University of Marburg

About: University of Marburg is a education organization based out in Marburg, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Virus. The organization has 23195 authors who have published 42907 publications receiving 1506069 citations. The organization is also known as: Philipps University of Marburg & Philipps-Universität.

Heat transfer and large scale dynamics in turbulent Rayleigh-Bénard convection

Abstract: The progress in our understanding of several aspects of turbulent Rayleigh-Benard convection is reviewed. The focus is on the question of how the Nusselt number and the Reynolds number depend on the Rayleigh number Ra and the Prandtl number Pr, and on how the thicknesses of the thermal and the kinetic boundary layers scale with Ra and Pr. Non-Oberbeck-Boussinesq effects and the dynamics of the large scale convection roll are addressed as well. The review ends with a list of challenges for future research on the turbulent Rayleigh-Benard system.

Analysis of shared heritability in common disorders of the brain

Abstract: Disorders of the brain can exhibit considerable epidemiological comorbidity and often share symptoms, provoking debate about their etiologic overlap. We quantified the genetic sharing of 25 brain disorders from genome-wide association studies of 265,218 patients and 784,643 control participants and assessed their relationship to 17 phenotypes from 1,191,588 individuals. Psychiatric disorders share common variant risk, whereas neurological disorders appear more distinct from one another and from the psychiatric disorders. We also identified significant sharing between disorders and a number of brain phenotypes, including cognitive measures. Further, we conducted simulations to explore how statistical power, diagnostic misclassification, and phenotypic heterogeneity affect genetic correlations. These results highlight the importance of common genetic variation as a risk factor for brain disorders and the value of heritability-based methods in understanding their etiology.

Chronic pain as a symptom or a disease: the IASP Classification of Chronic Pain for the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

Abstract: Chronic pain is a major source of suffering. It interferes with daily functioning and often is accompanied by distress. Yet, in the International Classification of Diseases, chronic pain diagnoses are not represented systematically. The lack of appropriate codes renders accurate epidemiological investigations difficult and impedes health policy decisions regarding chronic pain such as adequate financing of access to multimodal pain management. In cooperation with the WHO, an IASP Working Group has developed a classification system that is applicable in a wide range of contexts, including pain medicine, primary care, and low-resource environments. Chronic pain is defined as pain that persists or recurs for more than 3 months. In chronic pain syndromes, pain can be the sole or a leading complaint and requires special treatment and care. In conditions such as fibromyalgia or nonspecific low-back pain, chronic pain may be conceived as a disease in its own right; in our proposal, we call this subgroup "chronic primary pain." In 6 other subgroups, pain is secondary to an underlying disease: chronic cancer-related pain, chronic neuropathic pain, chronic secondary visceral pain, chronic posttraumatic and postsurgical pain, chronic secondary headache and orofacial pain, and chronic secondary musculoskeletal pain. These conditions are summarized as "chronic secondary pain" where pain may at least initially be conceived as a symptom. Implementation of these codes in the upcoming 11th edition of International Classification of Diseases will lead to improved classification and diagnostic coding, thereby advancing the recognition of chronic pain as a health condition in its own right.

Sniffing neuropeptides: a transnasal approach to the human brain

Abstract: Neuropeptides act as neuronal messengers in the brain, influencing many neurobehavioral functions1. Their experimental and therapeutic use in humans has been hampered because, when administered systemically, these compounds do not readily pass the blood–brain barrier, and they evoke potent hormone-like side effects when circulating in the blood2,3. We administered three peptides, melanocortin(4–10) (MSH/ACTH(4–10)), vasopressin and insulin, intranasally and found that they achieved direct access to the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) within 30 minutes, bypassing the bloodstream.