 (6)

Pwani	3 (6)	3 (6)

Mtwara	3 (6)	3 (6)

Ruvuma	4 (8)	4 (8)

Facility type:

Regional hospital	12 (23)	12 (24)

Health centre/Dispensary	40 (77)	38 (76)

	Number (%) of facilities assessed in evaluation

	2010	2012

Total	52	50

Region:

Tanga	6 (12)	6 (12)

Arusha	5 (10)	5 (10)

Lindi	3 (6)	3 (6)

Morogoro	5 (10)	5 (10)

Manyara	5 (10)	4 (8)

Iringa	4 (8)	4 (8)

Tabora	6 (12)	6 (12)

Kilimanjaro	5 (10)	5 (10)

Kigoma	3 (6)	3 (6)

Pwani	3 (6)	3 (6)

Mtwara	3 (6)	3 (6)

Ruvuma	4 (8)	4 (8)

Facility type:

Regional hospital		12 (24)

	Number (%) of facilities assessed in evaluation

	2010	2012

	12 (23)

Health centre/Dispensary	40 (77)	38 (76)


Characteristics	Number	Percentage (95% confidence interval [CI])

Total n	138

Median age (y)	30 (16–41)

Median gravidity	2 (1–9)

Median parity	1 (0–5)

Race/ethnicity

 Non-Hispanic White	114	82.6 (75.4–88.1)

 Non-Hispanic African-American	23	16.7 (11.3–13.8)

 Other	1	0.7 (0–4.4)

Type of insurance

 Private	97	70.3 (62.2–77.3)

 Medical assistance	41	29.7 (22.7–37.8)

Obstetrical provider Type

 Private physician	100	72.5 (64.5–79.3)

 Maternal fetal medicine	3	2.2 (0.5–6.5)

 OB/GYN residents	25	18.1 (12.5–25.4)

 Midwife 	8	5.8 (2.8–11.2)

 Family practitioner	2	1.4 (0.07–5.5)

Type of delivery

 Vaginal	116	84.1 (77.0–89.3)

 Cesarean after labor	22	15.9 (10.7–23.0)

Patient documentation of nature of the penicillin allergy	78	56.5 (48.2–64.5)

Patients with documentation that they received antibiotic prophylaxis	135	97.8 (93.5–99.5)

Type of antibiotics received

 Cephalosporin	41	30.4 (23.2–38.6)

 Clindamycin	54	40 (32.1–48.4)

 Erythromycin	2	1.5 (0.07–5.6)

 Vancomycin	36	26.7 (19.9–34.7)

 Penicillin	2	1.5 (0.07–5.6)

Characteristics	Number	Percentage (95% confidence interval [CI])

Clindamycin	54	40 (32.1–48.4)

Erythromycin	2	1.5 (0.07–5.6)

Vancomycin	36	26.7 (19.9–34.7)

Penicillin	2	1.5 (0.07–5.6)


Characteristic	N	%

VTE event type

 Lower extremity DVT	37	37.4

 Pulmonary embolism	26	26.3

 Portal vein thrombosis	2	2

 Upper extremity DVT	26	26.3

 Other venous thrombotic episode	8	8.1

Median time to thrombocytopenia (days)	89.5	NA

Characteristic	N	%

Lower extremity DVT	37	37.4

Pulmonary embolism	26	26.3

Portal vein thrombosis	2	2

Upper extremity DVT	26	26.3

Other venous thrombotic episode	8	8.1

Median time to thrombocytopenia (days)	89.5	NA


	Karnataka state	Uttar Pradesh state

	Bagalkot	Hassan	Agra	Gorakhpur

% API	OXYTOCIN (%)	METHYL-ERGOMETRINE (%)	OXYTOCIN (%)	METHYL-ERGOMETRINE (%)	OXYTOCIN (%)	METHYL- ERGOMETRINE (%)	OXYTOCIN (%)	METHYL- ERGOMETRINE (%)


Variable	Frequency	Percentage

Recording condition of the baby after birth

 Yes	203	84.9

 No	36	15.1

Mode of delivery

 SVD	181	75.7

 C/S	23	9.6

 Note recorded	35	14.6

Fetal outcome

 Alive	192	80.3

 Dead	3	1.3

 Not recorded	44	18.4

Active management of third stage of labour

 Yes	133	55.6

 No	106	44.4

Sex of the new born

 Recorded	189	79.1

 Not recorded	50	20.9

Weight of the new born

 Recorded	192	80.3

 Not recorded	47	19.7

Time of delivery

 Recorded	202	84.5

 Not recorded	37	15.5

APGAR score

Good (7–10)	195	81.6

Not good (1–6)	3	1.3

Not recorded	41	17.2


	Family worries or complains about alcohol use	Alcohol use causing problems with others	Alcohol interfered with responsibilities	Drinking ever interfered with work/school/job/home	Drinking problem causing family/friend argues/problems

	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)	OR (95% CI)

Smoke

Yes	1.51 (1.19–1.92)	1.70 (0.66–4.37)	1.39 (0.52–3.68)	0.77 (0.50–1.17)	0.77 (0.50–1.18)

No	1	1	1	1	1


Variables	n with information	%

Place of residence

Plak-Ô	33	66.0

Terra Nova	64	34.0

Gender

Male	44	45.4

Female	53	54.6

Age

<2 years	32	33.0

≥2 years	65	67.0

Garbage collection

Adequate	-	-

Inadequate	97	100.0

Birthplacea

Maternity/hospital	94	97.9

Home	2	2.1

Vitamin A supplementationa

Yes	67	77.0

No	20	23.0

Iron deficiency anemia

No	41	42.3

Yes	56	57.7

Presence of parasitic infestationa

No	24	32.9

Yes	49	67.1

Variables	n with information	%

tion

Adequate	-	-

Inadequate	97	100.0

Birthplacea

Maternity/hospital	94	97.9

Home	2	2.1

Vitamin A supplementationa

Yes	67	77.0

No	20	23.0

Iron deficiency anemia

No	41	42.3

Yes	56	57.7

Presence of parasitic infestationa

No	24	32.9

Yes	49	67.1


	Single mothers (n = 442)	Partnered mothers (n = 2218)	All mothers (n = 2660)

	Moderate (n = 115) vs. non-smoking (n = 236)	Heavy (n = 91) vs. non-smoking (n = 236)	Moderate (n = 413) vs. non-smoking (n = 1607)	Heavy (n = 198) vs. non-smoking (n = 1607)	Moderate (n = 528) vs. non-smoking (n = 1843)	Heavy (n = 289) vs. non-smoking (n = 1843)

Coping styles	OR	CI 95%	OR	CI 95%	OR	CI 95%	OR	CI 95%	OR	CI 95%	OR	CI 95%

Substance consumption	1.54	1.38-1.72	1.80	1.58-2.04	1.51	1.44-1.58	1.66	1.55-1.78	1.51	1.45-1.58	1.72	1.62-1.82


	Habituation	Extinction

	CS+	CS−	CS+	CS−

SC measurement first	0.020 (0.019)	0.006 (0.019)	0.025 (0.030)	−0.064 (0.026)


Gene	Forward Primer	Reverse Primer

Slc22a1	TCTGGCTACAGGAGAACGACGGCCA	TGCTCCATTATCCTGACAGCTCGCGT

Slc22a2	TCGAAACAGAGGAGGATTGTGGGAATA	GAGAGGTGTTTCCCATTGCACTTAGCCAC

Slc22a6	TATGTGGGCACCTTGATTGGC	AGGGTGAGGTCCAGCCTTCCT

Slc22a8	ATCTCATCAACATCTATTGGG	AGGGCCTTTGAGTATTTTCCA

Slco1a1	TATGGAGGACAAGCCAGAGAG	AGAGGTGGTTAATCCAGCAAC

Slco1a2	CACAGAAAAAAGGCCAAGGAA	TAAGGAAAGACAGAAGGTACT

Slco1a5	CACAGAGAAAAAGCCAAAGAG	AGAGGCAGTTAAGCCGGCAAC


Mycotoxigenic Fungi	Corn Silage	Barley Silage	Hay

Fusarium culmorum	100	0	0

F. poae	0	100	100

F. verticillioides	0	100	0

F. sporotrichioides	0	100	0

Aspergillusflavus	100	20	0

Penicillium roqueforti	100	100	100

P. crustosum	20	0	20

P. paneum	20	0	20

P. citrinum	50	25	0

Mycotoxigenic Fungi	Corn Silage	Barley Silage	Hay

P. citrinum	50	25	0


Author	N	Ye	I	Lan	DeliriumN	S	Specificit	APACHE II	Q


ICD-9 procedure code	N = 50,225^ n (%)	Description

41.31	5,185 (10.3%)	Biopsy of bone marrow

38.93	4,066 (8.1%)	Venous catheterization, not elsewhere classified

01.59	3,160 (6.3%)	Other excision or destruction of lesion or tissue of brain

03.31	2,705 (5.4%)	Spinal tap

86.07	2,264 (4.5%)	Insertion of totally implantable vascular access device [VAD]

85.05	1,147 (2.3%)	Incision with removal of foreign body or device from skin and subcutaneous tissue

02.2	1,076 (2.1%)	Ventriculostomy

40.11	1,038 (2.1%)	Biopsy of lymphatic structure

40.3	827 (1.7%)	Regional lymph node excision

54.4	819 (1.6%)	Excision or destruction of peritoneal tissue


Recommended timeline	Building the infrastructure	Educational development	Program accreditation	Marketing and recruitment

6–12 months	Institutional affiliation and training site

	Budget/funding Timeline

3–4 months		Review and apply ACGME requirements

		Develop your educational vision

4–6 months		Curriculum and program design	Complete the application

2–3 months		Faculty development	Prepare for site visit

3–6 months			Await accreditation decision	Strategic marketing

8 months (July–February)				Active recruitment

4 Months (March–June)				The beginning: match and orientation


RCC subtype	%	Number of samples

Clearcell RCC	48%	(17/35)

Papillary RCC	32%	(11/35)

Chromophobe RCC	20%	(7/35)

TNM

T1a	31%	(11/35)

T	23	(8/35)


