University of East Anglia

About: University of East Anglia is a education organization based out in Norwich, Norfolk, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Climate change. The organization has 13250 authors who have published 37504 publications receiving 1669060 citations. The organization is also known as: UEA.

Evaluation of the North Atlantic Oscillation as simulated by a coupled climate model

Abstract: The realism of the Hadley Centre’s coupled climate model (HadCM2) is evaluated in terms of its simulation of the winter North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), a major natural mode of the Northern Hemisphere atmosphere that is currently the subject of considerable scientific interest. During 1400 y of a control integration with present-day radiative forcing levels, HadCM2 exhibits a realistic NAO associated with spatial patterns of sea level pressure, synoptic activity, temperature and precipitation anomalies that are very similar to those observed. Spatially, the main model deficiency is that the simulated NAO has a teleconnection with the North Pacific that is stronger than observed. In a temporal sense the simulation is compatible with the observations if the recent observed trend (from low values in the 1960s to high values in the early 1990s) in the winter NAO index (the pressure difference between Gibraltar and Iceland) is ignored. This recent trend is, however, outside the range of variability simulated by the control integration of HadCM2, implying that either the model is deficient or that external forcing is responsible for the variation. It is shown, by analysing two ensembles, each of four HadCM2 integrations that were forced with historic and possible future changes in greenhouse gas and sulphate aerosol concentrations, that a small part of the recent observed variation may be a result of anthropogenic forcing. If so, then the HadCM2 experiments indicate that the anthropogenic effect should reverse early next century, weakening the winter pressure gradient between Gibraltar and Iceland. Even combining this anthropogenic forcing and internal variability cannot explain all of the recent observed variations, indicating either some model deficiency or that some other external forcing is partly responsible.

Classification for sediment gravity-flow deposits based on flow conditions during sedimentation

Abstract: The classifications of sediment gravity flows in use by geologists are based on rheology and dominant clast-support mechanism of uniform and steady sediment flow. This paper discusses a classification based on the ultimate flow character of a sediment gravity flow, which is more likely to be reflected in the deposit. Three constitutive conditions prevail during sedimentation that define the flow character of a sediment gravity flow in its final stage: (I) the flow is either laminar or turbulent; (II) the flow behavior is either plastic (cohesive) or fluidal (cohesionless); (III) its concentration is either low or high. The resulting eight theoretical rheological models are each likely to be characterized by only one type of deposit. A comparison with Lowe9s (1979) classification, for example, shows that (low-density) turbidity current and cohesive debris flow correlate quite well (because the steady-flow state is not much different from their ultimate rheological state), but that liquefied flow, fluidized flow, grain flow, and modified grain flow all belong to the same rheological model—namely, laminar, high-concentration, cohesionless sediment flow. An analysis of grain-support mechanisms shows that these four types of gravity flows behave in virtually similar fashion during deposition, and all must be considered as fluidal flows.

Cholinesterase inhibitors for dementia with Lewy bodies, Parkinson's disease dementia and cognitive impairment in Parkinson's disease

Abstract: Background - Previous Cochrane reviews have considered the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in both Parkinson's disease with dementia (PDD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). The clinical features of DLB and PDD have much in common and are distinguished primarily on the basis of whether or not parkinsonism precedes dementia by more than a year. Patients with both conditions have particularly severe deficits in cortical levels of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine. Therefore, blocking its breakdown using cholinesterase inhibitors may lead to clinical improvement. Objectives - To assess the efficacy, safety and tolerability of cholinesterase inhibitors in dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease with dementia (PDD), and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease falling short of dementia (CIND-PD) (considered as separate phenomena and also grouped together as Lewy body disease). Search methods - The trials were identified from a search of ALOIS, the Specialised Register of the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group (on 30 August 2011) using the search terms Lewy, Parkinson, PDD, DLB, LBD. This register consists of records from major healthcare databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL) and many ongoing trial databases and is updated regularly. Reference lists of relevant studies were searched for additional trials. Selection criteria - Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials assessing the efficacy of treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors in DLB, PDD and cognitive impairment in Parkinson’s disease (CIND-PD). Data collection and analysis - Data were extracted from published reports by one review author (MR). The data for each 'condition' (that is DLB, PDD or CIND-PD) were considered separately and, where possible, also pooled together. Statistical analysis was conducted using Review Manager version 5.0. Main results - Six trials met the inclusion criteria for this review, in which a total of 1236 participants were randomised. Four of the trials were of a parallel group design and two cross-over trials were included. Four of the trials included participants with a diagnosis of Parkinson's disease with dementia (Aarsland 2002a; Dubois 2007; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005), of which Dubois 2007 remains unpublished. Leroi 2004 included patients with cognitive impairment and Parkinson's disease (both with and without dementia). Patients with dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) were included in only one of the trials (McKeith 2000). For global assessment, three trials comparing cholinesterase inhibitor treatment to placebo in PDD (Aarsland 2002a; Emre 2004; Ravina 2005) reported a difference in the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (ADCS-CGIC) score of -0.38, favouring the cholinesterase inhibitors (95% CI -0.56 to -0.24, P < 0.0001). For cognitive function, a pooled estimate of the effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on cognitive function measures was consistent with the presence of a therapeutic benefit (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.34, 95% CI -0.46 to -0.23, P < 0.00001). There was evidence of a positive effect of cholinesterase inhibitors on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) in patients with PDD (WMD 1.09, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.73, P = 0.0008) and in the single PDD and CIND-PD trial (WMD 1.05, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.68, P = 0.01) but not in the single DLB trial. For behavioural disturbance, analysis of the pooled continuous data relating to behavioural disturbance rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.04, P = 0.01). For activities of daily living, combined data for the ADCS and the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) activities of daily living rating scales favoured treatment with cholinesterase inhibitors (SMD -0.20, 95% CI -0.38 to -0.02, P = 0.03). For safety and tolerability, those taking a cholinesterase inhibitor were more likely to experience an adverse event (318/452 versus 668/842; odds ratio (OR) 1.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.15, P = 0.0003) and to drop out (128/465 versus 45/279; OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.84, P = 0.0006). Adverse events were more common amongst those taking rivastigmine (357/421 versus 173/240; OR 2.28, 95% CI 1.53 to 3.38, P < 0.0001) but not those taking donepezil (311/421 versus 145/212; OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.80, P = 0.25). Parkinsonian symptoms in particular tremor (64/739 versus 12/352; OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.44 to 5.09, P = 0.002), but not falls (P = 0.39), were reported more commonly in the treatment group but this did not have a significant impact on the UPDRS (total and motor) scores (P = 0.71). Fewer deaths occurred in the treatment group than in the placebo group (4/465 versus 9/279; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.84, P = 0.03). Authors' conclusions - The currently available evidence supports the use of cholinesterase inhibitors in patients with PDD, with a positive impact on global assessment, cognitive function, behavioural disturbance and activities of daily living rating scales. The effect in DLB remains unclear. There is no current disaggregated evidence to support their use in CIND-PD.