The aim of this study is to understand the diagnostic utility of comparative genomic hybridization CGH -based microarrays for pregnancies with abnormal ultrasound findings.
We performed a retrospective analysis of pregnancies with abnormal ultrasounds and normal karyotypes when performed tested in our laboratory using CGH microarrays targeted to known chromosomal syndromes with later versions providing backbone coverage of the entire genome.
Abnormalities were stratified according to organ system involvement. Detection rates for clinically significant findings among these categories were calculated. Microarray analysis identified clinically significant genomic alterations in 6. Larger data sets such as this allow for sub-stratification by specific anomalies to determine risks for genomic alterations detectable by microarray analysis. Invasive prenatal testing is used mainly to identify chromosome abnormalities in the fetus.
The chance of finding a cytogenetic aberration depends on many factors, including family history of a chromosome abnormality, the age of the mother, and whether fetal anomalies are identified by ultrasound. In the case of fetal ultrasound anomalies, the specific structural finding or the involvement of more than one system appears to influence the chance of identifying an abnormal fetal karyotype.
Several studies have attempted to stratify the risk of a chromosome abnormality based on the specific fetal anomalies identified.
These findings prompted us to contemplate the number of submicroscopic genomic alterations present in fetuses with structural anomalies that are not identified by traditional karyotyping. The recent utilization of microarray analysis in prenatal testing allows for estimates of the frequency of identifying clinically significant copy number alterations CNAs by microarray analysis that are not detected by routine fetal karyotyping.
Module 6: Radiation Detection and Measurements
There have been many publications on the use of microarrays to identify clinically significant CNAs in a variety of prenatal samples, 7 — 16 and several studies have focused specifically on the use of microarray analysis in prenatal diagnosis of fetuses with abnormal ultrasound findings. Of further interest in prenatal diagnosis are the detection rates of submicroscopic genomic alterations for specific fetal anomalies. In most of these microarray studies, the number of cases investigated was too small to allow for meaningful stratification of the data to identify the risk of finding an abnormality by microarray with particular structural defects in the fetus.
One exception is the publication by Lee and coauthors 16 in which clinically significant CNAs were identified in Further stratification of their data found detection rates after microarray analysis in fetuses with specific anomalies. In our studies, we have shown that 5. All data used in the analyses presented here were gathered or generated during the process of clinically approved microarray-based comparative genomic hybridization testing for routine patient care.
Excluding samples that failed to generate results, a total of samples were tested for a variety of indications, including samples for abnormal ultrasound findings, which includes soft markers. Because of the increased likelihood of identifying CNAs, all cases with known abnormal fetal karyotypes at the time of microarray testing, with a family history of a chromosome rearrangement in a parent, and of fetal demise were excluded from the cases.
Pregnancies therapeutically terminated because of ultrasound anomalies were not considered to be fetal demises and are included in this cohort. Microarray analysis was performed as previously described. Each case was reviewed by author JAR and categorized according to the ultrasound abnormalities identified on the laboratory requisition form and ultrasound reports when provided and whether the test result was reported as normal, unclear, or clinically significant abnormal.
Cases with unclear results were further reviewed by authors LGS and JAR and in some cases, reassigned to the normal or abnormal groups as appropriate based on new knowledge gained from the medical literature and from our own experience since the initial reporting of the case. Ultrasound anomalies were categorized in several ways including multiple structural anomalies, structural anomalies limited to a single organ system, isolated abnormalities of growth, isolated abnormal amniotic fluid volume, single soft marker, multiple soft markers, or multiple nonstructural anomalies.
Soft markers included choroid plexus cysts, echogenic foci in the heart or bowel, isolated short long bones, absent nasal bone, single umbilical artery, persistent right umbilical vein, sandal gap between the first and second toes, and fifth finger clinodactyly.
Increased nuchal translucency NTincreased nuchal fold, and cystic hygroma were categorized as structural anomalies in an abnormal body fluid category, which also included pericardial and pleural effusions, edema, ascites, and hydrops.
If it was not clear as to which category a case should be classified, it was further reviewed by author AJF and classified accordingly. Abnormal results were further stratified based on the size of the alteration by author JAR. Rates of significant CNAs among cases with nonstructural anomalies or soft ultrasound markers. A total of prenatal cases with documented fetal anomalies were received by our laboratory for prenatal testing using microarray analysis.