Harvestable amount	pH	OM	TN 	P2O5

Root length	0.452	0.888∗∗	0.921∗∗	0.630

Harvestable amount	pH	OM	TN

Root length	0.452	0.888∗∗	0.921∗∗


Case	Fracture type	Time to fracture (mo)	Treatment	Plates	Bone graft	Time to union (mo)	Duration of follow-up (mo)	Outcome	JOA score

1	Oblique	104	ORIF	DFLCP	-	4	22	Union	63

2	Transverse	100	ORIF	Reverse DFLCP	Auto, fibula	6	28	Union	77

3	Transverse	75	Revision (IBG) +ORIF	LCP	Allo, auto, iliac	3	119	Union	68

4	Transverse (with stem fracture)	88	Revision (IBG)	-	Allo	4	45	Union	77

5	Transverse	78	ORIF	Dall-Miles plate	Auto, fibula	7	115	Nonunion*	53

6	Oblique	99	ORIF	LCF	Auto, iliac	4	74	Union	60

7	Transverse	12	ORIF	Dall-Miles plate	Auto, fibula	8	180	Union	67

8	Oblique	120	ORIF	DFLCP	Allo	4	35	Union	60

9	Oblique	142	ORIF	DFLCP	-	4	10	Union	62

10	Transverse	114	ORIF	Reverse DFLCP	Auto, iliac	6	12	Union	72

11	Oblique	240	ORIF	DFLCP	-	2	8	Union	81

Case	Fracture type	Time to fracture (mo)	Treatment	Plates	Bone graft	Time to union (mo)	Duration of follow-up (mo)	Outcome	JOA score

7	Transverse	12	ORIF	Dall-Miles plate	Auto, fibula	8	180	Union	67

8	Oblique	120	ORIF	DFLCP	Allo	4	35	Union	60

9	Oblique	142	ORIF	DFLCP	-	4	10	Union	62

10	Transverse	114	ORIF	Reverse DFLCP	Auto, iliac	6	12	Union	72

11	Oblique	240	ORIF	DFLCP	-	2	8	Union	81


	Total

Characteristic	n	IR	IRR	95% CI

Total	338	0.92	NA

Race

 Whites	295	0.97	1.00	Reference

 Blacks	20	0.59	0.61	0.37 to 0.96

 Other/unspecified	23	~	~	~

Calendar period

 1977 to 1986	79	0.78	1.00	Reference

 1987 to 1996	121	1.02	1.30	0.97 to 1.76

 1997 to 2006	138	0.96	1.23	0.93 to 1.65

Age

 <50 years	59	0.25	1.00	Reference

 ≥50 years	279	2.70	11.02	8.31 to 14.87

Laterality

 Right	164	0.45	1.00	Reference

 Left	173	0.47	1.06	0.85 to 1.32

 Not specified	1	~	~	~

Site

 Upper outer quadrant	105	0.29	1.00	Reference

 Upper inner quadrant	29	0.08	0.28	0.18 to 0.43

 Lower outer quadrant	23	0.06	0.22	0.13 to 0.35

 Lower inner quadrant	14	~	~	~

 Nipple/central	28	0.08	0.27	0.17 to 0.41

 Overlapping	89	0.24	0.83	0.62 to 1.11

 Not specified	50	0.14	0.47	0.33 to 0.67

Stage

 Localized	320	0.87	1.00	Reference

 Regional	14	~	~	~

 Distant	1	~	~	~

 Unstaged	3	~	~	~

LN and sizea

 LN negative, ≤2 cm	126	0.50	1.00	Reference

 LN negative, >2 cm	67	0.26	0.52	0.38 to 0.71

 LN positive, ≤2 cm	2	~	~	~

 LN positive, >2 cm	3	~	~	~

 Other/not specified	46	0.18	0.36	0.25 to 0.51

Hormone receptorsb

 ER-negative/PR-negative	128	0.56	1.00	Reference

 ER-negative/PR-positive	6	~	~	~

 ER-positive/PR-positive	21	0.09	0.16	0.10 to 0.25

 ER-positive/PR-negative	12	~	~	~

 Other/not specified	55	0.24	0.42	0.30 to 0.59

	Total

Characteristic	n	IR	IRR	95% CI

Regional	14	~	~	~

Distant	1	~	~	~

Unstaged	3	~	~	~

LN and sizea

LN negative, ≤2 cm	126	0.50	1.00	Reference

LN negative, >2 cm	67	0.26	0.52	0.38 to 0.71

LN positive, ≤2 cm	2	~	~	~

LN positive, >2 cm	3	~	~	~

Other/not specified	46	0.18	0.36	0.25 to 0.51

Hormone receptorsb

ER-negative/PR-negative	128	0.56	1.00	Reference

ER-negative/PR-positive	6	~	~	~

ER-positive/PR-positive	21	0.09	0.16	0.10 to 0.25

ER-positive/PR-negative	12	~	~	~

Other/not specified	55	0.24	0.42	0.30 to 0.59


	Journal Name

	BMJ	Lancet	NEJM	JAMA	BJS	BJC	BJOG	Total

2007-8

Original articles	6	5	5	1	10	16	10	541 (1.6%)

Pilot or feasibility study in preparation for a trial	0	3	3	0	2	1	3	12

Piloting new technique, combination of treatments	1	0	0	0	4	2	6	13

Phase I, II trials	0	1	1	0	0	7	0	9

Piloting screening program	2	0	0	1	1	1	0	5

Piloting guidelines, educational package, patient care strategy	3	1	0	0	2	3	1	10

Laboratory testing of activity of compounds	0	0	1	0	1	2	0	4

Total research papers	292	379	444	383	338	1084	398	3318

2000-12

Original articles	11	17	3	7	9	33	10	90 (2.0%)

Total research papers	372	1115	434	619	396	1132	381	4449


Variable	Number (percent)

Gender	Male: 7 (28%)

Female: 18 (72%)

Racial/ethnic background	White: 19 (76%)

African-American: 2 (8%)

Hispanic: 1 (4%)

Asian: 3 (12%)

Highest Education level	High School or less: 3 (12%)

Some college, no degree: 3 (12%)

Associate’s degree: 11 (44%)

Bachelor’s degree: 4 (16%)

Post-graduate training: 4 (16%)

Recruitment source	Office staff: 7 (28%)

Website volunteer: 8 (32%)

Practice volunteer: 6 (24%)

Department staff volunteer: 4 (16%)

Newest Vital Sign Health Literacy category	Adequate literacy: 18 (72%)

Possible limited literacy: 5 (20%)

High likelihood limited literacy: 2 (8%)

REALM grade level	High School: 21 (84%)

7th – 8th grade: 3 (12%)

4th to 6th grade: 1 (4%)

 	Mean (sd, range)

Age, years	51.4, (13.8, 22 to 71)

Subjective numeracy scale	4 (0.75, 2.25 to 5.38)

Variable	Number (percent)

Highest Education level	Some college, no degree: 3 (12%)

Associate’s degree: 11 (44%)

Bachelor’s degree: 4 (16%)

Post-graduate training: 4 (16%)

Recruitment source	Office staff: 7 (28%)

Website volunteer: 8 (32%)

Practice volunteer: 6 (24%)

Department staff volunteer: 4 (16%)

Newest Vital Sign Health Literacy category	Adequate literacy: 18 (72%)

Possible limited literacy: 5 (20%)

High likelihood limited literacy: 2 (8%)

REALM grade level	High School: 21 (84%)

7th – 8th grade: 3 (12%)

4th to 6th grade: 1 (4%)

	Mean (sd, range)

Age, years	51.4, (13.8, 22 to 71)

Subjective numeracy scale	4 (0.75, 2.25 to 5.38)


	Steatosis grade	Fibrosis stage	Lobular inflammation	Ballooning

Serum (n=138)

Campes	−0.0	−0.0	−0.02	0.0


Characteristic		N = 110

Sex	Male	60 (54.5%)

Female	50 (45.5%)

Age	Mean	60.97 ± 2.34

BMI	Mean	27.06 ± 0.98

Ethnicity (skin color)	Yellow	6 (6.8%%)


	Number of	Lower 95% of risk

Outcome	Events	Patients	rule of 3	Exact CI

Epidural haematoma

Cardiac	0	4971	1 in 1,700	1 in 1,350

Thoracic	0	4108	1 in 1,400	1 in 1,100

Vacular	0	5026	1 in 1,700	1 in 1,350

Combined	0	14105	1 in 4,700	1 in 3,800

Permanent neurological injury

Combined	0	13827	1 in 4,600	1 in 3,750


Species	Group	NSkull	NMandible

C. australis (aus)	mendocinus	31	27

C. azarae (aza)	mendocinus	29	26

C. flamarioni (fla)	mendocinus	32	22

C. porteousi (por)	mendocinus	30	28

C. mendocinus (men)	mendocinus	24	14

C. ibicuiensis (ibi)	torquatus	16	10

C. lami (lam)	torquatus	89	66

C. minutus (min)	torquatus	197	122

C. pearsoni (pea)	torquatus	77	60

C. perrensi (per)	torquatus	9	9

C. roigi (roi)	torquatus	7	7

C. torquatus (tor)	torquatus	222	124

Total		763	515

Species	Group	NSkull	NMandible

C. ibicuiensis (ibi)	torquatus	16	10

C. lami (lam)	torquatus	89	66

C. minutus (min)	torquatus	197	122

C. pearsoni (pea)	torquatus	77	60

C. perrensi (per)	torquatus	9	9

C. roigi (roi)	torquatus	7	7

C. torquatus (tor)	torquatus	222	124

Total		763	515


		Percentile

Sample	No. > LOD/total (%)a	10th	25th	50th	75th	90th	95th

Maternal blood (pg/g)a	13/92 (14)	< LOD	< LOD	< LOD	< LOD	1.5	2.5

Umbilical cord blood (pg/g)a	8/65 (12)	< LOD	< LOD	< LOD	< LOD	2.3	2.5

Postpartum meconium (ng/g)b	23/83 (28)	< LOD	< LOD	< LOD	0.44	0.62	0.77


Case	MP Pulse Therapy	Prednisone	Others	Proteinuria (month)	Outcome

1		+	MMF	7	RBC, 14/HP after 15 months

2			Tripterygium	2	Normal urine test after 13 months

3		+	MMF	4	RBC, 14/HP after 20 months

4	+	+	CTX	5	Normal urine test after 17 months

5		+	Tripterygium	1	Normal urine test after 7 months

6	+	+	CTX	5	RBC, 10/HP after 15 months

7		+		4	RBC, 8/HP after 19 months

8		+	Tripterygium	2	RBC, 6/HP after 17 months

9			Tripterygium	4	Normal urine test after 13 months

10	+	+	CTX	4	Normal urine test after 15 months

11		+	MMF	4	RBC, 15/HP after 13 months


	Hyperhomocysteinemiaa	Hypercysteinemiaa

Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4


Approaches	# of selected nodes	# of Sampled records	Recall (%)	Precision (%)

hLDA	20	200	48.2	76.5

Ours without domain knowledge	20	200	61.7	82.56

Ours with domain knowledge	20	200	65.86	82.33


Male/female	21/4

Injured side

Right/left	18/7

Dominance

Right/left	21/4

Mechanism of primary injury

Bicycling	9

Simple fall	7

Sport	7

Traffic accident	2

Rockwood type in primary radiographs

II	3

III	6

IV	1

V	15

Mean age at time of injury, y (range)	44 (22–59)

