Telespectrograph Patent

Telespectrograph for analyzing upper atmosphere by tracking bodies reentering atmosphere at high velocitie

An autonomous fault detection, isolation, and recovery system for a 20-kHz electric power distribution test bed

Future space explorations will require long term human presence in space. Space environments that provide working and living quarters for manned missions are becoming increasingly larger and more sophisticated. Monitor and control of the space environment subsystems by expert system software, which emulate human reasoning processes, could maintain the health of the subsystems and help reduce the human workload. The autonomous power expert (APEX) system was developed to emulate a human expert's reasoning processes used to diagnose fault conditions in the domain of space power distribution. APEX is a fault detection, isolation, and recovery (FDIR) system, capable of autonomous monitoring and control of the power distribution system. APEX consists of a knowledge base, a data base, an inference engine, and various support and interface software. APEX provides the user with an easy-to-use interactive interface. When a fault is detected, APEX will inform the user of the detection. The user can direct APEX to isolate the probable cause of the fault. Once a fault has been isolated, the user can ask APEX to justify its fault isolation and to recommend actions to correct the fault. APEX implementation and capabilities are discussed

Reliability of the modified Rankin Scale: a systematic review

<p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> A perceived weakness of the modified Rankin Scale is potential for interobserver variability. We undertook a systematic review of modified Rankin Scale reliability studies.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Two researchers independently reviewed the literature. Crossdisciplinary electronic databases were interrogated using the following key words: Stroke*; Cerebrovasc*; Modified Rankin*; Rankin Scale*; Oxford Handicap*; Observer variation*. Data were extracted according to prespecified criteria with decisions on inclusion by consensus.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> From 3461 titles, 10 studies (587 patients) were included. Reliability of modified Rankin Scale varied from weighted κ=0.95 to κ=0.25. Overall reliability of mRS was κ=0.46; weighted κ=0.90 (traditional modified Rankin Scale) and κ=0.62; weighted κ=0.87 (structured interview).</p> <p><b>Conclusion:</b> There remains uncertainty regarding modified Rankin Scale reliability. Interobserver studies closest in design to large-scale clinical trials demonstrate potentially significant interobserver variability.</p&gt

Recent trends in the incidence of anxiety diagnoses and symptoms in primary care.

Anxiety is common, with significant morbidity, but little is known about presentations and recording of anxiety diagnoses and symptoms in primary care. This study aimed to determine trends in incidence and socio-demographic variation in General Practitioner (GP) recorded diagnoses of anxiety, mixed anxiety/depression, panic and anxiety symptoms

Comparison of hydrogen and methane as coolants in regeneratively cooled panels

Comparison of hydrogen and methane as coolants in regeneratively cooled panel

Variability in modified rankin scoring across a large cohort of observers

<br>Background and Purpose— The modified Rankin scale (mRS) is the most commonly used outcome measure in stroke trials. However, substantial interobserver variability in mRS scoring has been reported. These studies likely underestimate the variability present in multicenter clinical trials, because exploratory work has only been undertaken in single centers by a few observers, all of similar training. We examined mRS variability across a large cohort of international observers using data from a video training resource.</br> <br>Methods— The mRS training package includes a series of “real-life” patient interviews for grading. Training data were collected centrally and analyzed for variability using kappa statistics. We examined variability against a standard of “correct” mRS grades; examined variability by country; and for UK assessors, examined variability by center and by professional background of the observer.</br> <br>Results— To date, 2942 assessments from 30 countries have been submitted. Overall reliability for mRS grading has been moderate to good with substantial heterogeneity across countries. Native English language has had little effect on reliability. Within the United Kingdom, there was no significant variation by profession.</br> <br>Conclusion— Our results confirm interobserver variability in mRS assessment. The heterogeneity across countries is intriguing because it appears not to be related solely to language. These data highlight the need for novel strategies to improve reliability.</br&gt

Exploring the reliability of the modified Rankin Scale

<p><b>Background and Purpose:</b> The modified Rankin Scale (mRS) is the most prevalent outcome measure in stroke trials. Use of the mRS may be hampered by variability in grading. Previous estimates of the properties of the mRS have used diverse methodologies and may not apply to contemporary trial populations. We used a mock clinical trial design to explore inter- and intraobserver variability of the mRS.</p> <p><b>Methods:</b> Consenting patients with stroke attending for outpatient review had the mRS performed by 2 independent assessors with pairs of assessors selected from a team of 3 research nurses and 4 stroke physicians. Before formal assessment, interviewers estimated disability based only on initial patient observation. Each patient was then randomized to undergo the mRS using standard assessment or a prespecified structured interview. The second interviewer in the pair reassessed the patient using the same method blinded to the colleague’s score. For each patient assessed, one rater was randomly assigned to video record their interview. After 3 months, this interviewer reviewed and regraded their original video assessment.</p> <p><b>Results:</b> Across 100 paired assessments, interobserver agreement was moderate (k=0.57). Intraobserver variability was good (k=0.72) but less than would be expected from previous literature. Forty-nine assessments were performed using the structured interview approach with no significant difference between structured and standard mRS. Researchers were unable to reliably predict mRS from initial limited patient assessment (k=0.16).</p> <p><b>Conclusions:</b> Despite availability of training and structured interview, there remains substantial interobserver variability in mRS grades awarded even by experienced researchers. Additional methods to improve mRS reliability are required.</p&gt