The average mean maternal age at time of testing was This supplement explains the application of the formulas in the original background document to calculate an action leakage rate called rapid and extremely large leak in the proposalpresents the results of action leakage rate calculations for facilities meeting the minimum design specifications in the final rule, and provides results from a more sophisticated 3-dimensional model.
The action leakage rates, based on the minimum specifications in the final rule and a safety factor of two, are gallons per acre per day gpad for landfills and waste piles, and 1, gpad for surface impoundments. The output from the 3-D model helps to visualize the shape of the flow for various design specifications and shows the relative impact of a number of factors on flow capacity. This supplemental background document also presents additional data on flow rates actually achieved at a number of double-lined facilities.
These numbers support the proposed and final rules by showing that facilities with good construction quality assurance CQA perform significantly better than those without. Finally, this supplemental document also references a number of technical guidances the Agency has issued since the three proposals1 that contain useful information relative to all of the design, performance, monitoring, and response action standards in the final rule.
A lot of information has been generated since the and proposals that further support this rulemaking. In particular, data on actual flow rates at double-lined landfills and surface impoundments and on top liner performance has been collected and evaluated, flow models have been applied to calculate action leakage rates, and a number of technical guidances have been- published.
This document discusses each of these. Since the proposal, EPA has gathered information from a number of facilities, including some data submitted by commenters.Read or download keys to the flora of arkansas by edwin
This data is summarized here. One commenter claimed to achieve, after removal of construction water, a leakage rate of gpad at six landfills and 0, 0, 18, and 75 gpad at four non-regulated surface impoundments. Commenters made a number of claims regarding other sources of liquids in leak detection systems: consolidation water from clay in composite top liners can be gpad; construction water can be gpad; vapor transmission through a top liner geomembrane can be 4 gpad; and ground water through a geomembrane in the bottom liner can be 20 gpad.
The findings from Bonaparte and Gross are presented in Section 2. The units are located in different climatic regions across the United States; however, most of the units are located in relatively moist climatic regions with average annual rainfalls ranging from 35 to 43 in to 1, mm.
For each unit, they presented information on the design and operation of the unit, as well as the rate of flow from the LDCRS. Then they evaluated the probable sources of the flow from each unit. Landfills with Geomembrane Top Liners In their paper, Bonaparte and Gross evaluated flow rate data from 23 landfill cells that were constructed with geomembrane top liners instead of composite top liners.
A geomembrane top liner represents the minimum technology requirement for top liners at hazardous waste management units regulated under 40 CFR Parts and The authors determined that for 16 of the 23 landfills cells, there could be no consolidation water, and, based on design and operating considerations, construction water and infiltratin water were unlikely sources of LDCRS flow. Eleven of the 16 landfill cells had been constructed using construction quality assurance CQA procedures in substantial conformance with EPA  guidance.
Table 1 presents a summary of the data for the 16 landfill cells constructed with geomembrane top liners. Comparison of average LDCR8 flow rates at 16 landfill cell with geomembrane top liners from Bonaparte and Gross . The data in Table 1 show that a base leakage rate of 20 gpad Iphdwhich is the top of the range for the base action leakage rate in the proposal, is too low i.
Table 1 also provides evidence of the benefit of a rigorous CQA program. In summary, the LDCRS flow rates from waste management units with rigourous CQA programs are significantly lower than the flow rates from units without rigorous programs. Based on these data, it appears that flow rates from LDCRSs of landfills that are properly constructed using rigorous CQA programs should be well less than gpad 1, Iphd.
Surface Impoundments with Geomembrane Top Liners Conclusions similar to those given above for landfills can also be drawn for surface impoundments. Bonaparte and Gross  presented data on LDCRS flow rates from eight double-lined surface impoundments having geomembrane top liners. The authors determined that for six of these surface impoundments, top liner leakage was the likely source of any LDCRS flow. The authors reported that four of the six surface impoundments exhibited no LDCRS flow in the time period between the start of operation and the time the flow data was collected.
It only takes a minute to sign up. In the R caret documentation for confusionMatrix :. Many people elsewhere think detection rate is the same as sensitivity. Why is such confusion so common?
One possible implication for this measure in policy and evaluation is for cost-effectiveness. Suppose, for instance, we intend to implement targeted screening for a disease in a population of healthcare subscribers receiving routine care. The current standard of care is to wait for the patient to present with symptoms of disease in clinic; however, treatment at this point tends to have a low success rate, many complications, and high cost.
