323,022 research outputs found
A multilevel logistic regression model for the analyses of concurrent Human papillomavirus (HPV) infections
No full textHuman Papillomavirus (HPV) is a sexually transmitted infection that causes cervical cancer. A nested three-level logistic regression model was introduced in order to investigate whether, in the IARC HPV prevalence surveys, co-infection with different HPV types occurs more or less frequently than expected if the infections are independent from one another. Two random effects, at individual and study-area level, were specified, while the fixed-effect covariates at individual level were age and lifetime number of sexual partners. The Best Linear Unbiased Predictors (BLUP) technique was used to estimate the random components. The predictions of the random effects at individual level are particularly important because they can be considered as a synthetic estimate of all those residual sources of individual variability, i.e., unmeasured risk factors due to sexual habits, that otherwise could not be accounted for. Individual probabilities of being positive for each HPV type are thus estimated, and the expected vs observed number of infections are compared, given the positivity for a different HPV type. Few positive associations (HPV58 with 33 being the strongest) were found in this analyses. However, the majority of HPV types, particularly the two most oncogenic types, HPV16 and 18, that are also included in the prophylactic vaccine, were not associated with one another
Burden of human papillomavirus infections and related diseases in the extended middle east and North Africa Region
No full textIn this chapter, we present the available information on the burden of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related cancers (cancers of the cervix, anogenital cancers, and cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx), as well as available data on the prevalence and distribution of HPV types in women with and without cervical cancer, for the countries of the Extended Middle East and North Africa region (EMENA). The EMENA region is characterized by societies that share similar cultures and religions and that are considered to have a more conservative sexual behaviour compared to Western societies. The incidence of cervical cancer is estimated to be relatively low, although it is difficult to assess precisely because systematic and national cancer registries are lacking in many countries of the EMENA region. In these countries, nationwide programs of cervical cancer screening do not exist or are based on a limited opportunistic cytology-based screening, which often lacks quality assurance. The incidence of anogenital cancers other than cervix is very low. The incidence of cancers of the oral cavity and pharynx is relatively high in some countries, particularly in Pakistan. Relatively low levels of HPV prevalence have been observed in the several surveys conducted in the EMENA region, although only few young women were included in these studies. Possible changes in lifestyle and sexual behaviour in younger generations might, however, change this scenario. Thus, improving the information on the burden of HPV-related cancers and on the HPV prevalence in the general population is essential to develop a comprehensive intervention policy for future management of cervical cancer in this area.This article forms part of a regional report entitled . Comprehensive Control of HPV Infections and Related Diseases in the Extended Middle East and North Africa Region Vaccine Volume 31, Supplement 6, 2013. Updates of the progress in the field are presented in a separate monograph entitled . Comprehensive Control of HPV Infections and Related Diseases Vaccine Volume 30, Supplement 5, 2012. