79,735 research outputs found
A Tripartite Post-Recession Rebalancing
No full textIn this latest Advance & Rutgers Report, entitled “A Tripartite Post-Recession Rebalancing,” Dean James W. Hughes and Professor Joseph J. Seneca deliver an incisive assessment of the current market conditions and obstacles in the path of our economic recovery. They offer a statistical cautionary tale that the private and public sector need to hear and acknowledge in order for the economy to make continued progress.This report was published as Issue Paper Number 7, November 2011, in Advance & Rutgers Report
The effectiveness of origami on overall hand function after injury: A pilot controlled trial
No full textThis pilot study measured the effectiveness of using origami to improve the overall hand function of outpatients attending an NHS hand injury unit. The initiative came from one of the authors who had used origami informally in the clinical setting and observed beneficial effects. These observed effects were tested experimentally. The design was a pilot non-randomised controlled trial with 13 participants. Allocation of the seven control group members was based on patient preference. The experimental group members attended a weekly hour of origami for six weeks, in addition to their conventional rehabilitation.
Hand function of all participants was measured using the Jebsen-Taylor Hand Function Test before and after the six-week period, and additional qualitative data were gathered in the form of written evaluations from patients. The quantitative data were analysed using the Mann Whitney U test or Fisher’s exact test. Themes were highlighted from the qualitative data.
The results show that there was a greater difference in the total score of the experimental group using the impaired hand between pre- and post-intervention of 11.8 seconds, compared with 4.3 seconds in the control group, but this was not statistically significant at the 5% level (p=0.06). Additionally, differences in the sub-test scores show a markedly larger improvement in the experimental group. Qualitative data indicate that the experimental group experienced the origami sessions as being enjoyable and beneficial. Further research with a larger sample and randomised group allocation is recommended to verify and expand these preliminary findings
The Receding Metropolitan Perimeter: A New Postsuburban Demographic Normal
No full textThe report traces population changes for two time periods: 1950 to 1980, reflecting the nation’s unprecedented postwar suburbanization, and 2010 to 2013, for the recovery period to date from aftershocks of the Great 2007-2009 Recession. The decades between the two time periods analyzed – the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s – are also examined for the influence of overall regional growth, age-structure variations and immigration levels on population change.
Twenty-seven of the suburban-ring counties in the four states witnessed explosive growth in the 30-year period from 1950 to 1980, gaining more than 5.3 million residents, and nearly doubling their population. By contrast, the regional core of eight urban counties in New York and New Jersey contracted sharply during the same period, losing nearly a million people.
Then, during the 2010–2013 period, the trend reversed: the regional core grew at a rate more than double that of the suburban ring, adding 85,284 persons per year. The regional core accounted for most of the total population growth, a phenomenon unparalleled since World War II. All of the suburban counties with population losses were on the metropolitan outer ring with the exception of Monmouth County, which suffered impacts from Superstorm Sandy.
The authors insistently caution that this shift in population growth is not necessarily a long-term change since the latest time period is so limited. However, the data suggest a change of the crest of the wave nature indicating that the multidecade pattern of further growth on the perimeter of the region out has shifted.
The report also discusses the influence of young adults’ locational preferences for urban lifestyle and workplace choices post-2000 as one contributing factor to these shifting population patterns
Solar Power in the Garden State
No full textThis special issue on energy and solar power in New Jersey was made possible because of the extensive portfolio of research centers and institutes at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy. Dr. Frank A. Felder, an Associate Research Professor, has been director of the School’s Center for Energy, Economic & Environmental Policy (CEEEP) since 2006. Frank is a nuclear engineer with a PhD degree from MIT, and he, along with his CEEEP colleague, Shankar N. Chandramowli, coauthored the main article in this issue of the Advance & Rutgers Report. CEEEP has worked extensively with the New Jersey Board of Public Utilities on projects, including New Jersey’s current Energy Master Plan.Shining Brightly: Bloustein's Centers of Excellence / by James W. Hughes and Joseph S. Seneca -- Solar Power in the Garden States / by Shankar N. Chandramowli and Frank A. Felder.Guest contributors include Shankar N. Chandramowli and Frank A. Felder, PhD, Director—Center for Energy, Economic and Environmental Policy at the Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public PolicyReports published as Issue Paper Number 5, May 2011, in Advance & Rutgers Report, Special Issue
Author Correction: Establishment and equilibrium levels of deleterious mutations in large populations (Scientific Reports, (2019), 9, 1, (10384), 10.1038/s41598-019-46803-7)
No full textThe original version of this Article contained errors. Affiliations 1 and 2 were reversed. Secondly, Affiliation 7 was incorrectly given as ‘Institute for Cellular and Molecular Medicine, Department of Immunology, and SAMRC Extramural Unit for Stem Cell Research and Therapy, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0084, South Africa’. Thirdly, an affiliation was omitted for the author Michael S. Pepper, which is now listed as Affiliation 8. Fourthly, Affiliation 1 was omitted for the author Johan W. Viljoen. Finally, Augustinus J. van Zyl was incorrectly affiliated with ‘Institute for Maternal and Child Health, IRCCS ‘Burlo Garofolo’, Trieste, Italy.’ The correct author affiliations are listed below: Affiliation 1: Department of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering, EBIT, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0028, South Africa Johan W. Viljoen and J. Pieter de Villiers Affiliation 2: Development, Research and Technology Department, Hensoldt Optronics, Centu..
