State University of New York System

About: State University of New York System is a education organization based out in Albany, New York, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 54077 authors who have published 78070 publications receiving 2985160 citations.

Light upconverting core–shell nanostructures: nanophotonic control for emerging applications

Abstract: Light upconverting nanostructures employing lanthanide ions constitute an emerging research field recognized with wide ramifications and impact in many areas ranging from healthcare, to energy and, to security. The core–shell design of these nanostructures allows us to deliberately introduce a hierarchy of electronic energy states, thus providing unprecedented opportunities to manipulate the electronic excitation, energy transfer and upconverted emissions. The core–shell morphology also causes the suppression of quenching mechanisms to produce efficient upconversion emission for biophotonic and photonic applications. Using hierarchical architect, whereby each shell layer can be defined to have a specific feature, the electronic structure as well as the physiochemical structure of the upconverting nanomaterials can be tuned to couple other electronic states on the surface such as excitations of organic dye molecules or localized surface plasmons from metallic nanostructures, or to introduce a broad range of imaging or therapeutic modalities into a single conduct. In this review, we summarize the key aspects of nanophotonic control of the light upconverting nanoparticles through governed design and preparation of hierarchical shells in the core–shell nanostructures, and review their emerging applications in the biomedical field, solar energy conversion, as well as security encoding.

Modeling Data and Process Quality in Multi-Input, Multi-Output Information Systems

Abstract: This paper presents a general model to assess the impact of data and process quality upon the outputs of multi-user information-decision systems. The data flow/data processing quality control model is designed to address several dimensions of data quality at the collection, input, processing and output stages. Starting from a data flow diagram of the type used in structured analysis, the model yields a representation of possible errors in multiple intermediate and final outputs in terms of input and process error functions. The model generates expressions for the possible magnitudes of errors in selected outputs. This is accomplished using a recursive-type algorithm which traces systematically the propagation and alteration of various errors. These error expressions can be used to analyze the impact that alternative quality control procedures would have on the selected outputs. The paper concludes with a discussion of the tractability of the model for various types of information systems as well as an application to a representative scenario.

Improved limits on scattering of weakly interacting massive particles from reanalysis of 2013 LUX data

Abstract: We present constraints on weakly interacting massive particles (WIMP)-nucleus scattering from the 2013 data of the Large Underground Xenon dark matter experiment, including 1.4×10^{4} kg day of search exposure. This new analysis incorporates several advances: single-photon calibration at the scintillation wavelength, improved event-reconstruction algorithms, a revised background model including events originating on the detector walls in an enlarged fiducial volume, and new calibrations from decays of an injected tritium β source and from kinematically constrained nuclear recoils down to 1.1 keV. Sensitivity, especially to low-mass WIMPs, is enhanced compared to our previous results which modeled the signal only above a 3 keV minimum energy. Under standard dark matter halo assumptions and in the mass range above 4 GeV c^{-2}, these new results give the most stringent direct limits on the spin-independent WIMP-nucleon cross section. The 90% C.L. upper limit has a minimum of 0.6 zb at 33 GeV c^{-2} WIMP mass.

Mortality and Locomotion 6 Months After Hospitalization for Hip Fracture: Risk Factors and Risk-Adjusted Hospital Outcomes

Abstract: ContextHip fracture is a common clinical problem that leads to considerable mortality and disability A need exists for a practical means to monitor and improve outcomes, including function, for patients with hip fractureObjectivesTo identify and compare the importance of significant prefracture predictors of functional status and mortality at 6 months for patients hospitalized with hip fracture and to compare risk-adjusted outcomes for hospitals providing initial careDesignProspective study with data obtained from medical records and through structured interviews with patients and proxiesSetting and ParticipantsA total of 571 adults aged 50 years or older with hip fracture who were admitted to 4 New York, NY, metropolitan hospitals between August 1997 and August 1998Main Outcome MeasuresIn-hospital and 6-month mortality; locomotion at 6 months; and adverse outcomes at 6 months, defined as death or needing assistance to ambulate, compared by hospital, adjusting for patient risk factorsResultsThe in-hospital mortality rate was 16% At 6 months, the mortality rate was 135%, and another 128% needed total assistance to ambulate Laboratory values were strong predictors of mortality but were not significantly associated with locomotion Age and prefracture residence at a nursing home were significant predictors of locomotion (P = 02 for both) but were not significantly associated with mortality Adjustment for baseline characteristics either substantially augmented or diminished interhospital differences in outcomes Two hospitals had 1 outcome (functional status or mortality) that was significantly worse than the overall mean while the other outcome was nonsignificantly better than averageConclusionsMortality and functional status ideally should be considered both together and individually to distinguish effects limited to one or the other outcome Hospital performance for these 2 measures may differ substantially after adjustment, probably because different processes of care are important to each outcome