Cervicogenic headache(CEH)has been recognized as a unique category of headache that can be difficult to diagnose and treat.In China,CEH patients are managed by many different specialties,and the treatment plans remain...Cervicogenic headache(CEH)has been recognized as a unique category of headache that can be difficult to diagnose and treat.In China,CEH patients are managed by many different specialties,and the treatment plans remain controversial.Therefore,there is a great need for comprehensive evidence-based Chinese experts’recommendations for the management of CEH.The Chinese Association for the Study of Pain asked an expert panel to develop recommendations for a series of questions that are essential for daily clinical management of patients with CEH.A group of multidisciplinary Chinese Association for the Study of Pain experts identified the clinically relevant topics in CEH.A systematic review of the literature was performed,and evidence supporting the benefits and harms for the management of CEH was summarized.Twenty-four recommendations were finally developed through expert consensus voting for evidence quality and recommendation strength.We hope this guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for the management of CEH.展开更多
IntroductionMore than 1.0 million patients worldwide are diagnosed with space-occupying lesions in the liver every year, with the number approaching 0.5 million per year in China, and only 20% of the lesions are resec...IntroductionMore than 1.0 million patients worldwide are diagnosed with space-occupying lesions in the liver every year, with the number approaching 0.5 million per year in China, and only 20% of the lesions are resectable Due to a lack of available donors, only a limited number of patients underwent allogeneic liver transplantation, the remaining patients simply receive palliative care. Therefore, discovering new options for treating these patients is a high priority. Liver autotransplantation （LAT） is a surgical technique that adopts liver transplantation skills to radically treat spaceoccupying hepatic lesions, benign or malignant,展开更多
Wildfires are complex natural phenomena that exert significant impacts on landscapes,societies,and economies.Understanding the concept of resilience is crucial in mitigating its possible negative impacts,as it involve...Wildfires are complex natural phenomena that exert significant impacts on landscapes,societies,and economies.Understanding the concept of resilience is crucial in mitigating its possible negative impacts,as it involves preparing for,responding to,and recovering from wildfires.This research aims to demonstrate the utility of in situ soil profile description in assessing land use resilience using an Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP)through an expert panel survey.The study examines a catchment located in the Balearic Islands,considering two fire occurrences(once and twice),comparing abandoned agricultural terraces and natural hillslopes.The results demonstrated that the priority ranking of variables to assess soil profile resilience against wildfires,determined by a panel of 10 experts,identified horizon depth(25.1%),slope inclination(21.5%),and hydrological connectivity(16.6%)as the most crucial factors.Other variables,such as number and size of roots,structure of pedal soil material,size class structure,and rock fragments,also contributed to resilience but to a lesser extent,with scores ranging from 5.7%to 9.6%.Analyzing the priorities established by the experts using AHP,the results showed that the least resilient soil horizon was H1 of the control hillslope,especially under high and low connectivity processes,which aligned with the loss of superficial soil horizons after one and two wildfires.Hillslopes showed greater changes in resilience after occurring wildfires compared to terraces,with the most significant alterations occurring after the second wildfire event.This study addresses a significant knowledge gap in the field by highlighting the interconnectedness of wildfires,resilience,and land use,providing insights into land management strategies for wildfire-prone regions.展开更多
The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members.The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptanc...The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members.The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine.The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited,ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting.However,the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance,and details of the process followed are usually unclear.We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology;identification of problem area of research,selection of panel,anonymity of panelists,controlled feedback,iterative Delphi rounds,consensus criteria,analysis of consensus,closing criteria,and stability of the results.Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points,we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019.There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members,defining consensus,closing criteria for rounds,and presenting the results.We propose our evaluation points for researchers,medical journal editorial boards,and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.展开更多
文摘Cervicogenic headache(CEH)has been recognized as a unique category of headache that can be difficult to diagnose and treat.In China,CEH patients are managed by many different specialties,and the treatment plans remain controversial.Therefore,there is a great need for comprehensive evidence-based Chinese experts’recommendations for the management of CEH.The Chinese Association for the Study of Pain asked an expert panel to develop recommendations for a series of questions that are essential for daily clinical management of patients with CEH.A group of multidisciplinary Chinese Association for the Study of Pain experts identified the clinically relevant topics in CEH.A systematic review of the literature was performed,and evidence supporting the benefits and harms for the management of CEH was summarized.Twenty-four recommendations were finally developed through expert consensus voting for evidence quality and recommendation strength.We hope this guideline provides direction for clinicians and patients making treatment decisions for the management of CEH.
