Search

Introduction The diagnosis of severe mesenteric traction syndrome (MTS) is based on assessing the developed degree of facial flushing. Only one validated objective diagnostic method, Laser Speckle Contrast Imaging (LSCI), exists. However, this method is sensitive to distance, motion, and angulation. Digital thermography is known to correlate well with LSCI without the same limitations, but has never been tested in relation to MTS. This study aimed to examine the thermographic changes during the development of severe MTS and to calculate a cut-off value for identifying severe MTS. Methods A prospective cohort study was performed on patients planned for open esophagectomy and pancreatic surgery from March 2021 to April 2022. All patients underwent continuous measurement on their forehead using LSCI and digital thermography during the first hour of surgery. The validated LSCI cut-off value was used to grade the severity of MTS. Blood samples and hemodynamics were collected at predefined time points. Results Fifty-seven patients were included. Patients developing severe MTS had increased facial skin temperature 15 min (p = 0.002) and 30 min into surgery (p < 0.001). A cut-off value for identifying severe MTS using thermography was identified (35.55 °C, p < 0.001). Patients identified as developing severe MTS using this cut-off value had a higher level of prostacyclin (p = 0.001) and lower systemic vascular resistance (p < 0.001) 15 min into surgery, as compared with patients not developing severe MTS. Conclusion This study shows that digital thermography may complement LSCI in the objective identification of severe MTS., Introduction: The diagnosis of severe mesenteric traction syndrome (MTS) is based on assessing the developed degree of facial flushing. Only one validated objective diagnostic method, Laser Speckle Contrast Imaging (LSCI), exists. However, this method is sensitive to distance, motion, and angulation. Digital thermography is known to correlate well with LSCI without the same limitations, but has never been tested in relation to MTS. This study aimed to examine the thermographic changes during the development of severe MTS and to calculate a cut-off value for identifying severe MTS. Methods: A prospective cohort study was performed on patients planned for open esophagectomy and pancreatic surgery from March 2021 to April 2022. All patients underwent continuous measurement on their forehead using LSCI and digital thermography during the first hour of surgery. The validated LSCI cut-off value was used to grade the severity of MTS. Blood samples and hemodynamics were collected at predefined time points. Results: Fifty-seven patients were included. Patients developing severe MTS had increased facial skin temperature 15 min (p = 0.002) and 30 min into surgery (p < 0.001). A cut-off value for identifying severe MTS using thermography was identified (35.55 °C, p < 0.001). Patients identified as developing severe MTS using this cut-off value had a higher level of prostacyclin (p = 0.001) and lower systemic vascular resistance (p < 0.001) 15 min into surgery, as compared with patients not developing severe MTS. Conclusion: This study shows that digital thermography may complement LSCI in the objective identification of severe MTS.

Although FAIR Research Data Principles are targeted at and implemented by different communities, research disciplines, and research stakeholders (data stewards, curators, etc.), there is no conclusive way to determine the level of FAIRness intended or required to make research artefacts (including, but not limited to, research data) Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. The FAIR Principles cover all types of digital objects, metadata, and infrastructures. However, they focus their narrative on data features that support their reusability. FAIR defines principles, not standards, and therefore they do not propose a mechanism to achieve the behaviours they describe in an attempt to be technology/implementation neutral. Various FAIR assessment metrics and tools have been designed to measure FAIRness. Unfortunately, the same digital objects assessed by different tools often exhibit widely different outcomes because of these independent interpretations of FAIR. This results in confusion among the publishers, the funders, and the users of digital research objects. Moreover, in the absence of a standard and transparent definition of what constitutes FAIR behaviours, there is a temptation to define existing approaches as being FAIR-compliant rather than having FAIR define the expected behaviours. This whitepaper identifies three high-level stakeholder categories -FAIR decision and policymakers, FAIR custodians, and FAIR practitioners - and provides examples outlining specific stakeholders' (hypothetical but anticipated) needs. It also examines possible models for governance based on the existing peer efforts, standardisation bodies, and other ways to acknowledge specifications and potential benefits. This whitepaper can serve as a starting point to foster an open discussion around FAIRness governance and the mechanism(s) that could be used to implement it, to be trusted, broadly representative, appropriately scoped, and sustainable. We invite engagement in this

The principles of Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability (FAIR) have been put forward to guide optimal sharing of data. The potential for industrial and social innovation is vast. Domain-specific metadata standards are crucial in this context, but are widely missing in the energy sector. This report provides a collaborative response from the low carbon energy research community for addressing the necessity of advancing FAIR metadata standards. We review and test existing metadata practices in the domain based on a series of community workshops. We reflect the perspectives of energy data stakeholders. The outcome is reported in terms of challenges and elicits recommendations for advancing FAIR metadata standards in the energy domain across a broad spectrum of stakeholders.

Changes in economy and society since the early nineteenth century have often been associated with the process of time-space compression, during which people felt increasingly compelled to travel faster over greater distances and to fit ever more activities into a given period of time. Unsurprisingly, such changes can also lead to increased stress and frustration. However, the impacts of this speeding-up of everyday life have rarely been explored at an individual level. In this paper we use a wide range of personal diaries from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to examine how (if at all) a sample of English diarists experienced and reacted to the processes of time-space compression in their everyday lives. Is there evidence that changes in transport, communications and work practices caused stress and frustration or rather presented new opportunities that were welcomed? Were there spatial and social differences in how people negotiated and interacted with new transport technologies, and were such reactions strongly gendered? While the period under consideration undoubtedly offered many new (and faster) forms of communication, old modes of travel also persisted. It is argued that for most people, most of the time, increased speed was welcomed, that engagement with new forms of transport was trouble-free, that older forms of mobility flourished alongside the new, and that undue stress only occurred when opportunities for mobility clashed with other demands that were placed upon an individual, or when expectations of speed were not met.

Changes in economy and society since the early nineteenth century have often been associated with the process of time-space compression, during which people felt increasingly compelled to travel faster over greater distances and to fit ever more activities into a given period of time. Unsurprisingly, such changes can also lead to increased stress and frustration. However, the impacts of this speeding-up of everyday life have rarely been explored at an individual level. In this paper we use a wide range of personal diaries from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries to examine how (if at all) a sample of English diarists experienced and reacted to the processes of time-space compression in their everyday lives. Is there evidence that changes in transport, communications and work practices caused stress and frustration or rather presented new opportunities that were welcomed? Were there spatial and social differences in how people negotiated and interacted with new transport technologies, and were such reactions strongly gendered? While the period under consideration undoubtedly offered many new (and faster) forms of communication, old modes of travel also persisted. It is argued that for most people, most of the time, increased speed was welcomed, that engagement with new forms of transport was trouble-free, that older forms of mobility flourished alongside the new, and that undue stress only occurred when opportunities for mobility clashed with other demands that were placed upon an individual, or when expectations of speed were not met.