Reconstruction of blast injuries of the hand and upper limb
No full textOver recent years, hand surgeons in the Middle East and Arabic region have particularly had to deal with an increasing number of war blast injuries to the upper extremity, in the acute, subacute and chronic phases. Many have been referred from War Zone countries such as Iraq and, more recently, Syria, where the resources to treat such complex injuries are scarce. The present article is a comprehensive review of the basic principles of management of blast injuries based on the available literature merged with the authors' personal experience of these injuries. The state of the art in treatment of blast injuries to the hand, from ammunition physics and wound ballistics to radiological investigation and, ultimately, the principles of surgical management are discussed. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.ADAMS DB, 1982, MIL MED, V147, P831; AMATO JJ, 1974, AM J SURG, V127, P454, DOI 10.1016-0002-9610(74)90296-7; ANDERSON RJ, 1990, J TRAUMA, V30, P1059, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199009000-00001; ANDERSON RJ, 1990, J VASC SURG, V11, P544, DOI 10.1067-mva.1990.16139; Bakhach J, 2009, J HAND SURG-EUR VOL, V34E, P227, DOI 10.1177-1753193408098904; Bakhach J, 2005, Ann Chir Plast Esthet, V50, P35, DOI 10.1016-j.anplas.2004.11.014; BARR RJ, 1989, J BONE JOINT SURG BR, V71, P739; Bartlett C S, 2000, J Am Acad Orthop Surg, V8, P21; Bowen TE, 1988, NATO HDB, P13; Bowyer GW, 1996, J TRAUMA, V40, P170; BRIEN WW, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P133; Brown P, 1995, J HAND SURG-AM, V20, P615; BYNOE RP, 1991, J VASC SURG, V14, P346; CHAPMAN MW, 1979, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P120; CHAPMAN MW, 1989, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V71A, P159; COONEY WP, 1987, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P136; COOPER GJ, 1990, BRIT J SURG, V77, P606, DOI 10.1002-bjs.1800770604; DEITCH EA, 1984, J TRAUMA, V24, P600, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198407000-00009; DENNIS J W, 1990, Journal of Vascular Surgery, V11, P84, DOI 10.1067-mva.1990.16942; DiMaio VJM, 1993, GUNSHOT WOUNDS PRACT; DUBUISSON A, 1992, NEUROL CLIN, V10, P935; Dufresne G W, 1995, Int J Trauma Nurs, V1, P4, DOI 10.1016-S1079-2104(05)80404-4; DUGAS R, 1985, ORTHOPEDICS, V8, P1121; Duncan R, 1992, J Orthop Trauma, V6, P25; ELSTROM JA, 1978, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V60, P335; FACKLER ML, 1992, J HAND SURG-AM, V17A, P971, DOI 10.1016-0363-5023(92)90481-4; Fackler ML, 1996, ANN EMERG MED, V28, P194, DOI 10.1016-S0196-0644(96)70062-8; Fackler ML, 1994, WOUND BALLISTICS REV, V1, P12; Fackler ML, 1988, J TRAUMA, V28, P21; Fackler ML, 1995, TECH ORTHOP, V10, P163, DOI 10.1097-00013611-199501030-00005; FREEARK R J, 1961, Q Bull Northwest Univ Med Sch, V35, P305; FRIEDRICH PL, 1898, LANGENBECKS ARCH KLI, V57, P288; Frykberg ER, 1989, J TRAUMA, V29, P57; FRYKBERG ER, 1989, J TRAUMA, V29, P1041, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198908000-00001; GOMEZ GA, 1986, J TRAUMA, V26, P1005, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198611000-00008; GONZALEZ MH, 1993, J HAND SURG-AM, V18A, P267, DOI 10.1016-0363-5023(93)90359-B; GRACE TG, 1980, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V62, P433; Granberry W M, 1973, Hand, V5, P220, DOI 10.1016-0072-968X(73)90032-6; GUSTILO RB, 1984, J TRAUMA, V24, P742, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198408000-00009; GUSTILO RB, 1990, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V72A, P299; HAHN M, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P85; HANSRAJ KK, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P9; HARDY JD, 1975, ANN SURG, V181, P640, DOI 10.1097-00000658-197505000-00019; HARTLING RP, 1987, RADIOLOGY, V162, P465; HENDERSON V, 1991, WESTERN J MED, V155, P253; HOEKSTRA SM, 1990, J