Mean age at time of examination, y (range)	48 (24–63)


Variables	Sample Number (Persons)	Weighted Number (Million Persons)	Proportion (%)

Region

East	769,169	401	40.73

Central	558,169	317	32.2

West	581,861	267	27.07

Marital status

Unmarried	227,393	115	11.66

Married	1,523,107	788	80.03

Divorced or widowed	158,699	82	8.31

Employment

Yes	1,367,709	719	72.99

No	541,490	266	27.01

Annual family income per capita by residential area *

>national average	462,517	233	23.69

≤national average	1,446,682	751	76.31


Predictive variables

WC (1)

Age (2)

WC (1)

Age (2)

Apo B (2)

WC (1)

Age (2)

Apo B (2)

Triglycerides (2)


Level of consciousness	Example of positive collective values

7. Service: Self-less service to the world	Social responsibility, future generations, long-term perspective, ethics, compassion, humility

6. Making a difference: to the local community or health district	Collaboration, community involvement, strategic partnerships.Staff fulfilment, coaching/mentoring, leadership development

5. Internal cohesion: Building internal organisational community	Shared values, vision, commitment, integrity, trust, passion, creativity, openness, transparency

4. Transformation: Continuous renewal and learning	Accountability, adaptability, empowerment, teamwork, goals orientation, personal growth

3. Self-esteem: High performance and quality of care	Systems, processes, quality, best practices, pride in performance.Bureaucracy, arrogance, image, hoarding information

2. Relationships: With colleagues and patients	Loyalty, open communication, patient experience, friendship.Blame, internal competition, rivalry, manipulation

1. Survival: Resources and safety	Sufficient budget, equipment, employee health, safety.Control, chaos, caution, job security


	Number	Response rate

Invitational e-mails sent	1345	17% (227/1345)

Valid emails addresses	1131	20% (227/1131)

Emails opened	693	33% (227/693)

Links to survey opened	293	77% (227/293)

Participants that completed survey	227

	Number	Response rate

Invitational e-mails sent	1345	17% (227/1345)

Va	11	20% (227

lid emails addresses	31	/1131)

Emails opened	693	33% (227/693)

Links to survey opened	293	77% (227/293)

Participants that completed survey	227


ρ	Method	Auc	Sensitivity	nIMS	nTMS

0.3	AucEN	0.81	0.45	3	12

	AucL	0.81	0.45	3	6

	LogEN	0.85	0.50	3	3


	III.2	III.3	III.6	III.7	III.8 (Proband)	III.9

Lab ID	PI-2568	PI-2569	PI-2570	PI-1202	PI-1124	PI-2571

Gender	F	F	F	M	M	F

ATXN10 repeat (SMRT/Cas9 capture)*	1315	1363	1076	1363	1304	1080

Age at onset (years)	35	48	unaffected	48	38	37

Onset of seizures (years)	60	57	–	53	–	–

Current age (years)	71	68	61	65	57	53

Duration of disease (years)	36	20	–	17	19	16

Seizures	+	+	–	+	–	–

Gait ataxia	+	+	–	+	–	+

Intention tremor	+	+	–	–	+	–

Dysarthria	+	+	–	+	–	+

Dysmetria	+	+	–	+	–	+

Dysdiadochokinesia	+	+	–	–	+	+

Nystagmus	+	+	–	+	–	+

Ocular dyskinesia	+	+	–	+	–	–

Hypotonia	–	–	–	–	–	–

Hyperreflexia	–	–	–	+	–	–

Babinski’s sign	–	–	–	–	–	–

Leg spasticity	–	–	–	–	–	–

Aggressiveness	+	+	–	–	–	+

Depression	+	+	–	+	+	+

MoCA	9/30	2/30	29/30	U	U	25/30

SARA	23.5/40	24.5/40	0/40	U	6/40	16/40

B-SIT (% tile)	NP	NP	27%	U	29%	20%

B-SIT (category)	NP	NP	Normal	U	Normal	Normal


	Controls	Carcinomas

	No (%)	No (%)

No. of subjects	399	157

Gendera

Male	157 (39.3)	87 (55.4)

Female	242 (60.7)	70 (44.6)

Ageb

Mean (SD)	54.2 (3.3)	67.9 (11.2)

Smoking status *

Never smoked	155 (46.7)	33(31.1)

Ever smoked	177 (53.3)	73 (68.9)

Mean no. of cigarette years (SD)	249(229)	383(339)

Alcohol consumption *

< 1 unit/month	72 (21.7)	36 (34.0)

≥ 1 unit/month	260 (78.3)	70 (66.0)

Mean units of alcohol per month (SD)	11.1 (12.2)	15.5 (22.3)


Species and tissue or cell type	Relevant properties of tissue or cells	Name of library in NCBI and contributor(s)	Total number of ESTs per library (March 2006)	Number of ESTs matching genes in Arabidopsis (e < 10-7)	Number of contigs identified using CAP3	Number of singletons identified using CAP3	Unigenes (contigs plus singletons)

Zea mays

Sperm	Male	Zea mays sperm cell cDNA library (S. McCormick) Engel et al.[64]	5174	2457	384	781	1165

Egg	Female	Zea mays egg cell cDNA library (H. Yang and S. McCormick) Yang et al. [65]	4085	1957	264	863	1127

Triticum aestivum

Anther-meiotic	Male	Wheat meiotic anther cDNA library (O. Anderson)	9139	6118	860	3058	3918

Ovary	Female	Ov (Genoplante)	5311	3699	813	1295	2108

Brassica napus

Microspores (from 3 to 4 mm buds)	Male	65JKBNM0 (M. Malik and J. Krochko)	6539	5325	781	1620	2401

Buds and young flowers	Heterogeneous (male, female and somatic)	ADIS-MPIZ 021 (B. Weisshaar)	8747	6164	995	2665	3660

Species and tissue or cell type

Zea mays

Sperm

Egg

Triticum aestivum

Anther-meiotic

Ovary

Brassica napus

Microspores (from 3 to 4 mm buds)

Buds and young flowers

Relevant properties of tissue or cells	Name of library in NCBI and contributor(s)	Total number of ESTs per library (March 2006)	Number of ESTs matching genes in Arabidopsis (e < 10-7)	Number of contigs identified using CAP3	Number of singletons identified using CAP3	Unigenes (contigs plus singletons)

Male	Zea mays sperm cell cDNA library (S. McCormick) Engel et al.[64]	5174	2457	384	781	1165

Female	Zea mays egg cell cDNA library (H. Yang and S. McCormick) Yang et al. [65]	4085	1957	264	863	1127

Male	Wheat meiotic anther cDNA library (O. Anderson)	9139	6118	860	3058	3918

Female	Ov (Genoplante)	5311	3699	813	1295	2108

Male	65JKBNM0 (M. Malik and J. Krochko)	6539	5325	781	1620	2401

Heterogeneous (male, female and somatic)	ADIS-MPIZ 021 (B. Weisshaar)	8747	6164	995	2665	3660


Region no.	ORFa	Region size (nt)	Size of sequenced region (nt)	Left coordinatea	Right coordinatea	Newly found changes in the regions suggested by CGS	Newly found changes not suggested by mapping phase of CGS	Confirmation of SNPs identified by CGS in this regionb

1	TP0012	37	390	12322	12711	3 nt deletion	-	-

2	TP0076	29	529	83788	84316	-	1 solitary SNP	-

3	TP0117	86	699	134808	135506	7 clustered SNPs	-	-

4	TP0117	86				3 clustered SNPs	-	-

5	TP0126	29	393	147948	148340	1 solitary SNP	-	-

6	upstream	29	460	149103	149562	2 clustered SNPs	-	-

	of TP0128					1 nt + 5 nt insertions

7	TP0131	421	723	150925	151647	3 clustered SNPs, 1 solitary SNP	2 clustered SNPs	-

8	upstream of TP0136	29	404	156348	156751	64 nt deletion	-	-

9	TP0136	1087	1609	156752	158360	19 clustered SNPs	8 clustered SNPs	21 SNPs

						1 nt + 1 nt + 1 nt + 6 nt deletions	2 solitary SNPs

10	TP0272	29	480	288647	289126	-	-	-

11	TP0304	37	466	318761	319226	3 nt deletion	-	-

12	TP0326	79	452	345605	346056	8 clustered SNPs	-	1 SNP

13	TP0352	29	465	376926	377390	-	-	-

14	TP0394	29	505	420353	420857	-	-	1 SNP

15	TP0431	29	465	458973	459437	-	-	1 SNP

16	TP0457	29	465	487935	488399	-	-	-

17	TP0484	29	468	514441	514908	-	-	-

18	TP0486	29	494	517297	517790	-	1 nt insertion, 1 nt deletion	-

19	TP0493	29	478	529146	529623	-	-	-

20	TP0515	44	506	555754	556259	3 clustered SNPs	-	4 SNPs

21	TP0544	29	611	585940	586550	6 nt insertion	-	-


Independent variable	Odds ratio	Std. Err.	z	p

Basal circumference	1.21	0.08	2.79	0.005

PwarmQ	3.90	0.70	7.63	<0.001

Ave. of the 5 windiest days	2.59	0.50	4.92	<0.001

Pwarmq*Ave. of the 5 windiest days	3.85	0.90	5.73	<0.001

Leptosols	4.86	1.54	4.99	<0.001

Regosols	0.67	0.13	−2.06	0.039

Constant	0.21	0.05	−6.39	<0.001


 	Body weight (g)	GHb (%)	Urine volume (ml/24 hours)