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd.Aziz MTA, 2006, MED SCI MONITOR, V12, pMT43; Abd El-Azim S, 2011, CLIN LAB, V57, P363; Abdullah LS, 2007, ANN SAUDI MED, V27, P268; Ahmed MI, 2001, CLIN BIOCHEM, V34, P491, DOI 10.1016-S0009-9120(01)00243-0; Al-Awadhi R, 2011, J MED VIROL, V83, P453, DOI 10.1002-jmv.21981; Alhamany Z, 2010, J INFECT DEV COUNTR, V4, P732; Al Jaroudi D, 2010, ANN SAUDI MED, V30, P397, DOI [10.4103-0256-4947.68550, 10.4103-0236-4947.68330]; Allameh T, 2011, ARCH GYNECOL OBSTET, V284, P1509, DOI 10.1007-s00404-011-1863-4; Altun Z, 2011, TURK KLIN TIP BILIM, V31, P307, DOI 10.5336-medsci.2009-16463; Amrani M, 2003, J CLIN VIROL, V27, P286, DOI 10.1016-S1386-6532(02)00227-5; Balaha MH, 2011, J CYTOL, V28, P173, DOI 10.4103-0970-9371.86343; Bayram A, 2011, J MED VIROL, V83, P1997, DOI 10.1002-jmv.22218; Ben Aissa R, 2002, ONFP TUNIS MED, V80, P203; Bruni L, 2010, J INFECT DIS, V202, P1789, DOI 10.1086-657321; Chaouki N, 1998, INT J CANCER, V75, P546, DOI 10.1002-(SICI)1097-0215(19980209)75:4546::AID-IJC93.0.CO;2-T; Clifford GM, 2005, LANCET, V366, P991, DOI 10.1016-S0140-6736(05)67069-9; Curado MP, 2007, IARC SCI PUBLICATION, VIX; de Martel Catherine, 2012, Lancet Oncol, V13, P607, DOI 10.1016-S1470-2045(12)70137-7; de Sanjose S, 2010, LANCET ONCOL, V11, P1048, DOI 10.1016-S1470-2045(10)70230-8; De Vuyst H, 2009, INT J CANCER, V124, P1626, DOI 10.1002-ijc.24116; D'Souza G, 2007, NEW ENGL J MED, V356, P1944, DOI 10.1056-NEJMoa065497; Dursun P, 2009, BMC INFECT DIS, V9, DOI 10.1186-1471-2334-9-191; el-All Howayda S Abd, 2007, Infect Agent Cancer, V2, P12; El-Kak F, 2013, VACCINE, V31, pG45, DOI 10.1016-j.vaccine.2012.10.120; El Khair MM, 2010, MED ONCOL, V27, P861, DOI 10.1007-s12032-009-9297-6; Eren F, 2010, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V109, P235, DOI 10.1016-j.ijgo.2010.01.007; Esmaeili M, 2008, GYNECOL OBSTET INVES, V66, P68, DOI 10.1159-000134917; Ferlay J, 2010, IARC CANCERBASE; Franceschi S, 2005, BRIT J CANCER, V92, P601, DOI 10.1038-sj.bjc.6602348; Ghaffari Saeed Reza, 2006, Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, V7, P529; Ghazal-Aswad S, 2006, ACTA CYTOL, V50, P41, DOI 10.1159-000325893; Guan P, 2012, INT J CANCER, V131, P2349, DOI 10.1002-ijc.27485; Hajjaj AA, 2006, SAUDI MED J, V27, P487; Hamkar R, 2002, East Mediterr Health J, V8, P805; Hammouda D, 2005, INT J CANCER, V113, P483, DOI 10.1002-ijc.20600; Hammouda D, 2011, INT J CANCER, V128, P2224, DOI 10.1002-ijc.25539; Hassen E, 2003, INFECTION, V31, P143, DOI 10.1007-s15010-003-3112-7; Inal MM, 2007, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V17, P1266, DOI 10.1111-j.1525-1438.2007.00944.x; Kapila K, 2006, MED PRIN PRACT, V15, P253, DOI 10.1159-000092986; Karabulut A, 2010, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V110, P40, DOI 10.1016-j.ijgo.2010.02.011; Karam WG, 2011, J BIOL REG HOMEOS AG, V25, P453; Karam WG, 2005, LEBAN MED J, V53, P132; Kasap B, 2011, EUR J OBSTET GYN R B, V159, P168, DOI 10.1016-j.ejogrb.2011.06.021; Keita N, 2009, BRIT J CANCER, V101, P202, DOI 10.1038-sj.bjc.6605140; Khan S, 2007, INT J INFECT DIS, V11, P313, DOI 10.1016-j.ijid.2006.06.007; Khodakarami N, 2012, INT J CANCER, V131, pE156, DOI 10.1002-ijc.26488; KrennHrubec K, 2011, J MED VIROL, V83, P651, DOI 10.1002-jmv.22011; Li N, 2011, INT J CANCER, V128, P927, DOI 10.1002-ijc.25396; Luthra UK, 2002, ACTA CYTOL, V46, P303, DOI 10.1159-000326726; Missaoui N, 2010, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V11, P235; Missaoui