TRAUMA, V30, P1489, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199012000-00008; HOPKINSO.DA, 1967, BRIT J SURG, V54, P344, DOI 10.1002-bjs.1800540507; Hull JB, 1996, J TRAUMA, V40, pS198, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199603001-00044; HUTSON HR, 1994, NEW ENGL J MED, V330, P324, DOI 10.1056-NEJM199402033300506; Isiklar ZU, 1998, INJURY, V29, P7, DOI 10.1016-S0020-1383(98)90032-8; JANZON B, 1985, J TRAUMA, V25, P138, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198502000-00009; Jones J A, 1991, J Orthop Trauma, V5, P272, DOI 10.1097-00005131-199109000-00004; Kasprzak H, 1984, Neurol Neurochir Pol, V18, P567; Katzman BM, 1999, HAND CLIN, V15, P233; KING TA, 1991, AM J SURG, V162, P163, DOI 10.1016-0002-9610(91)90181-C; KLINE DG, 1982, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P42; LAIN K C, 1970, Surgical Forum (Chicago), V21, P179; Le Maitre R, 1918, LJ CHIRURG, Vi, P65; Lenihan M R, 1992, J Orthop Trauma, V6, P32; LONG WT, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P123; LYNCH K, 1991, ANN SURG, V214, P737, DOI 10.1097-00000658-199112000-00016; MACKINNON SE, 1989, ANN PLAS SURG, V22, P257, DOI 10.1097-00000637-198903000-00013; Mackinnon SE, 1988, SURG PERIPHERAL NERV; MAGALON G, 1988, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P32; MCCORKELL SJ, 1985, AM J ROENTGENOL, V145, P1245; MCCORMICK TM, 1979, J TRAUMA, V19, P384, DOI 10.1097-00005373-197905000-00014; MENZOIAN JO, 1983, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V118, P93; MENZOIAN JO, 1985, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V120, P801; MILLESI H, 1993, MICROSURG, V14, P228, DOI 10.1002-micr.1920140403; MILLESI H, 1984, CLIN PLAST SURG, V11, P3; Millesi H, 1982, Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg Suppl, V19, P25; MOED BR, 1986, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V68A, P1008; Molinari Robert W., 1994, Contemporary Orthopaedics, V29, P335; MUFTI MA, 1970, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V101, P562; Nathan R, 1999, HAND CLIN, V15, P193; NICHOLS JS, 1988, SURG CLIN N AM, V68, P837; NOWOTARSKI P, 1994, J ORTHOP TRAUMA, V8, P134, DOI 10.1097-00005131-199404000-00010; Omer Jr GE, 1991, OPERATIVE NERVE REPA, P655; OMER GE, 1974, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, VA 56, P1615; Omer Jr GE, 1988, HAND, P903; ORDOG GJ, 1988, J TRAUMA, V28, P624, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198805000-00011; ORDOG GJ, 1983, J TRAUMA, V23, P832, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198309000-00008; ORDOG GJ, 1994, J TRAUMA, V36, P358, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199403000-00014; ORDOG GJ, 1994, J TRAUMA, V36, P106, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199401000-00017; PATMAN RD, 1964, SURG GYNECOL OBSTET, V118, P725; PERRY MO, 1971, ANN SURG, V173, P403, DOI 10.1097-00000658-197103000-00011; Peters C, 1996, J TRAUMA, V40, P16; PHILLIPS P, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P95; REID JDS, 1988, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V123, P942; SIMS D W, 1989, Journal of Trauma, V29, P940, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198907000-00006; SIRINEK KR, 1981, J TRAUMA, V21, P339, DOI 10.1097-00005373-198105000-00001; Smith D K, 1990, J Orthop Trauma, V4, P7; SMITH RF, 1974, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V109, P198; Snyder III WH, 1989, VASCULAR SURG, P613; Snyder III WH, 1992, CIVILIAN VASCULAR TR, P157; SNYDER WH, 1978, ARCH SURG-CHICAGO, V113, P424; SPENCER AD, 1962, SURG GYNECOL OBSTET, V114, P490; STEIN JS, 1995, ORTHOP CLIN N AM, V26, P29; Swan KG, 1989, GUNSHOT WOUNDS PATHO; Tornetta P, 1997, J ORTHOP TRAUMA, V11, P422, DOI 10.1097-00005131-199708000-00009; Wang Z G, 1982, Acta Chir Scand Suppl, V508, P185; Whelan T J Jr, 1968, Adv Surg, V3, P227; WILD JJ, 1982, J BONE JOINT SURG AM, V64, P1010; WOLOSZYN JT, 1988, CLIN ORTHOP RELAT R, P247; WRIGHT DG, 1993, J TRAUMA, V35, P678, DOI 10.1097-00005373-199311000-0000433