Normal	618 ± 71	5.7 ± 0.6	9 ± 8

Diabetes	369 ± 65	11.1 ± 2.1*	106 ± 20*

Diab + Nutr	354 ± 63	9.8 ± 2.4*	92 ± 42*

	Body weight (g)	GHb (%)	Urine volume (ml/24 hours)

Diab + Nutr	354 ± 63	9.8 ± 2.4*	92 ± 42*


	Average gold-standard	Average real-time	Wilcoxon p-value

For all subjects (63/63)

Endocardial border	3.9	3.9	0.23

Papillary muscle	4.0	3.9	0.03*

Blood pool	4.0	3.6	<0.001*

Mitral valve	3.9	3.4	<0.001*

Myocardium	3.9	3.9	0.45

Cardiac motion	3.9	3.9	1.00

Radial GRAPPA with 26 calibration frames (23/63)

Endocardial border	3.9	3.9	0.73

Papillary muscle	4.0	4.0	0.71

Blood pool	4.0	3.7	<0.01*

Mitral valve	3.8	3.2	<0.001*

Myocardium	3.9	4.0	0.17

Cardiac motion	3.9	4.0	0.14

Radial GRAPPA with 6 calibration frames (40/63)

Endocardial border	4.0	3.9	0.05

Papillary muscle	4.0	3.9	0.02*

Blood pool	4.0	3.6	<0.001*

Mitral valve	3.9	3.5	<0.001*

Myocardium	4.0	3.9	0.07

Cardiac motion	4.0	3.9	0.23


 	Stepwise multiple regression	Predictor variables

 	Model	 	 	 	Variable	Beta	P

F	df	P	R2

B cells all	21.650	3	0.000	0.391	CXCL13	0.745	0.000

CXCL12	−0.490	0.001

BAFF	0.320	0.012

B cells	18.098	2	0.000	0.262	CXCL13	0.616	0.000

 	 	 	 	 	CXCL12	−0.271	0.010

Plasmablasts	20.265	2	0.000	0.287	CXCL13	0.413	0.000

 	 	 	 	 	BAFF	0.234	0.009

T cells	6.001	2	0.003	0.110	BAFF	−0.498	0.001

 	 	 	 	 	APRIL	0.296	0.05

Monocytes	 	 	 	 	No variables included

 cells		2	003	110	BAFF	498	.001

					APRIL	0.296	0.05

Monocytes					No variables included


Cancer type	#Patient	#Gene	MMF	AMN	AMF	NG

HNSCC [6]	74	4920	46	94.5	1.42	2

GBM1 [6]	84	178	43	9.6	4.5	8


Endpoint	Exposure conditions	Results of exposure	Comments	Reference

Weight gain, survival, in SD rats, urinalysis, hematology, blood biochemistry after exposure	849 MHz CDMA and 1.95 GHz WCDMA, 45 min/day, 5 days/week for 1 year, at 2 W/kg per signal, animals freely moving, am or pm alternately	No significant effects except significant increase in mean corpuscular hemoglobin level and alkaline phosphatase in males, and significant decrease in total bilirubin and lactate dehydrogenase in females		(48)

Weight gain, survival, lymphoma incidence in AKR/J mice, blood biochemistry after 26 weeks of exposure, metastatic infiltration by IHC	849 MHz CDMA and 1.95 GHz WCDMA, 45 min/day, 5 days/week for 42 weeks, at 2 W/kg per signal, animals freely moving, am or pm alternately	No significant effects. Significant decrease in metastatic infiltration in brain of males, increase in females, not due to exposure		(49)


 	TJ-54 (n = 48)	Placebo (n = 50)	Test statics

Age (years)	46.4 ± 9.7	5.4 ± 9.6	ns

Gender (males/females)	28/20	32/18	ns

Duration of disease (years)	23.7 ± 10.4	22.5 ± 9.6	ns

Duration of treatment (years)	3.2 ± 10.5	21.0 ± 10.3	ns

CPZ equivalents (mg)	1905.8 ± 1541.5	1941.8 ± 1948.1	ns

Type

Paranoid	39	35

 Catatonic	6	5

 Undifferentiated	3	10	ns

PANSS (total)	113.0 ± 23.0	111.1 ± 21.1	ns

PANSS (positive)	28.6 ± 5.4	28.7 ± 6.0	ns

PANSS (negative)	27.9 ± 7.1	27.8 ± 7.3	ns

PANSS (general)	56.6 ± 13.3	54.6 ± 11.9	ns

CGI-S	5.4 ± 0.8	5.5 ± 0.8	ns

GAF	27.4 ± 7.5	27.2 ± 6.4	ns

DIEPSS	4.3 ± 4.0	4.8 ± 4.5	ns


No.	Strain	Species	Culture conditions	Active acidity	Bacteriocin production

S1	CCDM 731	Lactococcus lactis subsp. Lactis	37°C 18 h	M17 broth	4.65	Nisin

S2	CCDM 857	Enterococcus faecalis		M17 broth	4.51	Enterocin

S3	CCDM 108	Lactobacillus helveticus		MRS broth	4.14	Enterocin

S4	RL 26-P	Lactobacillus plantarum		MRS broth	3.67	Plantaricin

S5	CCM 7165	Enterococcus faecium		M17 broth	4.68	Enterocin

S6	RL 23-P	Lactobacillus sp.		MRS broth	4.11	Plantaricin

S7	CCDM 768	Lactobacillus helveticus		MRS broth	4.07	Enterocin

S8	CCDM 182	Lactobacillus plantarum		MRS broth	3.81	Plantaricin

S9	RL 22-P	Lactobacillus gasseri		MRS broth	4.51	Plantaricin

No.	Strain	Species	Culture conditions	Active acidity	Bacteriocin production

S1	CCDM 731	Lactococcus lactis subsp. Lactis	37°C 18 h	M17 broth	4.65	Nisin

S2	CCDM 857	Enterococcus faecalis		M17 broth	4.51	Enterocin

S3	CCDM 108	Lactobacillus helveticus		MRS broth	4.14	Enterocin

S4	RL 26-P	Lactobacillus plantarum		MRS broth	3.67	Plantaricin

S5	CCM 7165	Enterococcus faecium		M17 broth	4.68	Enterocin

S6	RL 23-P	Lactobacillus sp.		MRS broth	4.11	Plantaricin

S7		Lactoba		MRS broth	4.	Ent

No.	Strain	Species	Culture conditions	Active acidity	Bacteriocin production

	CCDM 768	cillus helveticus		07	erocin

S8	CCDM 182	Lactobacillus plantarum	MRS broth	3.81	Plantaricin

S9	RL 22-P	Lactobacillus gasseri	MRS broth	4.51	Plantaricin


Cross	Generation	No. of total plants	No. of dwarf plants (< 60 cm)	No. of high plants (≥60 cm)	χ2 (1:1)

(Huaai11/Monker)/Huaai 11	BC1	135	62	73	0.90

(Huaai11/Monker)/Aiganqi	TC1	119	0	119	0

(Huaai 11/Monker)/Himalaya	TC1	157	0	157	0

(Huaai 11/Monker)/Indian dwarf	TC1	117	0	117	0

(Huaai 11/Monker)/Maris Mink	TC1	143	0	143	0


Rat Number	Treatment	Hemisphere	Frequency (kHz)	Voltage (V)

1	IRE	Left	-	100

	H-FIRE	Right	250	100

2	IRE	Left	-	200

	H-FIRE	Right	250	200

3	H-FIRE	Left	250	300

	H-FIRE	Right	250	400

4	IRE	Left	-	50

	H-FIRE	Right	500	400

Rat Number	Treatment	Hemisphere	Frequency (kHz)	Voltage (V)

	H-FIRE	Right	250	100

2	IRE	Left	-	200

	H-FIRE	Right	250	200

3	H-FIRE	Left	250	300

	H-FIRE	Right	250	400

4	IRE	Left	-	50

	H-FIRE	Right	500	400


	Standard of care (SOC)	Community-based intervention (CBI)

Adult patients asked to bring child contacts to TB clinic for screening	X	X

Child contacts screened with symptom questionnaire	X	X

IPT offered to eligible child contacts	X	X

Monthly IPT visits	X	X

HIV testing encouraged for eligible child contacts	X	X

Active community contact tracing		X

Community-based health education using study brochure		X

Child screening and IPT provision according to clinical algorithm		X

Nurse training and ongoing mentorship		X

Health education for caregivers using treatment literacy curriculum		X

Active tracking of IPT provision		X

Consistent community support via VHW		X

Social support and navigation by VHW		X

SMS medication and appointment reminder messages		X

Review of IPT monitoring data at quarterly multidisciplinary team meetings		X


Socio-Demographic Characteristics	Total n = 60

Age Range (Min, max)	70–97

Mean (SD)	77 (6.27)

Sex, n (%)

Female	40 (66.7)

Male	20 (33.3)

Educational Level, n (%)

High school or less	48 (80)

Some college education	12 (20)

Monthly Income, n (%)

Low(<$1000)	50 (83)

Medium ($1000–$2000)	8 (13)

High (>$2000)	2 (3)

Health Conditions, n (%)

Hypertension	35 (58)

Musculoskeletal	33 (55)

Diabetes	32 (53)

Visual	15 (25)

Respiratory	13 (23)

Cardiac	12 (20)

Overweight	12 (20)

Socio-Demographic Characteristics	Total n = 60

Cardiac	12 (20)