The rationale for screening is to deliver more timely, less invasive, and more successful treatment at a comparable cost. If a patient is identified as a true positive, not only must they undergo treatment, but their longer survival requires them to be on treatment for a longer duration, and individuals who would have died from other disease before becoming symptomatic undergo treatment unnecessarily for the disease.
The cost of the screening program must incorporate the costs of treating those identified with the disease. It is a parameter that will vary according to the dataset.
If you get a high overall performance on a moderate detection rate, it would make me wonder how the performance would vary on a smaller dataset with more positives.Lichtenberg wiring diagram
Sign up to join this community. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top. Home Questions Tags Users Unanswered. What is the usefulness of detection rate in a confusion matrix? Ask Question. Asked 2 years, 7 months ago. Active 1 year, 10 months ago. Viewed 3k times. What is its usefulness? I'm a bit confused! Orion Orion 2 2 silver badges 13 13 bronze badges. I would never use such terminology in reporting the validation of a diagnostic test. Merely, "probability test positive" or some other contextually appropriate description more than suffices.
Active Oldest Votes. AdamO AdamO The problem is, the cost of this screening program will be determined by the total number of patients selected by the screen for further treatment, which includes both true positives and false positives. Without another test, TPs and FPs are totally indistinguishable in practice. If we want to know how cost effective the test is, the positive predictive value appropriately measures how often the test is right for positive cases.
I would add that in order to be identified as a true positive vs false positive a secondary test that is more specific than the first test and less costly than the full treatment, perhaps would have to be administered. In breast cancer for instance, a screening mammogram can identify abnormal masses, but the biopsy confirms it is cancer.
The cost of the biopsy among TPs and FPs may be negligible. The surgical resection, years of chemotherapy, and surveillance that takes places among the TPs incurs the most cost. There are four aspects to evaluating a screening program: the sensitivity and cost of the screen, the cost of the confirmation, the cost of treatment in the screen detected persons, the reduced cost of treatment in symptomatic persons hopefully fewer go on to develop symptoms and thus be identified as diseased as a result of screening if lessons from cancer screening studies are to teach us anything.
In effect, though, this artificially sets the FPR of the original test to 0. Without that perfect secondary test, some healthy people will be treated at exactly the same cost as treating someone with cancer.By Amber Pariona on September 28 in Society.Walmart annual report
Cancer has a major adverse impact on lives and societies across the globe. This fact is particularly true in the United States which has one of the highest rates of cancer in the world. Not only is cancer tragic for the patients and their families, but it is also detrimental to the healthcare system.
The cancer rate in the US is approximately cases perpeople. This article provides an outline of the states with the highest cancer rates. Why is cancer so common in the US? Health professionals believe that some cancers cases are caused by unhealthy lifestyle choices. Residents in this country are more likely to be obese, consume large amounts of alcohol, and have sedentary lifestyles than in other parts of the world.
This, however, does not mean that the country is doomed to suffer from high cancer rates. Lifestyle is a choice, and the risk of developing cancer can be decreased by becoming physically active, losing weight, and eating healthy.
Cancer rates in the US are highest in the eastern side of the country. Kentucky has the highest incidence with people out ofdeveloping the disease every year. One of the poorest states in the nation, it has not sufficiently invested in cancer prevention and detection; therefore, the state also has the highest rate of deaths from cancer.
Kentucky was founded on the tobacco industry, a legacy that remains today as nearly a quarter of the population smokes cigarettes. This smoking habit explains why lung cancer is higher here than any other state in the nation. The second highest cancer rate is found in Delaware where After being named as one of the states with the highest rates of cancer, Delaware increased its screening and prevention programs which has helped to improve survival and diagnoses rates.
Common cancers here are colorectal and prostate. Both can be prevented through early detection. Number 3 on the list is Pennsylvania. In this state, the incidence of cancer is Cancer is one of the most common chronic diseases here and the second leading cause of death after heart disease.
The most commonly diagnosed type of cancer is prostate followed by lung, breast, and colorectal. Lifestyle behaviors are again to blame, residents here report high tobacco use and unhealthy diets. The other states with the highest cancer rates include New YorkNew Jersey The most common types of cancer throughout the country include breast, lung, prostate, colon, bladder, and skin.
Additionally, rates of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, thyroid, kidney, leukemia, endometrial, and pancreatic cancers are expected to rise in Many of these are treatable with early detection.