基金supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China:United Foundation with Xinjiang(U1403222)National Natural Science Foundation of China(81570079)
文摘IntroductionMore than 1.0 million patients worldwide are diagnosed with space-occupying lesions in the liver every year, with the number approaching 0.5 million per year in China, and only 20% of the lesions are resectable Due to a lack of available donors, only a limited number of patients underwent allogeneic liver transplantation, the remaining patients simply receive palliative care. Therefore, discovering new options for treating these patients is a high priority. Liver autotransplantation （LAT） is a surgical technique that adopts liver transplantation skills to radically treat spaceoccupying hepatic lesions, benign or malignant,
基金supported by the research project CGL2017-88200-R,titled"Functional Hydrological and Sediment Connectivity in Mediterranean Catchments:Global Change Scenarios–MEDhyCON_2,"funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science,Innovation,and Universities,the Spanish Agency of Research (AEI)the European Regional Development Funds (ERDF)funded by COST Action (grant no. CA18135),supported by COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology),during a Short-Term Scientific Mission (STSM) conducted by Jesús Rodrigo-Comino
文摘Wildfires are complex natural phenomena that exert significant impacts on landscapes,societies,and economies.Understanding the concept of resilience is crucial in mitigating its possible negative impacts,as it involves preparing for,responding to,and recovering from wildfires.This research aims to demonstrate the utility of in situ soil profile description in assessing land use resilience using an Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP)through an expert panel survey.The study examines a catchment located in the Balearic Islands,considering two fire occurrences(once and twice),comparing abandoned agricultural terraces and natural hillslopes.The results demonstrated that the priority ranking of variables to assess soil profile resilience against wildfires,determined by a panel of 10 experts,identified horizon depth(25.1%),slope inclination(21.5%),and hydrological connectivity(16.6%)as the most crucial factors.Other variables,such as number and size of roots,structure of pedal soil material,size class structure,and rock fragments,also contributed to resilience but to a lesser extent,with scores ranging from 5.7%to 9.6%.Analyzing the priorities established by the experts using AHP,the results showed that the least resilient soil horizon was H1 of the control hillslope,especially under high and low connectivity processes,which aligned with the loss of superficial soil horizons after one and two wildfires.Hillslopes showed greater changes in resilience after occurring wildfires compared to terraces,with the most significant alterations occurring after the second wildfire event.This study addresses a significant knowledge gap in the field by highlighting the interconnectedness of wildfires,resilience,and land use,providing insights into land management strategies for wildfire-prone regions.
文摘The Delphi technique is a systematic process of forecasting using the collective opinion of panel members.The structured method of developing consensus among panel members using Delphi methodology has gained acceptance in diverse fields of medicine.The Delphi methods assumed a pivotal role in the last few decades to develop best practice guidance using collective intelligence where research is limited,ethically/logistically difficult or evidence is conflicting.However,the attempts to assess the quality standard of Delphi studies have reported significant variance,and details of the process followed are usually unclear.We recommend systematic quality tools for evaluation of Delphi methodology;identification of problem area of research,selection of panel,anonymity of panelists,controlled feedback,iterative Delphi rounds,consensus criteria,analysis of consensus,closing criteria,and stability of the results.Based on these nine qualitative evaluation points,we assessed the quality of Delphi studies in the medical field related to coronavirus disease 2019.There was inconsistency in reporting vital elements of Delphi methods such as identification of panel members,defining consensus,closing criteria for rounds,and presenting the results.We propose our evaluation points for researchers,medical journal editorial boards,and reviewers to evaluate the quality of the Delphi methods in healthcare research.