Establishing a Standardized Clinical Assessment Tool of Pathologic and Prosthetic Hand Function: Normative Data, Reliability, and Validity
No full textABSTRACT. Light CM, Chappell PH, Kyberd PJ. Establishing a standardized clinical assessment tool of pathologic and prosthetic hand function: normative data, reliability, and validity. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83:776-83. Objective: To develop a new assessment procedure, the Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP), that allows contextual results of hand function to be obtained readily in a clinical environment. Design: Reliability (test-retest, interrater) and validity (criterion, content) of new assessment procedure against standard medical outcome measure techniques. Setting: Normative data collected in a university laboratory. Participants: Twenty-four volunteers selected on the basis of optimum hand function using these criteria: age (range, 18-25y), and no adverse hand trauma, neurologic condition, or disabling effects of the upper limb. Interventions: Not applicable. Main Outcome Measures: The normative control group was assessed for variability, and the procedure measured in terms of interrater and test-retest reliability. The absence of a direct comparison prevents a criterion standard from being established; however, content validity was shown by expert peer review. Results: The control group data were shown to be multivariate gaussian; test-retest and interrater reliability were demonstrated at the 95% confidence level. The content validity was demonstrated by peer panel approval. Conclusions: Results of the control group established the statistical integrity of SHAP. Clinical trials are underway, although more extensive use of the procedure is advocated in primary care and rehabilitation centers where physiotherapy and occupational therapy are actively used in hand rehabilitation
Mr. Melvin J. Collier, RWWL AUC, June 2011
No full textThis video is a conversation with Mr. Melvin J. Collier. Mr. Collier talks about his book, "From Mississippi to Africa: A Journey of Discovery". Daniel Le, AUC Woodruff Library, is the interviewer
Correspondence, W. J. Hawks to Richard Parker, March 15, 1855
No full textA letter to Richard Parker from W. J. Hawks regarding a bill for a carriage repository. 1 page
Economic Soft Patch 2: A Second-Half Rebound or Redux?
No full textAs this issue (August 2011) of the Advance & Rutgers Report was on press, the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the U.S. Department of Commerce released revised Gross Domestic Product (GDP) estimates on July 29, 2011 that showed the December 2007– June 2009 recession to be far deeper than originally determined. The 4.1 percent recessionary decline in real GDP was revised to a much larger 5.1 percent decrease; therefore, the analysis of economic output starting on page 8 of this report is slightly altered.
Before the revisions, GDP had fully recovered all of its recessionary losses by the fourth quarter of 2010, 36 months after the recession began. However, the revised estimates show that GDP had not yet fully recovered its recessionary losses by the second quarter of 2011, 42 months after the recession began. This affects figures 3 and 4 on pages 9 and 10 of the report.
But the conclusions in the report remain valid: The U.S. economy today is close (real GDP in the second quarter of 2011 is 0.42 percent below the fourth quarter of 2007) to producing the same pre-recessionary economic output with about 7 million fewer private-sector workers, and the time elapsed for full recovery of economic output (42 months and counting) is far more severe than the recovery time (21 months) from the July 1981-November 1982 recession, the previous post-World War II record holder.This report was published as Issue Paper Number 6, August 2011, in Advance & Rutgers Report
- …