N, 2010, ANN BIOL CLIN-PARIS, V68, P297, DOI 10.1684-abc.2010.0431; Missaoui N, 2010, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V11, P777; Mortazavi S, 2002, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V3, P69; Mroueh AM, 2002, EUR J GYNAECOL ONCOL, V23, P429; MURRAY CJL, 1994, B WORLD HEALTH ORGAN, V72, P429; Nokiani FA, 2008, ASIAN PAC J CANCER P, V9, P107; Ozcan ES, 2011, J OBSTET GYNAECOL, V31, P656, DOI 10.3109-01443615.2011.597460; Ozgul N, 2008, J OBSTET GYNAECOL RE, V34, P865, DOI 10.1111-j.1447-0756.2008.00795.x; Ozturk Sual, 2004, Mikrobiyoloji Bulteni, V38, P223; Plummer M, 2012, INT J CANCER, V130, P2638, DOI 10.1002-ijc.26250; Rasul S, 1991, Asia Oceania J Obstet Gynaecol, V17, P1; Raza SA, 2010, BRIT J CANCER, V102, P1657, DOI 10.1038-sj.bjc.6605664; Safaei A, 2010, INDIAN J PATHOL MICR, V53, P681, DOI 10.4103-0377-4929.72030; Sancho-Garnier H, 2013, VACCINE, V31, pG51, DOI 10.1016-j.vaccine.2012.06.046; Seoud M, 2012, J LOW GENIT TRACT DI, V16, P106, DOI 10.1097-LGT.0b013e31823a0108; Shahsiah R, 2011, PATHOL RES PRACT, V207, P754, DOI 10.1016-j.prp.2011.09.011; Soerjomataram I, 2012, BMC MED RES METHODOL, V12, DOI 10.1186-1471-2288-12-125; Sughayer MA, 2010, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V108, P74, DOI 10.1016-j.ijgo.2009.08.025; Kara F, 2009, INT J GYNECOL OBSTET, V106, P206, DOI 10.1016-j.ijgo.2009.04.003; Usubutun A, 2009, INT J GYNECOL PATHOL, V28, P541, DOI 10.1097-PGP.0b013e3181aaba0d; Wasti S, 2004, ANN SAUDI MED, V24, P189; Yalti S, 2005, INT J GYNECOL CANCER, V15, P292, DOI 10.1111-j.1525-1438.2005.15218.x; YOUNIS N, 1993, STUD FAMILY PLANN, V24, P175, DOI 10.2307-2939232; Zandi K, 2010, VIROL J, V7, DOI 10.1186-1743-422X-7-65; Zavarei M, 2012, IRAN J PUBLIC HEALTH, V37, P10135
Diffusive author(s), cohesive author: Analysis of S/N (1994)
No full textThis study indicates the ways in which various aspects of the author(s) are brought forth in Dumb type’s performance art, the S/N production. Previous research has suggested a non-hierarchical organization of Dumb type and the absence of a “privileged author” in Dumb type’s collaborative work, S/N. However, the results that I have investigated from member’s interviews on the creative process of S/N along with my analysis of the recorded images of S/N, indicate a different aspect of the author(s). First, S/N was created through, so to speak, the collective ideas of the members of Dumb type. Further, S/N has at least nine quotations from previous performances, installations, and printed writings, besides the work-in-progress technique. Explicating one of the “author functions” as given by Michel Foucault, each text has plural subjects of the author. However, it has been revealed from members’ interviews that Teiji Furuhashi had a decision-making role in selecting the members’ ideas within the performance. Since then, S/N has had plural subjects of creation; however, Furuhashi is one of the subjects of creation along with the “privileged author.” S/N has plural authors (diffusive authors) yet at the same time, it has a “privileged author,” Teiji Furuhashi (cohesive author)
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Oral hygiene, dentition, sexual habits and risk of oral cancer
No full textIn an Italian case-control study of oral cancer, number of missing teeth and other aspects of dental care were similar, but the general condition of the mouth, as indicated by gum bleeding, tartar deposits and mucosal irritation, was worse among oral cancer cases than controls. No differences were detected in sexual practices (including oral sex) and (previous) sexually transmitted infections
- …
