University of Colorado Colorado Springs

About: University of Colorado Colorado Springs is a education organization based out in Colorado Springs, Colorado, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 6664 authors who have published 10872 publications receiving 323416 citations. The organization is also known as: UCCS & University of Colorado at Colorado Springs.

The flux of small near-Earth objects colliding with the Earth

Abstract: Asteroids with diameters smaller than approximately 50-100 m that collide with the Earth usually do not hit the ground as a single body; rather, they detonate in the atmosphere. These small objects can still cause considerable damage, such as occurred near Tunguska, Siberia, in 1908. The flux of small bodies is poorly constrained, however, in part because ground-based observational searches pursue strategies that lead them preferentially to find larger objects. A Tunguska-class event-the energy of which we take to be equivalent to 10 megatons of TNT-was previously estimated to occur every 200-300 years, with the largest annual airburst calculated to be approximately 20 kilotons (kton) TNT equivalent (ref. 4). Here we report satellite records of bolide detonations in the atmosphere over the past 8.5 years. We find that the flux of objects in the 1-10-m size range has the same power-law distribution as bodies with diameters >50 m. From this we estimate that the Earth is hit on average annually by an object with approximately 5 kton equivalent energy, and that Tunguska-like events occur about once every 1,000 years.

Implementation intention and action planning interventions in health contexts: state of the research and proposals for the way forward.

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the literature on two planning intervention techniques in health behaviour research, implementation intentions and action planning, and to develop evidence-based recommendations for effective future interventions and highlight priority areas for future research. We focused our review on four key areas: (1) definition and conceptualisation; (2) format and measurement; (3) mechanisms and processes; and (4) design issues. Overall, evidence supports the effectiveness of planning interventions in health behaviour with advantages including low cost and response burden. There is, however, considerable heterogeneity in the effects across studies and relatively few registered randomised trials that include objective behavioural measures. Optimally effective planning interventions should adopt “if–then” plans, account for salient and relevant cues, include examples of cues, be guided rather than user-defined, and include boosters. Future studies should adopt randomised controlled designs, report study protocols, include fidelity checks and relevant comparison groups, and adopt long-term behavioural follow-up measures. Priority areas for future research include the identification of the moderators and mediators of planning intervention effects. Future research also needs to adopt “best practice” components of planning interventions more consistently to elucidate the mechanisms and processes involved.