Overweight	12 (20)


Time to CT (h)

Time to treatment

Acute NIHSS

Diabetes

Age

Hypertension

Smoker

AF

Lipids


Gene Contributes to Core Enrichment	Gene Does Not Contribute to Core Enrichment

BMP4	SP1	ACTB	GJA1	PDPK1

BMP6	TBXAS1	AKAP1	GNAS	PECAM1

CCL2	TGFB1	ANXA2	GNB2	PFDN5

CD34	THBD	ANXA5	GNG5	PTGS2

CENPF	THBS1	APOE	GRN	RGS5

CTGF	TRA1	APS	HADHSC	RPL30

CXCL12	TUBG1	ARF4L	HMOX1	RPL34

CYP1B1	VCAM1	ASS	ICAM1	RPS11

CYR61	VIPR1	CAV1	IFITM3	RPS7

DPYSL3	XPO1	CCL15	IL13RA1	SAT

EDN1		CCL25	IL15	SCGF

EEF1A2		CD164	IL16	SELE

ELN		CD1D	IL1R1	SERPINE1

F3		CD58	IL1RL1	SERPINE2

FGF2		CD68	ITGB3	SLC35F2

FN1		CDKN1A	JARID1A	SMARCD1

GAPD		CEACAM1	JUN	SOD2

GBP1		CYP1A1	KLF2	SPARC

GJA5		DKK2	LAMB1	SPTA1

GSTP1		E2F5	LIMS1	SPTAN1

IL8		EDN3	LRP2	STAM

ILK		EFEMP1	METAP2	TEK

JAG2		EGR1	MGP	TFPI

JUNB		EIF4EBP2	MMP1	TGFB1I4

KIF20A		EIF4G3	MMP14	THBS4

KLF4		ESM1	MMRN1	TNFRSF1A

LIG3		F2	MYD88	TNFRSF5

MAPRE1		F2R	NFKB1	TNFSF8

MATN2		FGF6	NOTCH4	TUBA3

MYC		FGFR3	NQO1	TXNRD1

NOS3		FLT1	NUMA1	UNG

PFDN2		FOS	OGT	VCL

PLAT		FOSL1	OLR1	VEGFC

RGS3		FTH1	PBP	VWF

RHOA		FTL	PCQAP	WNT2B

RHOB		GARS	PDGFRA

S100A10		GAS	PDGFRB


VSSinitial	VSSmax

	OR	95% CI	P	OR	95% CI

4	29	8 to 2.22	0.94	95	 to 5.81


Study	Adequate sequence generated?	Allocation concealment?	Blinding of participants and personnel?	Blinding of viral load assessment?	Incomplete outcome data addressed? (Missing at follow up = treatment failure)	Free of other bias?

Jaffar et al. [37]	Yes.	Yes.	No.	Yes.	No.	Yes.

Cards were sealed in advance and labelled with stratum numbers and placed into a box	Sealed cards were drawn from a concealed box.	The study was cluster randomized trial; researchers and participants knew which clusters were receiving the interventions.	Probably done, because Blood taken for viral load testing was for research purposes; the testing was done in batches rather than in real-time.	“Those who withdrew or were lost to follow-up before 12 months were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis...”	The two groups were well balanced according to baseline characteristics apart from CD4-cell count, which was lower in the home-based than in the facility-based group [39]. There were no losses of clusters. The analysis adjusted for the effect clustering

Nachega et al. [35]	Yes.	Yes.	No.	Unclear.	Yes.	No.

Probably done, because there was sequential allocation concealment	“[T]reatment assignments were placed in opaque envelopes, which were sequentially opened by the study coordinator at enrolment.”	The study was an open-label, randomized controlled trial; both the researchers and the participants knew which intervention was being administered.	Measurement of viral loads performed was every 6 months as part of routine monitoring	Missing viral load values were considered detectable.	Trial terminated early for futility by an independent Data and Safety Monitoring Board

Chang et al. [38]	Yes.	Yes.	No.	Unclear.	No.	No.

An allocation sequence was generated	Random allocation was by drawing of lots.	The study was cluster randomized trial; researchers and participants knew which clusters were receiving the interventions.	"Viral loads ... were performed every 24 weeks on all patients as part of routine patient monitoring procedures."	Those who died or were lost to follow-up were excluded from the analysis of shorter-term virologic outcomes	Contamination in the control arm was reported in subsequent evaluation study [40].

Taiwo et al. [36]	Yes.	Yes.	Yes.	No.	Yes.	Yes.

“Using a computer-generated allocation sequence, randomization was performed ...”	Probably done, because there was computer-generated allocation sequence.	“The study pharmacist, who was blinded to treatment arm, provided one-on-one reinforcement of the education provided by the adherence counsellor plus information specific to each participant’s regimen.”	Probably not done because patients who had detectable viral loads at week 24 underwent intensive adherence retraining with the adherence counsellor.	“[P]articipants who were missing virologic indicators and were reported to have died were counted as failures.”	There were no significant differences between treatment groups at baseline.

Matovu et al. [17]	Yes.	Unclear.	No.	Unclear.	No.	No.

Probably done, because patients were randomly allocated.	Insufficient information to permit judgement of “Yes” or “No”.	The study was an open randomized non-inferiority intervention trial.	Insufficient information to permit judgement of “Yes” or “No”.	Patients lost to follow-up were excluded from the analysis.	Baseline viral load was adjusted for. This means there were significant differences in viral loads between intervention groups at baseline.

Matovu et al. [17]	Probably done, because patients were randomly allocated.	Insufficient information to permit judgement of “Yes” or “No”.	The study was an open randomized non-inferiority intervention trial.	Insufficient information to permit judgement of “Yes” or “No”.	Patients lost to follow-up were excluded from the analysis.	Baseline viral load was adjusted for. This means there were significant differences in viral loads between intervention groups at baseline.


		pI

Spot	Relative zymolytic level	Without phosphatase	After phosphatase treatment

1	18	5.005	5.129

2	13	5.048	5.175

3	52	5.110	5.228

4	13	5.169	5.276

5	5	5.226	5.330

		pI

Spot	Relative zymolytic level	Without phosphatase	After phosphatase treatment

1	18	5.005	5.129

2	13	5.048	5.175

	5	5	5.22


Cases	Sex/Age	Site	Depth	Largest diameter (cm)	Immunohistochemistry	Karyotype

1	M/59	Paratesticular	Subcutaneous	5.5	CD34 Positive	45,XY,add(5)(p13~15),-7,der(13)t(1;13)(q12~21;q14~21),-14,der(16)t(7;16)(q11;q22),del(18)(q21),+mar[9]/46,XY[2]

S100 Negative

ER Negative

PGR Negative

2	M/79	Scrotum	Subcutaneous	7	CD34 Positive	46,XY,t(10;15)(p13;q22),del(13)(q12q22)[15]

S100 Negative

ER Focal positive (20%)

PGR Focal positive (10%)

2	M/79	Scrotum	Subcutaneous	7	ER Focal positive (20%)	46,XY,t(10;15)(p13;q22),del(13)(q12q22)[15]

PGR Focal positive (10%)


HA concentration, %	HA/DVS weight ratio	ξ (nm)

5	10 : 1	223 ± 5

5	5 : 1	94 ± 6

HA concentration, %	HA/DVS weight ratio

5	10 : 1

5	5 : 1


	Small ponds	Large ponds

Taxonomic groups	Periphyton	Phytoplankton	Periphyton	Phytoplankton

Chlorophytes	p > 0.05	p = 0.045	p = 0.013	p = 0.004

Euglenophytes	p > 0.05	p > 0.05	p = 0.021	p > 0.05

Diatoms	p = 0.013	p > 0.05	p > 0.05	p > 0.05

Dinophytes	p = 0.001	p = 0.038	p > 0.05	p > 0.05

Cyanoprocaryotes	p > 0.05	p > 0.05	p = 0.023	p = 0.020

Taxonomic groups

Chlorophytes

Euglenophytes

Diatoms

Dinophytes

Cyanoprocaryotes


	Pairs	Trios

HGDP reference	0.0009	0.0026

Reich2012 reference	0.0013	0.0034

	Pairs	Trios

Reich2012 reference	0.0013	0.0034


Measurement	Single measure ICC (2,1)	95% CI	SEM cm (mm)

Right shoulder (1st measurement)	.92	.86 to .96	0.40 (4 mm)

Left shoulder (1st measurement)	.93	.88 to .96	0.37 (4 mm)

Dominant shoulder (1st measurement)	.93	.86 to .96	0.38 (4 mm)

Non dominant shoulder (1st measurement)	.92	.87 to .96	0.39 (4 mm)

	Average measure ICC (2,3)	95% CI	SEM cm (mm)

Right shoulder (mean of 3)	.96	.93 to .98	0.29 (3 mm)

Left shoulder (mean of 3)	.92	.94 to .98	0.28 (3 mm)

Dominant shoulder (mean of 3)	.96	.94 to .98	0.29 (3 mm)

Non dominant shoulder (mean of 3)	.96	.93 to .98	0.28 (3 mm)


Clinical signs and symptoms (%)	Percentage positivity (%)

DF (n = 145)	DHF (n = 74)

Headache	89.5	95.4

Retroorbital pain	58.3	69.3

Nausea/vomiting	72.7	75.5

Rash	6.6	13.1

Abdominal pain∗	29.3	48.0

Sore throat	18.2	28.5

Lethargy	82.5	89.4

Myalgia	84.6	91.8

Arthralgia	85	88.1

Red eyes	25.8	20.9

Ecchymosis/bruising	2.3	1.6

Bleeding	8.7	15.9

Clinical signs and symptoms (%)	Percentage positivity (%)

DF (n = 145)	DHF (n = 74)

