Brown University

About: Brown University is a education organization based out in Providence, Rhode Island, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 35778 authors who have published 90896 publications receiving 4471489 citations. The organization is also known as: brown.edu & Brown.

Essentially Non-Oscillatory and Weighted Essentially Non-Oscillatory Schemes for Hyperbolic Conservation Laws

Abstract: In these lecture notes we describe the construction, analysis, and application of ENO (Essentially Non-Oscillatory) and WENO (Weighted Essentially Non-Oscillatory) schemes for hyperbolic conservation laws and related Hamilton-Jacobi equations. ENO and WENO schemes are high order accurate finite difference schemes designed for problems with piecewise smooth solutions containing discontinuities. The key idea lies at the approximation level, where a nonlinear adaptive procedure is used to automatically choose the locally smoothest stencil, hence avoiding crossing discontinuities in the interpolation procedure as much as possible. ENO and WENO schemes have been quite successful in applications, especially for problems containing both shocks and complicated smooth solution structures, such as compressible turbulence simulations and aeroacoustics.

Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine

Abstract: Importance Since publication of the report by the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine in 1996, researchers have advanced the methods of cost-effectiveness analysis, and policy makers have experimented with its application. The need to deliver health care efficiently and the importance of using analytic techniques to understand the clinical and economic consequences of strategies to improve health have increased in recent years. Objective To review the state of the field and provide recommendations to improve the quality of cost-effectiveness analyses. The intended audiences include researchers, government policy makers, public health officials, health care administrators, payers, businesses, clinicians, patients, and consumers. Design In 2012, the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine was formed and included 2 co-chairs, 13 members, and 3 additional members of a leadership group. These members were selected on the basis of their experience in the field to provide broad expertise in the design, conduct, and use of cost-effectiveness analyses. Over the next 3.5 years, the panel developed recommendations by consensus. These recommendations were then reviewed by invited external reviewers and through a public posting process. Findings The concept of a “reference case” and a set of standard methodological practices that all cost-effectiveness analyses should follow to improve quality and comparability are recommended. All cost-effectiveness analyses should report 2 reference case analyses: one based on a health care sector perspective and another based on a societal perspective. The use of an “impact inventory,” which is a structured table that contains consequences (both inside and outside the formal health care sector), intended to clarify the scope and boundaries of the 2 reference case analyses is also recommended. This special communication reviews these recommendations and others concerning the estimation of the consequences of interventions, the valuation of health outcomes, and the reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses. Conclusions and Relevance The Second Panel reviewed the current status of the field of cost-effectiveness analysis and developed a new set of recommendations. Major changes include the recommendation to perform analyses from 2 reference case perspectives and to provide an impact inventory to clarify included consequences.

Enhancing Treatment Fidelity in Health Behavior Change Studies: Best Practices and Recommendations From the NIH Behavior Change Consortium.

Abstract: Treatment fidelity refers to the methodological strategies used to monitor and enhance the reliability and validity of behavioral interventions. This article describes a multisite effort by the Treatment Fidelity Workgroup of the National Institutes of Health Behavior Change Consortium (BCC) to identify treatment fidelity concepts and strategies in health behavior intervention research. The work group reviewed treatment fidelity practices in the research literature, identified techniques used within the BCC, and developed recommendations for incorporating these practices more consistently. The recommendations cover study design, provider training, treatment delivery, treatment receipt, and enactment of treatment skills. Funding agencies, reviewers, and journal editors are encouraged to make treatment fidelity a standard part of the conduct and evaluation of health behavior intervention research.

Estrogen plus progestin and the risk of coronary heart disease

Abstract: Background Recent randomized clinical trials have suggested that estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). In this report, we provide the final results with regard to estrogen plus progestin and CHD from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI). Methods The WHI included a randomized primary-prevention trial of estrogen plus progestin in 16,608 postmenopausal women who were 50 to 79 years of age at base line. Participants were randomly assigned to receive conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg per day) plus medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg per day) or placebo. The primary efficacy outcome of the trial was CHD (nonfatal myocardial infarction or death due to CHD). Results After a mean follow-up of 5.2 years (planned duration, 8.5 years), the data and safety monitoring board recommended terminating the estrogen-plus-progestin trial because the overall risks exceeded the benefits. Combined hormone therapy was associated with a hazard ratio for CHD of 1.24 (nominal 95 percent confidence interval, 1.00 to 1.54; 95 percent confidence interval after adjustment for sequential monitoring, 0.97 to 1.60). The elevation in risk was most apparent at one year (hazard ratio, 1.81 [95 percent confidence interval, 1.09 to 3.01]). Although higher base-line levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were associated with an excess risk of CHD among women who received hormone therapy, higher base-line levels of C-reactive protein, other biomarkers, and other clinical characteristics did not significantly modify the treatment-related risk of CHD. Conclusions Estrogen plus progestin does not confer cardiac protection and may increase the risk of CHD among generally healthy postmenopausal women, especially during the first year after the initiation of hormone use. This treatment should not be prescribed for the prevention of cardiovascular disease.