A Comparison and Evaluation of Performances among Crop Yield Forecasting Models Based on Remote Sensing: Results from Tte Geoland Observatory of Food Monitoring

In the context of the GEOLAND EC FP6 project the comparison of different remote sensing based approaches for yield forecasting over large areas in Europe are tested and results inter-compared. In particular the methods tested include the ones in use within the MARS-Crop Yield Forecasting System as the results from the Crop Growth Monitoring System model and vegetation indicators derived from Low Resolution SPOT-VGT and NOAA Images, METEOSAT based yield forecasting and ERS-Scatterometer Crop Performance Index. Performances of the different models were tested in Spain, Belgium and Poland. The inter-comparisons of the crop yield forecasts were mainly based on the forecasting error obtained from the different approaches based on the Root Mean Square Forecast Error (RMSFE). This error was derived by comparing the predicted yields of the different models with the official yield as from official statistics (EUROSTAT). The comparison of the RMSFE was used to verify the convergence of results from the different models, the reliability of the information, i.e. precision and bias, and its precocity compared to the crop cycle. The results showed that the indicators are able to give reliable information with some differences: remote sensing indicators are more precise and accurate in southern areas (less cloud cover) while in northern areas good results are obtained under the use of better local calibrations of traditional crop yield forecasting systems and/or the use of additional information for instance remote sensing data as inputs into advanced crop modelling systems. Furthermore, in order to take care of the different time series length available, a qualitative indicator called Performance Score (Ps) was introduced. The analysis of the Ps showed that when a long time series of observation is available greater advantages are obtained from RS rather than from more advanced crop models.JRC.DDG.H.4-Monitoring agricultural resource

A comparison and evaluation of performances among crop yield forecasting models based on remote sensing: Results from the GEOLAND Observatory of Food Monitoring

In the context of the GEOLAND EC FP6 project the comparison of different remote sensing based approaches for yield forecasting over large areas in Europe are tested and results inter-compared. In particular the methods tested include the ones in use within the MARS-Crop Yield Forecasting System as the results from a Crop Growth Monitoring model (Alterra) and vegetation indicators derived from Low Resolution VGT and NOAA Images (VITO, IGiK), METEOSAT based yield forecasting (EARS) and ERS-Scatterometer Crop Performance Index (TPF and NEO). Performances of the different models were tested in Spain, Belgium and Poland. The inter-comparison of the crop yield forecasts were mainly based on the forecasting error obtained from the different approaches based on the Root Mean Square Forecast Error (RMSFE). This error was derived by comparing the predicted yields of the different models with the official yield from EUROSTAT. The comparison of the RMSFE was used to verify the convergence of results from the different models, the reliability of the information, i.e. precision and bias, and its precocity compared to the crop cycle. The results showed that the indicators are able to give reliable information with some differences: remote sensing indicators are more precise and accurate in southern areas (less cloud cover) while in northern areas good results are obtained under the use of better local calibrations of traditional crop yield forecasting systems, the use of additional information or the additional use of remote sensing data as inputs into advanced crop modelling systems. Furthermore, in order to take care of the different time series length available, a qualitative indicator called Performance Score (Ps) was introduced. The analysis of the Ps showed that when a long time series of observation is available greater advantages are obtained from RS rather than from more advanced crop models.JRC.DG.G.3-Monitoring agricultural resource

Towards a European Cancer Information System: Status October 2016

Cancer is the second most common cause of death in the European Union. In 2009, the European Commission adopted the Communication on Action Against Cancer: European Partnership which defines several objectives for reducing the burden of cancer in Europe. Evaluation of measures to implement this goal is critically dependent on accurate and comparable European cancer data available for derivation of incidence, prevalence, survival and mortality statistics. For this purpose, the Joint Research Centre (JRC), in its role as a scientific service to the European Commission, and in close collaboration with the Directorate-General for Health and Food Safety (DG SANTE), is supporting the creation of a cancer-information system for Europe to be built upon existing experience, competence and cooperation of national and regional cancer registries.JRC.F.1 - Health in Societ

Defining the roadmap towards revision of ENCR coding standards and training for cancer registries