Rash	6.6	13.1

Abdominal pain∗	29.3	48.0

Sore throat	18.2	28.5

Lethargy	82.5	89.4

Myalgia	84.6	91.8

Arthralgia	85	88.1

Red eyes	25.8	20.9

Ecchymosis/bruising	2.3	1.6

Bleeding	8.7	15.9


	ε-recommended	ε-optimized	C-recommended	C-optimized	γ-optimized

Model for H2-Db	0.0475	0.0150	10.34	18.39	0.0316

	ε-recommended	ε-optimized	C-recommended	C-optimized	γ-optimized

Model for H2-Kb	0.0513	0.5134	10.88	34.41	0.0316

Model for H2-Kk	0.0152	0.0152	10.00	10.00	0.3162


			Diagnostic group	Comparison

			22q11.2DS	Controls	t test	Pearson’s chi-square	ANOVA	p value

N			95	100

Gender (male (%))			45 (47.36 %)	48 (48 %)		0.008		0.930

Age at first time point (mean (SD))			12.80 (4.23)	13.17 (4.43)	0.596			0.552

Full-scale IQ at first time point (mean (SD))			70.71 (12.27)	110.37 (13.62)			454.57	<0.001

VABS outcome measure at last time point (mean (SD))		ABC score	66.73 (12.53)

		Communication score	71.17 (17.00)

		Daily living skills score	71.06 (15.22)

		Socialization score	73.83 (14.51)

Psychiatric diagnosis (N (%))		Simple phobia	42 (44.21 %)

		Attention deficit disorder	36 (37.89 %)

		Generalized anxiety	16 (16.84 %)

		Major depressive episode	13 (13.68 %)

		Psychosis	8 (8.42 %)

		Obsessive-compulsive disorder	7 (7.37 %)

Psychotropic medication	Total		39 (41.05 %)

	Categories	Methylphenidate	26 (66.66 %)

		Antidepressants	12 (30.77 %)

		Antipsychotics	7 (17.95 %)

		Antiepileptic	7 (17.95 %)

		Anxiolytic	3 (7.69 %)


Virus	gorillas	orangutans	chimpanzees

n = 77	n = 179	n = 305

RSV	79.3 # (61)	72.1 (129)	96.4 (294)


Variable	RMP	CI 95%	P

Gender

 Male	1

 Female	23.6	6.9–81.1	<0.05

Occupacion

 Other	1

 Housewife	22.8	4.9–106.1	<0.05

Contact with Stagnant Water

 No	1

 Yes	5.2	1.7–15.9	<0.05

Contact with Urine or Excrement

 No	1

 Yes	5.1	1.9–13.1	<0.05


Theme	Sub-theme

1. Views on smoking	1.1 Hostility towards smoking

3. Reasons to quit smoking	3.1 To improve health

3.2 Social stigma

3.3 Saving money

3.4 Personal

4. Emotions connected with smoking initiation	4.1 Regret starting

6. Beliefs that influence quit attempts	6.1 Control of nicotine dependence

6.2 Motivation and willpower

6.3 Confidence

7. Difficulties quitting/cutting down	7.4 Lack of motivation

8. Goals	8.1 Smoking cessation

9. Methods used to quit smoking	9.1 Abrupt

9.2 Cut down first

10. Methods of cutting down	10.1 Not smoking as many cigarettes

10.2 Not smoking in the morning

10.3 Smoking only part of the cigarette

11. Non-medical aids to quit smoking	11.1 Distraction

11.2 Motivation

11.3 Exercising

12. Reasons for using NRT	12.1 To aid quit attempt

12.4 To help with cravings

12.5 Rid of habit

15. Factors to encourage use of NRT	15.1 Free samples

15.2 Aid quit attempt

16. Use of NRT	16.2 Incorrect use/underuse

17. Length of NRT use	17.1 Short-term

17.2 Long-term

18. Knowledge about NRT	18.1 Current regulations

19. Concerns about NRT	19.1 Addiction

19.2 Harmful when used long-term

19.3 Effective

19.4 Health consequences

19.5 Delays quitting process

22. Helpfulness of NRT	22.1 Recommend

23. Recommendation of cessation aids	23.2 Other forms of therapy

24. Stop smoking services	24.1 Advantages

24.2 Disadvantages

Theme	Sub-theme

eliefs that influence quit attempts	6.1 Control of nicotine dependence

6.2 Motivation and willpower

6.3 Confidence

7. Difficulties quitting/cutting down	7.4 Lack of motivation

8. Goals	8.1 Smoking cessation

9. Methods used to quit smoking	9.1 Abrupt

9.2 Cut down first

10. Methods of cutting down	10.1 Not smoking as many cigarettes

10.2 Not smoking in the morning

10.3 Smoking only part of the cigarette

11. Non-medical aids to quit smoking	11.1 Distraction

11.2 Motivation

11.3 Exercising

12. Reasons for using NRT	12.1 To aid quit attempt

12.4 To help with cravings

12.5 Rid of habit

15. Factors to encourage use of NRT	15.1 Free samples

15.2 Aid quit attempt

16. Use of NRT	16.2 Incorrect use/underuse

17. Length of NRT use	17.1 Short-term

17.2 Long-term

18. Knowledge about NRT	18.1 Current regulations

19. Concerns about NRT	19.1 Addiction

19.2 Harmful when used long-term

19.3 Effective

19.4 Health consequences

19.5 Delays quitting process

22. Helpfulness of NRT	22.1 Recommend

23. Recommendation of cessation aids	23.2 Other forms of therapy

24. Stop smoking services	24.1 Advantages

24.2 Disadvantages


2q23.1 deletion syndrome	SMS431*

Developmental delay	+

Motor delay	+

Language impairment	+

Behavioral problems	+

Autistic-like symptoms	+

Sleep disturbances	+

Repetitive behaviors (stereotypies)	+

Self-injurious behaviors	+

Short attention span	+

Aggression	+

Seizures	+

Infantile hypotonia	+

Infantile feeding difficulties	+

Eye abnormalities	+

Heavy arched eyebrows	-

Prominent nose	-

Thin upper lip	+

Widely spaced teeth	-


Parameter	Measured and calculated values

Ash weight (g)	376.33

Char weight (g)	752.67

Tar weight (g)	73.58

Syngas flow rate (Nm3/hr)	16.02

Fuel consumption rate (kg/hr)	6.37

Gas yield (Nm3/kg)	2.51

Cold gas efficiency (%)	60.37

Mass conversion efficiency (%)	89.98

Carbon conversion efficiency (%)	91.18


Age (years)	Day of cycle before GnRHa therapy	Stage of endometriosis

(a) Tissue for DIGE assay (n = 4)

33	15	IV

27	16	IV

27	18	IV

37	27	III

(b) Tissue for WB assay (n = 10)

33	10	IV

25	14	IV

32	17	IV

29	13	III

27	15	IV

26	13	III

29	15	IV

23	11	IV

39	9	IV

36	12	III

Age (years)	Day of cycle before GnRHa therapy

(a) Tissue for DIGE assay (n = 4)

33	15

27	16

27	18

37	27

(b) Tissue for WB assay (n = 10)

33	10

25	14

32	17

29	13

27	15

26	13

29	15

23	11

39	9

36	12

Stage of endometriosis

(a) Tissue for DIGE assay (n = 4)

IV

IV

IV

III

(b) Tissue for WB assay (n = 10)

IV

IV

IV

III

IV

III

IV

IV

IV

III


System		α-Helix	Short segment	β-Turn

BSA	Frequency (cm−1)	1655	1642	1682

Content (%)	55.71	34.51	9.78

BSA-DIO	Frequency (cm−1)	1654	1639	1682

Content (%)	47.58	27.70	24.72


Age and gender	Population-at-risk	Annual incidence (per 100,000 person-years) 2002–2014

Odontoid fractures	Hangman's fractures	Atypical fractures	Total

Men <70	201,402	1.0	0.4	0.5	1.9

Women <70	201,444	0.5	0.2	0.03	0.8

Men ≥70	28,713	15.8	0.8	1.3	17.9

Women ≥70	41,382	16.0	1.1	0.7	17.8

Total	472,941	3.0	0.4	0.4	3.8


Food insecure* RBC LC-PUFA	0.842	0.721 – 0.984	0.030


	40-49	50-69	Total (40-69)

Women invited	56,888	63,552	120,440

Observed one-year participation rate	32.6%	30.6%	31.6%

Estimated one-year participation rate	37.1%	35.1%	36.1%

Observed two-year participation rate	55.1%	50.3%	52.5%

Estimated two-year participation rate	59.6%	54.8%	57.0%


Inhibitors	Target	Anti‐CSC activity

Tenovin‐6	SIRT1/2	CML, AML

BDF4‐1, ‐2a, ‐2b, ‐2d	SIRT1/2	Colon, glioblastoma

AGK2	SIRT2	Glioblastoma

Salermide	SIRT1/2	Colorectal

Inhibitors	Target	Anticancer activity

Nicotinamide	SIRT1/2/3/5/6	Leukemia, oral, prostate

Sirtinol	SIRT2	Breast, lung, prostate, oral

Salermide	SIRT1/2	Lung, breast, colon

JGB‐1741	SIRT1	Breast

Cambinol	SIRT1/2/5	Burkitt lymphoma

EX527	SIRT1	Leukemia

AC‐93253	SIRT1/2/3	Prostate, pancreas, lung

Inauhzin	SIRT1	Lung, colon

Tenovin‐1	Unknown	Burkitt lymphoma, melanoma


	H5N1	H1N1	H7N9

Residues	Avian	Human	Avian	Human	Avian	Human

				Then-2009/03	2009/04-Now

470K	2712	227	493	113	8127	98	494

	H5N1	H1N1	H7N9

Residues	Avian	Human	Avian	Human	Avian	Human

470R	0	0	1	1421	87	0	0


	Female: egg or central cell	Male: pollen or sperm	F1progeny	F1progeny

	CHX	CHX	CHX	Expect	Obs

	17	18	19	17	18	19	17	18	19	(%)	(%)

a	–	+	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/+	–/–	50	62 (95)

	–	+	–	–	–	–	–/–	+/–	–/–	50	3 (5)

b	–	+	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/+	–/–	50	98 (70)

	–	–	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/–	–/–	50	41 (30)

c	–	–	+	–	–	+	–/–	–/–	+/+	50	92 (97)

	–	–	+	–	–	–	–/–	–/–	+/–	50	3 (3)

d	–	–	+	–	–	+	–/–	–/–	+/+	50	69 (75)

	–	–	–	–	–	+	–/–	–/–	+/–	50	23 (25)

	Female: egg or central cell	Male: pollen or sperm	F1progeny

	CHX	CHX	CHX

	17	18	19	17	18	19	17	18

a	–	+	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/+

	–	+	–	–	–	–	–/–	+/–

b	–	+	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/+

	–	–	–	–	+	–	–/–	+/–

c	–	–	+	–	–	+	–/–	–/–

	–	–	+	–	–	–	–/–	–/–

d	–	–	+	–	–	+	–/–	–/–

	–	–	–	–	–	+	–/–	–/–


Factor	MPT ≥9 s n (%)	MPT <9 s n (%)	Significance

Method of RLN reconstruction

 Direct anastomosis	33 (94.3)	2 (5.7)	N.S.

