940 research outputs found

    Exchange bias effect in cylindrical nanowires with ferromagnetic core and polycrystalline antiferromagnetic shell

    Full text link
    We model the exchange bias effect in thin cylindrical nanowires composed of a ferromagnetic core and an antiferromagnetic shell implementing a classical spin Hamiltonian and Monte Carlo simulations. We address systematically the effect of shell polycrystallinity on the characteristic fields of the isothermal hysteresis loop (coercivity, exchange-bias) and their angular dependence upon the direction of the applied / cooling field. We relate the observed trends to modifications of the underlying magnetization reversal mechanism. We fit our simulation results to an extended Stoner-Wohlfarth model with effective off-axis unidirectional anisotropy and demonstrate that shell polycrystallinity could lead to maximum exchange bias effect in an off-axis direction. Our results are in qualitative agreement with recent experimental studies of Co/CoO nanowires.Comment: 8 pages, 10 figure

    Mother-child histocompatibility and risk of rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus among mothers.

    Get PDF
    The study objective was to test the hypothesis that having histocompatible children increases the risk of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), possibly by contributing to the persistence of fetal cells acquired during pregnancy. We conducted a case control study using data from the UC San Francisco Mother Child Immunogenetic Study and studies at the Inova Translational Medicine Institute. We imputed human leukocyte antigen (HLA) alleles and minor histocompatibility antigens (mHags). We created a variable of exposure to histocompatible children. We estimated an average sequence similarity matching (SSM) score for each mother based on discordant mother-child alleles as a measure of histocompatibility. We used logistic regression models to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals. A total of 138 RA, 117 SLE, and 913 control mothers were analyzed. Increased risk of RA was associated with having any child compatible at HLA-B (OR 1.9; 1.2-3.1), DPB1 (OR 1.8; 1.2-2.6) or DQB1 (OR 1.8; 1.2-2.7). Compatibility at mHag ZAPHIR was associated with reduced risk of SLE among mothers carrying the HLA-restriction allele B*07:02 (n = 262; OR 0.4; 0.2-0.8). Our findings support the hypothesis that mother-child histocompatibility is associated with risk of RA and SLE

    Bibliometrics of systematic reviews : analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors

    Get PDF
    Background: Systematic reviews are important for informing clinical practice and health policy. The aim of this study was to examine the bibliometrics of systematic reviews and to determine the amount of variance in citations predicted by the journal impact factor (JIF) alone and combined with several other characteristics. Methods: We conducted a bibliometric analysis of 1,261 systematic reviews published in 2008 and the citations to them in the Scopus database from 2008 to June 2012. Potential predictors of the citation impact of the reviews were examined using descriptive, univariate and multiple regression analysis. Results: The mean number of citations per review over four years was 26.5 (SD +/-29.9) or 6.6 citations per review per year. The mean JIF of the journals in which the reviews were published was 4.3 (SD +/-4.2). We found that 17% of the reviews accounted for 50% of the total citations and 1.6% of the reviews were not cited. The number of authors was correlated with the number of citations (r = 0.215, P =5.16) received citations in the bottom quartile (eight or fewer), whereas 9% of reviews published in the lowest JIF quartile (<=2.06) received citations in the top quartile (34 or more). Six percent of reviews in journals with no JIF were also in the first quartile of citations. Conclusions: The JIF predicted over half of the variation in citations to the systematic reviews. However, the distribution of citations was markedly skewed. Some reviews in journals with low JIFs were well-cited and others in higher JIF journals received relatively few citations; hence the JIF did not accurately represent the number of citations to individual systematic reviews
    corecore