Cancer treatment options in the US include surgery, radiation therapy, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, hormone therapy, stem cell transplant, and precision medicine. The treatment module chosen depends on the kind of cancer and its level of advance. Scientists are currently working on immunotherapy, a treatment that will retrain immune systems to fight cancer cells. It involves removing white blood cells and genetically modifying them with a new targeting method. So far this has only been used with leukemia patients and has yet to be fully developed.
All rights reserved.Mentioned in?
References in periodicals archive? Over the same period, the detection rate fell from Drugs crime rises in the north-east; Figures show drop in detection rates. From the first to the second screening round, the detection rate for proximal colon cancer declined 0. Association between grades of Hydronephrosis and detection of urinary stones by ultrasound imaging.Geological modeling workflow
A methylene blue dye pill illuminates hard-to-see polyps. PESHAWAR -- Detection rate of TB patients has been showing improvement in the province owing to enhanced awareness campaign aimed at doing away with social taboos associated with the ailment. Removal of misconceptions improves TB detection rate. It has been shown that serrated polyp detection rate is dependent on the endoscopist, experience of the pathologist, and colonoscopy withdrawal times [13, 16, 17]. Adenoma detection rate ADR is inversely associated with the risk of postcolonoscopy colorectal cancer.
Can colorectal cancer screening at 45 save lives? According to our study, the detection rate can be viewed as the rate of the transitions from a compromised state to a responsive state. Medical browser? Full browser?Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook. Toward the end of the article, it gives the alternative name "spouseware" which is maybe slightly more descriptive.
As best I can tell, these are legally-sold applications - presumably they don't use any exploits, and require granted access to the system - but once they are installed they use malware tactics to hide themselves from the user. Stuff like using the process names of Windows executables. Every move you make, and every vow you break Every smile you fake, every claim you stake, I'll be watching you. There may be more comments in this discussion.
From a report: The study, published earlier this week, took place in two phases, with the first in Novemberand the second in May Researchers looked at how 10 Android mobile antivirus apps and 10 Windows antivirus products detected some of today's most prevalent stalkerware strains. The study discovered that many antivirus companies have improved their detection rates between the November scan and May This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted. More Login. Score: 3. My first thought was, what the hell is stalkerware? Share twitter facebook linkedin. Prior art Score: 4. Every move you make, and every vow you break Every smile you fake, every claim you stake, I'll be watching you --The Police Outsourced!
Related Links Top of the: dayweekmonth. Slashdot Top Deals.Did you just find a download or a file on your computer that is digitally signed by Blue Century Software Co. The detection rate for the Blue Century Software Co. Please read on for more details. You will probably notice Blue Century Software Co. The publisher name shows up as the "Verified publisher" in the UAC dialog as the screencap shows:. As you can see in the screenshot above, Windows states that "This digital signature is OK".
This means that the file has been published by Blue Century Software Co. If you click the View Certificate button shown in the screenshot above, you can see all the details of the certificate, such as when it was issued, who issued the certificate, how long it is valid, etc.
You can also examine the address for Blue Century Software Co.
You can also see the details of the issuer by clicking the View Certificate button shown in the screenshot above. The following are the Blue Century Software Co. Here's the detection names for the Blue Century Software Co.
I have grouped the detection names by each scanner engine. Thanks to VirusTotal for the scan results.Samsung home theater not turning on
The detection percentage is based on the fact that I have gathered 67 scan reports for the Blue Century Software Co. If you like, you can review the full details of the scan reports by examining the files listed above.
Comments No comments posted yet. Leave a reply Your nickname required : Just to make sure you are human and not a spam bot, please answer the following question: How many eyes does a cat have?
- Reply to hope you are doing good
- Facility maintenance schedule excel template
- Class not registered looking for object with clsid c62a69f0
- Smart car key symbol dash display
- Model paint conversion app
- Vikings season 6 download
- Food and beverage services r singaravelavan pdf free download
- How to fix fortnite not launching
- Cpt code for ankle posterior tibial tendon repair
- Free robux codes 2019
- Quizizz smasher unblocked
- Lakh data peer ji video status download
- Togel terkaya
- Mission impossible rogue nation full movie in hindi download hd
- Briggs and stratton spark plug cross reference
- 5 esclusioni
- Grafana thresholds string
- Small basic code for games
- Forget so me d3 s3 download
- Sketchup 2018 plugins pack free download
- Jonsered 2166 msrp
- Hitta sex i ljung
- 1977 quarter no mm value