 Ansa cervicalis-RLN anastomosis	152 (86.9)	23 (13.1)

 Free nerve grafting	12 (80.0)	3 (20.0)

VCP preoperatively

 Yes	92 (88.5)	12 (11.5)	N.S.

 No	108 (87.5)	16 (12.9)

Site of distal anastomosis

 Outside	146 (87.4)	21 (12.6)	N.S.

 Inside	54 (88.5)	7 (11.5)


 	 	Movements from	Movements to

 	Na	Total	With haulier	%b	Total	With haulier	%

Premises type

Small-pig producer	1755	3888	108	3%	1927	211	11%

Non-assured commercial producers	285	6277	3550	57%	1232	798	65%

QHA producers	290	12237	9973	81%	4019	3601	90%

Slaughterhouse	29	2	0	0%	14105	8448	60%

Market	13	682	259	38%	1858	892	48%

Showground	8	20	0	0%	22	0	0%

Ferry collection centres	2	63	62	98%	6	2	33%

Scottish Regions

Highlands and Islands	677	2690	821	31%	2058	274	13%

Mid Scotland and Fife	185	1464	562	38%	1311	166	13%

Scotland Central Belt	229	1994	901	45%	5134	3904	76%

South Scotland	428	3538	1810	51%	2337	841	36%

East Scotland	514	12872	9618	75%	8471	5639	67%

English Regions

Yorkshire and The Humber	70	30	21	70%	371	351	95%

North East England	105	175	32	18%	1501	1362	91%

North West England	83	256	84	33%	660	470	71%

West Midlands	13	5	0	0%	31	22	71%

East Midlands	21	46	27	59%	685	458	67%

East of England	29	12	3	25%	585	460	79%

South East England	5	0	0	0%	7	1	0%

South West England	10	6	4	67%	7	2	29%

Northern Ireland	-	63	62	98%	6	2	33%

Wales	8	8	3	38%	4	0	0%

Other countries	-	10	4	40%	1	0	0%


Strains	No. of plants inoculated	Infection rate (%)	Wilt indexa

Fusarium solani CFD-1	160	96.3	3.6

Fusarium oxysporum CFD-1	144	97.9	3.7


Covariate	Multivariate analysis hazard ratio	p value

Sex, male versus female	0.87 (0.23–3.29)	0.837

Age at revision	1.02 (0.96–1.08)	0.497

Body mass index	1.05 (0.93–1.18)	0.461

Revision indication

 Pseudotumor versus	1.00	Baseline

 Fracture	0.21 (0.31-1.40)	0.106

 Other	0.31 (0.49–1.90)	0.203

Type of revision

 Femoral only with metal-on-metal bearing versus all component revision with nonmetal-on-metal bearing	5.65 (1.08–29.4)	0.040

Covariate	Multivariate analysis hazard ratio	p value

Body mass index	1.05 (0.93–1.18)	0.461

Revision indication

Pseudotumor versus	1.00	Baseline

Fracture	0.21 (0.31-1.40)	0.106

Other	0.31 (0.49–1.90)	0.203

Type of revision

Femoral only with metal-on-metal bearing versus all component revision with nonmetal-on-metal bearing	5.65 (1.08–29.4)	0.040


Variable	Sulpiride	Placebo	p-value

Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)

Participant characteristics

 Age (years)	24.58 (4.19)	23.92 (4.70)	0.717

 Body mass index (kg/m2)	24.56 (1.45)	24.32 (3.57)	0.832

 Education (years)	15.92 (1.45)	14.92 (2.78)	0.289

 Raven’s matrices (percentile)	88.00 (16.69)	86.08 (15.68)	0.774

Variable	Sulpiride	Placebo

Mean (SD)	Mean (SD)

Participant characteristics

Age (years)	24.58 (4.19)	23.92 (4.70)

Body mass index (kg/m2)	24.56 (1.45)	24.32 (3.57)

Education (years)	15.92 (1.45)	14.92 (2.78)

Raven’s matrices (percentile)	88.00 (16.69)	86.08 (15.68)

p-value

Participant characteristics

0.717

0.832

0.289

0.774


Renal failure (n = 30)	Matched controls (n = 30)	p-Value


	Control Group Individuals (n = 32)	Intervention Group Individuals (n = 37)	Unadjustedsignificance	Adjusted for highest qualification at baseline

Individual Domain	Mean baseline	Mean follow-up	Mean baseline	Meanfollow-up	Coefficient	P value	Coefficient	P value

i) Finding relevant literature	6.42	6.89	6.00	7.59	0.72	0.16	0.87	0.10

ii) Critically reviewing the literature	6.03	6.72	5.78	6.69	-0.33	0.95	0.25	0.61

iii) Using a computer referencing system (eg Endnote)	4.52	5.22	3.47	4.71	0.59	0.38	0.54	0.43

iv) Writing a research protocol	4.06	4.39	3.67	5.69	1.42	< 0.05*	1.76	< 0.05*

v) Securing research funding	2.90	3.29	2.75	4.70	1.53	< 0.05*	1.46	< 0.05*

vi) Submitting an ethics application	3.48	3.47	3.58	6.10	2.38	< 0.001**	2.37	< 0.001**

vii) Designing questionnaires	5.00	5.67	4.39	5.96	0.61	0.38	0.86	0.23

viii) Collecting data e.g. surveys, interviews	5.58	6.72	5.53	7.00	0.22	0.76	0.42	0.57

ix) Using computer data management systems	4.16	5.22	3.71	4.68	-0.39	0.93	0.11	0.81

x) Analysing qualitative research data	4.39	5.47	2.97	5.10	1.14	< 0.1†	1.27	< 0.05*

xi) Analysing quantitative research data	3.94	5.17	3.67	4.39	-0.54	0.38	-0.40	0.53

xii) Writing a research report	4.45	4.39	4.00	5.18	0.96	< 0.1†	1.28	< 0.05*

xiii) Writing for publication in peer-reviewed journals	3.81	4.00	3.14	4.80	1.15	< .0.05*	1.04	< 0.1†

xiv) Integrating research findings into practice	6.34	7.11	6.28	6.76	-0.27	0.67	-0.18	0.79

xv) Providing advice to less experienced researchers	6.67	3.76	3.00	4.93	1.22	< 0.05*	1.23	< 0.05*

Total score	4.65	5.19	4.13	5.63	0.98	< 0.05*	1.11	< 0.05*

	Control Group Individuals (n = 32)	Intervention Group Individuals (n = 37)	Unadjustedsignificance	Adjusted for highest qualification at baseline

iii) Using a computer referencing system (eg Endnote)	4.52	5.22	3.47	4.71	0.59	0.38	0.54	0.43

iv) Writing a research protocol	4.06	4.39	3.67	5.69	1.42	< 0.05*	1.76	< 0.05*

v) Securing research funding	2.90	3.29	2.75	4.70	1.53	< 0.05*	1.46	< 0.05*

vi) Submitting an ethics application	3.48	3.47	3.58	6.10	2.38	< 0.001**	2.37	< 0.001**

vii) Designing questionnaires	5.00	5.67	4.39	5.96	0.61	0.38	0.86	0.23

viii) Collecting data e.g. surveys, interviews	5.58	6.72	5.53	7.00	0.22	0.76	0.42	0.57

ix) Using computer data management systems	4.16	5.22	3.71	4.68	-0.39	0.93	0.11	0.81

x) Analysing qualitative research data	4.39	5.47	2.97	5.10	1.14	< 0.1†	1.27	< 0.05*

xi) Analysing quantitative research data	3.94	5.17	3.67	4.39	-0.54	0.38	-0.40	0.53

xii) Writing a research report	4.45	4.39	4.00	5.18	0.96	< 0.1†	1.28	< 0.05*

xiii) Writing for publication in peer-reviewed journals	3.81	4.00	3.14	4.80	1.15	< .0.05*	1.04	< 0.1†

xiv) Integrating research findings into practice	6.34	7.11	6.28	6.76	-0.27	0.67	-0.18	0.79

xv) Providing advice to less experienced researchers	6.67	3.76	3.00	4.93	1.22	< 0.05*	1.23	< 0.05*

Total score	4.65	5.19	4.13	5.63	0.98	< 0.05*	1.11	< 0.05*


Frequency	Detected rate (n (%))		Amplitude (dB SPL)	S/N (dB)

TTH	Control	P-value	TTH	Control	P-value	TTH	Control	P-value

Overall echo level	45 (97.8)	51 (98.1)	0.930	12.7 ± 4.1	12.5 ± 3.5	0.796	16.6 ± 4.6	14.9 ± 4.9	0.059


Characteristics	Number (n)	*Percent (%)

Age group of women (years)

15-19	1933	17.5

20-29	6770	61.3

30-49	2336	21.2

Missing	[141]

Parity

0	3811	35.7

1	2155	20.2

2-4	3210	30.1

≥5	1492	14.0

Missing	[512]

Singleton/Multiple

Singleton	9696	95.6

Multiple	451	4.4

Missing	[1033]

Occupation of mother

Salaried employee/business	1062	20.6

Subsistence farmer	1215	23.5

Housewife	2886	55.9

Missing	[6017]