The European Network of Cancer Registries (ENCR) and the Joint Research Centre (JRC) jointly support harmonising the activities of the European population-based cancer registries (CR) in providing reliable and valid data on cancer. The process to supply valid, complete and comparable data in different European Countries, implies that CR implement common rules to define and code cancer and receive similar training. For this reason, one of the main activities of the ENCR-JRC is to provide CR staff with specific recommendations on coding along with training. For ENCR-JRC the objective of this workshop was to collate previous and current requests from CR and provide advice on the most pressing issues relating to recommendations and training. The workshop was planned during the ENCR Steering Committee (SC) meeting, which took place on November 2014, and JRC (the Secretariat of ENCR) was requested to organise it. A group of experts on cancer registration was identified. This group included the ENCR-SC members, representatives from Institutions and cancer research projects which collaborate with CR (i.e. IARC, Eurocare, Concord, Rarecare), representatives from national networks of CR, members of the Cancer Information group at the JRC, and other specialists in the field. Prior to the workshop, an anonymous questionnaire was sent to the group of experts. Moreover, all directors and staff of CR were invited to complete the questionnaire and provide comments in order for ENCR- JRC to get a more comprehensive overview of the situation. The questionnaire invited respondents to specify the five most urgent topics, to be addressed, on both recommendations and training. During the workshop, participants (around 30 people) were split into two groups: one to focus on recommendations and the other to focus on training. For each group a moderator facilitated the debate presented the responses to the questionnaire, which were discussed in detail using the Metaplan method. The results of the discussion were summarized in a final plenary section, where further clarifications were given and all the participants were involved in the discussion. In summary, the topics to be addressed by the ENCR-SC, in relation to recommendations, either as updates of current recommendations or for new specific ones, were: Multiple primary rules; Staging; Registration/reportability criteria; Death Certificate Only cases (DCO) – Death Certificate Notified cases (DCN); Date of incidence in relation to diagnosis; 'Complicated' cancers (e.g. bladder, etc.); Haematological cancers; and coding of borderline malignancies. The group on training suggested that all the issues that were raised (Cancer Registration; Haematological malignancies; Analysis; Stage; Quality; Multiple primaries; many on Specific cancer types; and Grading) should be addressed making available on the web high quality, reliable and training-oriented documentations. JRC offered to translate these documents, if necessary, into other European languages. For training on specific technical methodology (analysis, data quality) it was suggested that traditional face-to-face courses be provided. The workshop highlighted that recommendations and training are interlinked and this implies that, in the future, any new recommendation should be issued together with training documentation to explain its practical application. The technical proposals made at the workshop will help the ENCR-SC to prioritize the future supporting activities to the real needs of CR.JRC.I.2-Public Health Policy Suppor

Glycopeptide resistance among coagulase- negative staphylococci that cause bacteremia: epidemiological and clinical findings from a case-control study

A 1-year prospective case-control study (ratio of control patients to case patients, 3:1) was performed to assess the incidence, risk factors, and genotypic patterns of bacteremia caused by glycopeptide-resistant coagulasenegative staphylococci (CoNS) and their correlation with hospital glycopeptide use. Among 535 subjects with CoNS bacteremia, 20 subjects had a glycopeptide-resistant strain (19 strains were resistant to teicoplanin and 1 was resistant to both teicoplanin and vancomycin). The percentage of resistant isolates recovered in 1 year was 8% in intensive care units and 3% and 2% in medical and surgical wards, respectively. Genotypic analysis of resistant strains showed different patterns with a high degree of polymorphism. Use of glycopeptides in individual wards was not statistically associated with the percentage of resistance. Previous exposure to β-lactams and glycopeptides, multiple hospitalization in the previous year, and concomitant pneumonia were significantly associated with the onset of glycopeptide-resistant CoNS bacteremia. Mortality rates were 25% among case patients and 18% among control patients, and they were significantly higher among patients who presented with concomitant pneumonia and a high Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation III score

MARS Bulletin Vol. 20, No. 11

BulletinJRC.H.4-Monitoring Agricultural Resource

MARS Bulletin Vol 17 No 1

The annexed document is the template for the bulletin that will be issued on the 10th March. This bulletin covers meteorological analysis and crop yield forecasts for the period 21 November 2008 - 28 February 2009 (since the day after the last covered period, to the last day of the decade before)JRC.G.3-Monitoring agricultural resource

MARS Bulletin Vol. 20, No. 8

Very high temperatures and scarce rainfall characterised the weather conditions in South and South-East Europe from mid-July until mid-August. The dry weather accelerated the harvesting of winter cereals. The inadequate water supply caused irreversible damages in the summer crops. The well-below average yield forecast for summer crops mirrors the severity of the situation in Spain, Italy, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. Seasonal or slightly colder than usual thermal conditions dominated in North and North-West Europe. Precipitation decreased and significant rainfall events became less frequent in this region as compared to the first half of July, except for Ireland and Northern UK where wet conditions persisted. The dryer weather facilitated the harvest of winter cereals and provided good conditions for the growth and development of summer cropsJRC.H.4 - Monitoring Agricultural Resource

Stomach cancer burden in EU-27

Stomach cancer, also called gastric cancer, occurs when cancer cells form in the lining of the stomach. For EU-27 countries it is estimated that stomach cancer accounted in 2020 for 2.8% of all new cancer diagnoses (excluding non-melanoma skin cancers) and 4.1% of all deaths due to cancer. That made it the tenth most frequently occurring cancer, and the seventh leading cause of cancer death.JRC.F.1 - Health in Societ