Search

Your search keyword '"Team, CHESS"' showing total 2 results
Start Over Author "Team, CHESS"
2 results on '"Team, CHESS"'

1. The CHESS chemical Herschel surveys of star forming regions: Peering into the protostellar shock L1157-B1. I. Shock chemical complexity

Author

Codella, C., Lefloch, B., Ceccarelli, C., Team, CHESS, and Team, HIFI

Subjects
Astrophysics - Astrophysics of Galaxies
Abstract

We present the first results of the unbiased survey of the L1157-B1 bow shock, obtained with HIFI in the framework of the key program Chemical Herschel surveys of star forming regions (CHESS). The L1157 outflow is driven by a low-mass Class 0 protostar and is considered the prototype of the so-called chemically active outflows. The bright blue-shifted bow shock B1 is the ideal laboratory for studying the link between the hot (around 1000-2000 K) component traced by H2 IR-emission and the cold (around 10-20 K) swept-up material. The main aim is to trace the warm gas chemically enriched by the passage of a shock and to infer the excitation conditions in L1157-B1. A total of 27 lines are identified in the 555-636 GHz region, down to an average 3 sigma level of 30 mK. The emission is dominated by CO(5-4) and H2O(110-101) transitions, as discussed by Lefloch et al. (2010). Here we report on the identification of lines from NH3, H2CO, CH3OH, CS, HCN, and HCO+. The comparison between the profiles produced by molecules released from dust mantles (NH3, H2CO, CH3OH) and that of H2O is consistent with a scenario in which water is also formed in the gas-phase in high-temperature regions where sputtering or grain-grain collisions are not efficient. The high excitation range of the observed tracers allows us to infer, for the first time for these species, the existence of a warm (> 200 K) gas component coexisting in the B1 bow structure with the cold and hot gas detected from ground.

Published
2010
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. The CHESS trial: protocol for the process evaluation of a randomised trial of an education and self-management intervention for people with chronic headache

Author

Nichols, VP, Ellard, DR, Griffiths, FE, Underwood, M, Taylor, SJC, Patel, S, Bright, M, Carnes, D, Davies, B, Eldridge, S, Ellard, D, Evans, S, Griffiths, F, Haywood, K, Hee, SW, Matharu, M, Petrou, S, Pincus, T, Sandhu, H, Taylor, S, Wilkie, A, Higgins, H, Nichols, V, Potter, R, Boss, D, White, K, Achana, F, Mistry, H, Caldwell, F, Probyn, K, and Team, CHESS

Subjects
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice, medicine.medical_specialty, Time Factors, Headache Disorders, Health Behavior, Psychological intervention, Medicine (miscellaneous), Process evaluation, law.invention, Study Protocol, 03 medical and health sciences, 0302 clinical medicine, Chronic Migraine, Patient Education as Topic, Randomized controlled trial, law, Chronic tension type headache and medication overuse headache, Self-management, Humans, Medicine, Pharmacology (medical), Active listening, 030212 general & internal medicine, Competence (human resources), Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Chronic migraine, lcsh:R5-920, business.industry, Process Assessment, Health Care, Attendance, Treatment Outcome, England, Physical therapy, Chronic headache, Headaches, medicine.symptom, business, lcsh:Medicine (General), 030217 neurology & neurosurgery
Abstract

Background Process evaluation is increasingly common alongside complex randomised controlled trials (RCTs). This evaluation helps in understanding the mechanisms of impact and how the study processes were executed, and it includes any contextual factors which may have implications for the trial results and any future implementation. This process evaluation is for the Chronic Headache Education and Self-management Study (CHESS) RCT, which is evaluating an education and self-management group behavioural intervention for people with chronic headache. Chronic headache is defined as headaches which are present for 15 or more days per month. The most common types are chronic migraine and chronic tension type and medication overuse headaches. Methods We will use a mixed methods approach. Quantitative data will be taken from routine trial data which will help us to assess the reach of the study; i.e. did we reach those whom we expected and from where? Intervention attendance (dose received) and attrition and qualitative data will augment our understanding about reasons why people may not wish to take part in or failed to attend sessions. Interviews with intervention facilitators and trial participants will gain different perspectives on taking part in the trial. Fidelity will be assessed through listening to audio recordings for adherence to course content and competence of the facilitation of a sample of sessions. Discussion Our process evaluation will allow us to gain insight into how the trial was delivered, the obstacles and enablers encountered and the possible reasons why the interventions may or may not be effective. Trial registration ISRCTN79708100. Registered on 16 December 2015. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-019-3372-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Published
2019

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results