Linköping University

About: Linköping University is a education organization based out in Linköping, Sweden. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 15671 authors who have published 50013 publications receiving 1542189 citations.

2013 ESH/ESC Practice guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension

Abstract: ABPMambulatory blood pressure monitoringACEangiotensin converting enzymeARBangiotensin receptor blockerA-Vatrio-ventricularBBbeta-blockerBPblood pressureCHDcoronary heart diseaseCKDchronic kidney d...

Elliptic boundary value problems in domains with point singularities

Abstract: Introduction Part 1: Boundary value problems for ordinary differential equations on the half-axis Elliptic boundary value problems in the half-space Elliptic boundary value problems in smooth domains Variants and extensions Part 2: Elliptic boundary value problems in an infinite cylinder Elliptic boundary value problems in domains with conical points Elliptic boundary value problems in weighted Sobolev spaces with nonhomogeneous norms Variants and extensions Part 3 Elliptic boundary value problems in domains with exterior cusps Elliptic boundary value problems in domains with inside cusps Bibliography Index List of symbols.

A consensus approach toward the standardization of back pain definitions for use in prevalence studies

Abstract: A modified Delphi study conducted with 28 experts in back pain research from 12 countries. OBJECTIVE. To identify standardized definitions of low back pain that could be consistently used by investigators in prevalence studies to provide comparable data. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA. Differences in the definition of back pain prevalence in population studies lead to heterogeneity in study findings, and limitations or impossibilities in comparing or summarizing prevalence figures from different studies. METHODS. Back pain definitions were identified from 51 articles reporting population-based prevalence studies, and dissected into 77 items documenting 7 elements. These items were submitted to a panel of experts for rating and reduction, in 3 rounds (participation: 76%). Preliminary results were presented and discussed during the Amsterdam Forum VIII for Primary Care Research on Low Back Pain, compared with scientific evidence and confirmed and fine-tuned by the panel in a fourth round and the preparation of the current article. RESULTS. Two definitions were agreed on a minimal definition (with 1 question covering site of low back pain, symptoms observed, and time frame of the measure, and a second question on severity of low back pain) and an optimal definition that is made from the minimal definition and add-ons (covering frequency and duration of symptoms, an additional measure of severity, sciatica, and exclusions) that can be adapted to different needs. CONCLUSION. These definitions provide standards that may improve future comparisons of low back pain prevalence figures by person, place and time characteristics, and offer opportunities for statistical summaries.

Interaction strengths in food webs: issues and opportunities

Abstract: Summary 1. Recent efforts to understand how the patterning of interaction strength affects both structure and dynamics in food webs have highlighted several obstacles to productive synthesis. Issues arise with respect to goals and driving questions, methods and approaches, and placing results in the context of broader ecological theory. 2. Much confusion stems from lack of clarity about whether the questions posed relate to community-level patterns or to species dynamics, and to what authors actually mean by the term ‘interaction strength’. Here, we describe the various ways in which this term has been applied and discuss the implications of loose terminology and definition for the development of this field. 3. Of particular concern is the clear gap between theoretical and empirical investigations of interaction strengths and food web dynamics. The ecological community urgently needs to explore new ways to estimate biologically reasonable model coefficients from empirical data, such as foraging rates, body size, metabolic rate, biomass distribution and other species traits. 4. Combining numerical and analytical modelling approaches should allow exploration of the conditions under which different interaction strengths metrics are interchangeable with regard to relative magnitude, system responses, and species identity. 5. Finally, the prime focus on predator‐prey links in much of the research to date on interaction strengths in food webs has meant that the potential significance of nontrophic interactions, such as competition, facilitation and biotic disturbance, has been largely ignored by the food web community. Such interactions may be important dynamically and should be routinely included in future food web research programmes.