Mbarara	3916	35.0

Bushenyi	3510	31.4

Ibanda	1045	9.3

Isingiro	936	8.4

Kiruhura	905	8.1

Other districts	868	7.8

Name of health facility attended

Comboni hospital	636	5.7

Ibanda hospital	1803	16.1

Ishaka Adventist hospital	1435	12.8

Kitagata hospital	1098	9.8

Mbarara regional referral hospital	5731	51.3

Rushere Community hospital	477	4.3

Characteristics	Number (n)	*Percent (%)

Ibanda hospital	1803	16.1

Ishaka Adventist hospital	1435	12.8

Kitagata hospital	1098	9.8

Mbarara regional referral hospital	5731	51.3

Rushere Community hospital	477	4.3


	Structured Care (31) 	Care-As-Usual (11) 	P -value

Yearly check performed by (%)

 General practitioner	29.0	36.4	0.65

 Practice nurse	51.6	63.6	0.49

 Practice assistant	6.5	0	0.39

 Diabetes specialist nurse	3.2	0	0.55

 GP with PN/PA	9.7	0	0.28

Tri-monthly checks performed by (%)

 General practitioner	16.1	9.1	0.57

 Practice nurse	61.6	63.6	0.89

 Practice assistant	22.6	27.3	0.75

Insulin treatments provided by (%)

 Internist	6.5**	63.6**	<0.001

 General practitioner	61.3	36.4	0.15

 Practice nurse	16.1	18.2	0.88

 Diabetes specialist nurse	67.7**	18.2**	0.005

Consultation between healthcare professionals (%)

 General practitioner	100*	80.0*	0.02

 Practice nurse	71.4	70.0	0.93

 Practice assistant	46.4	40.0	0.73

 Diabetes specialist nurse	78.6**	30.0**	0.005

 Dietician	50.0*	10.0*	0.03

Estimated percentage of patients that received education

 Diet % (sd)	86.7 (17.9)	83.5 (28.7)	0.91

 Exercise % (sd)	89.6 (16.0)	76.0 (29.5)	0.17

 Smoking behavior % (sd)	90.0 (11.4)	73.3 (44.2)	0.17

 Foot examination % (sd)	89.3 (17.0)	69.5 (38.3)	0.14

Education on diet, exercise, foot examination or smoking behavior.

 by DSN (%)	35.0*	0.0*	0.04

 by GP (%)	61.3	81.8	0.24

 by PN/PA (%)	87.1	90.0	0.74

Diabetes passport, often or always used in practice (%)	78.6*	40.0*	0.05


Plant part	Use	Use form	Percentage of users	Management

Stem	Mescal production	Whole stems are backed inside an earthen pit, grounded, fermented and distilled	100	Extraction of whole individuals from wild populations

Flower buds	Food	Flowering buds are boiled or roasted, coocked with eggs or hot chilli sauce	66	People extract the whole scape, to get the flowering buds

Floral scape	Roasted over the fire while working in the field	33	Extract the young whole floral scape

Leaf bases	Food	People ask for the backed leave bases to the mescal producer and eat them as candy	30	Leave bases remaining from mescal production

Medicine	An infusion of cooked agave leaf for lung affections	10

Applying a piece of fresh leaf (or roasted) directly to wounded area	33	Eventually cutting up one leaf

Floral escape	Fodder	Cattle eat the growing scape	40	Cattle eat the early floral scape while it is starting to grow

Construction	Used in small fences	16	Extract the whole floral scape

Whole plant	Religious	Agaves are transplanted from the wild to “little mountains” (montecitos) dedicated to the GuadalupeVirgin	10	Each year in December small agave individuals are transplanted from wild populations to home gardens

Uses of Mescal	As medicine	A small glass of mezcal aliviate the stomach-ache, flu symptoms, fever and cold- weat	30	(produced from agave stems)

Ritual	A small glass of mezcal is offered to the death in the “ofrendas de muertos”	80

Plant part	Use	Use form

Stem	Mescal production	Whole stems are backed inside an earthen pit, grounded, fermented and distilled

Flower buds	Food	Flowering buds are boiled or roasted, coocked with eggs or hot chilli sauce

Floral scape	Roasted over the fire while working in the field

Leaf bases	Food	People ask for the backed leave bases to the mescal producer and eat them as candy

Medicine	An infusion of cooked agave leaf for lung affections

Applying a piece of fresh leaf (or roasted) directly to wounded area

Floral escape	Fodder	Cattle eat the growing scape

Construction	Used in small fences

Whole plant	Religious	Agaves are transplanted from the wild to “little mountains” (montecitos) dedicated to the GuadalupeVirgin

Uses of Mescal	As medicine	A small glass of mezcal aliviate the stomach-ache, flu symptoms, fever and cold- weat

Ritual	A small glass of mezcal is offered to the death in the “ofrendas de muertos”

Percentage of users	Management

100	Extraction of whole individuals from wild populations

66	People extract the whole scape, to get the flowering buds

33	Extract the young whole floral scape

30	Leave bases remaining from mescal production

10

33	Eventually cutting up one leaf

40	Cattle eat the early floral scape while it is starting to grow

16	Extract the whole floral scape

10	Each year in December small agave individuals are transplanted from wild populations to home gardens

30	(produced from agave stems)

80


Items	Growth rate	ERR %	Weight of single cocoon, g	Weight of single shell, g

DPPH	−0.366	−0.494	−0.737	−0.830*

ABTS	−0.271	−0.057	−0.138	−0.719

Nitric oxide	−0.358	−0.717	−0.864*	−0.322

Superoxide	−0.847*	−0.975**	−0.794	−0.704

Reducing Power	0.927**	0.817*	0.679	0.899*


Author	Mean (m) or median (M) follow-up (mo)	PSM	Local or distant recurrence

Rogers [9]	15.7 (m)	0	No

Dogra [10]	29.4 (m)	0	No

Nazemi [15]	4 (M)	0	No

Hemal [17]	8.3 (m)	NR	No

Abaza [12]	15.4 (m)	0	No

Klingler [3]	NR	0	NR

Lorenzo [13]	12 (M)	0	No

White [14]	10.5 (m)	NR	NR

Boger [16]	NR	NR	NR

Rogers [11]	NR	NR	NR

Author	Mean (m) or median (M) follow-up (mo)	PSM	Local or distant recurrence

Rogers [11]	NR	NR	NR


Localisation	Gland	Type

Lips	Upper lip	Serous

	Lower lip	Serous

Cheek	Buccal mucosa	Mixed (predominantly mucous)

	Parotid	Serous

Hard palate	Postero-lateral hard palate	Mucous

Tongue	Von Ebner (dorsal)	Serous

	Weber Blandin Nuhn (marginal)	Mixed (predominantly mucous)

Floor of mouth	Submandibular	Mixed (predominantly serous)

	Sublingual	Mixed (predominantly mucous)

Localisation	Gland	Type

Tongue	Von Ebner (dorsal)	Serous

	Weber Blandin Nuhn (marginal)	Mixed (predominantly mucous)

Floor of mouth	Submandibular	Mixed (predominantly serous)

	Sublingual	Mixed (predominantly mucous)


Cell source	No. of slices	Total number of counted cells	Regional distribution of counted cells

			U	M	L	CP	IZ

GE	11	23556	8632	7219	4804	20655	2901

cortical	11	21657	4911	5342	5555	15808	5849

Mixed	10	20386	7430	6055	4344	17829	2557

Regional distribution of counted cells

Medial	Middle	Lateral

6522	8475	8559

5863	7546	8248

5261	6814	8311


MRI finding	PCNSL	GBM	p-value

Localization	only supratentorial	66.7%	98.1%	<0.001

only infratentorial	5.5%	1.9%	0.308

supra- and infratentorial	27.7%	0%	<0.001

Type of lesions	solitary demarcated lesion	3.7%	13%	0.046

solitary infiltrative type	20.4%	51.9%	0.121

multiple infiltrative lesions	51.9%	35.2%	0.081

diffuse infiltrative type	24.1%	0%	<0.001

Type of enhancement	homogeneous	64.8%	0%	<0.001

nonhomogeneous	14.8%	98.1%	<0.001

diffuse infiltrative – worm-like, patchy, stripy...	20.4%	0%	<0.001

presence of necrosis	5.6%	88.9%	<0.001

Involvement of brain surface	without reaching brain surface	12.9%	11.1%	0.567

reaching brain surface	87%	88.9%	0.846

meningeal infiltration	35.2%	46.3%	0.240

ependymal infiltration	53.7%	37%	0.054

Optic nerves, chiasma or tracts involvement	42.6%	5.6%	<0.001

Cranial nerves involvement (optical nerves and tracts excluded)	5.6%	0%	0.079

Corpus callosum infiltration	42.6%	44.4%	0.846

Butterfly pattern	24.1%	14.8%	0.224

Basal ganglia involvement	55.6%	18.5%	<0.001

Cerebral cortex involvement	83.3%	51.9%	<0.001

aDWI	free diffusion	1.9%	10.4%	0.189

restricted diffusion in some part of the solid	97%	89.6%	0.189

Signs of bleeding	5.6%	44.4%	<0.001

Presence of vasogenic edema	92.6%	83.3%	0.139

MRI finding	PCNSL

Localization	only supratentorial	66.7%

only infratentorial	5.5%

supra- and infratentorial	27.7%

Type of lesions	solitary demarcated lesion	3.7%

solitary infiltrative type	20.4%

multiple infiltrative lesions	51.9%

diffuse infiltrative type	24.1%

Type of enhancement	homogeneous	64.8%

nonhomogeneous	14.8%

diffuse infiltrative – worm-like, patchy, stripy...	20.4%

presence of necrosis	5.6%

Involvement of brain surface	without reaching brain surface	12.9%

reaching brain surface	87%

meningeal infiltration	35.2%

ependymal infiltration	53.7%

Optic nerves, chiasma or tracts involvement	42.6%

Cranial nerves involvement (optical nerves and tracts excluded)	5.6%

Corpus callosum infiltration	42.6%

Butterfly pattern	24.1%

Basal ganglia involvement	55.6%

Cerebral cortex involvement	83.3%

aDWI	free diffusion	1.9%

restricted diffusion in some part of the solid	97%

Signs of bleeding	5.6%

Presence of vasogenic edema	92.6%