Objectives: The aim of this study was to study measurement properties of the DutchLanguage Version of the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS-DLV) in blue and white collarworkers employed at multiple companies and to compare the validity and factorstructure to other language versions.Methods: Workers (n = 1023) were assessed during a cross-sectional health surveillance.Construct validity was tested with exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses(EFA and CFA) and hypothesis testing. Reliability was tested with Cronbach 's alpha.Results: A two-factor structure of the BRS-DLV had good model fit in both EFAand CFA, which could be explained by difficulties of workers with reversed orderitems. After excluding these inconsistent answering patterns, a one-factor structureshowed good model fit resembling the original BRS (χ2 = 16.5; CFI & TLI = 0.99;SRMR = 0.02;RMSEA = 0.04). Internal consitency is sufficient (Cronbach 'sα = 0.78). All five hypotheses were confirmed, suggesting construct validity.Conclusions: Reliability of the BRS-DLV is sufficient and there is evidence of constructvalidity. Inconsistent answering, however, caused problems in interpretationand factor structure of the BRS-DLV. This can be easily detected and handled becauseitem 2, 4 and 6 are in reversed order. Other language versions differ in factorstructure, most likely because systematic errors are not corrected for. To collect validdata, it is advised to be aware of inconsistent answering of respondents.CC BY-NC
MULTIFILE
BACKGROUND: Regular inspection of the oral cavity is required for prevention, early diagnosis and risk reduction of oral- and general health-related problems. Assessments to inspect the oral cavity have been designed for non-dental healthcare professionals, like nurses. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the content and the measurement properties of oral health assessments for use by non-dental healthcare professionals in assessing older peoples' oral health, in order to provide recommendations for practice, policy, and research.METHODS: A systematic search in PubMed, EMBASE.com, and Cinahl (via Ebsco) has been performed. Search terms referring to 'oral health assessments', 'non-dental healthcare professionals' and 'older people (60+)' were used. Two reviewers individually performed title/abstract, and full-text screening for eligibility. The included studies have investigated at least one measurement property (validity/reliability) and were evaluated on their methodological quality using "The Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments" (COSMIN) checklist. The measurement properties were then scored using quality criteria (positive/negative/indeterminate).RESULTS: Out of 879 hits, 18 studies were included in this review. Five studies showed good methodological quality on at least one measurement property and 14 studies showed poor methodological quality on some of their measurement properties. None of the studies assessed all measurement properties of the COSMIN. In total eight oral health assessments were found: the Revised Oral Assessment Guide (ROAG); the Minimum Data Set (MDS), with oral health component; the Oral Health Assessment Tool (OHAT); The Holistic Reliable Oral Assessment Tool (THROAT); Dental Hygiene Registration (DHR); Mucosal Plaque Score (MPS); The Brief Oral Health Screening Examination (BOHSE) and the Oral Assessment Sheet (OAS). Most frequently assessed items were: lips, mucosa membrane, tongue, gums, teeth, denture, saliva, and oral hygiene.CONCLUSION: Taken into account the scarce evidence of the proposed assessments, the OHAT and ROAG are most complete in their included oral health items and are of best methodological quality in combination with positive quality criteria on their measurement properties. Non-dental healthcare professionals, policymakers and researchers should be aware of the methodological limitations of the available oral health assessments and realize that the quality of the measurement properties remains uncertain.
This investigation is undertaken based on the indicated improvements for fabric simulations, defined during the panel discussion “Driving the Uniformity of Material Measurements for Accurate Virtual Simulation” at the Product Innovation Apparel Conference (PI Apparel) in Berlin 2017, by experts from industry and academia. According to the expert panel, there is no coherency between methods used to measure the fabric properties and the simulated results of the same fabric among the different software packages. In praxis, fashion brands use different 3D software packages and need to measure a fabric with different methods to obtain the same fabric properties. In addition to the time investment, the simulated results for the same fabric vary significantly between the different software packages. The experts indicated the lack of standardization in material measurements, the lack of correlation between the data of the different measurement systems, and the lack of correlation between the simulated results of the different software packages for the same material. The contributions of the panel were followed up during the next edition of PI Apparel in the United States and resulted in the 3D Retail Coalition (RC) innovation committee to work on the indicated areas to improve the efficiency of material measurements. Moreover, this topic was further discussed during the PI Apparel Conference at Lago Maggiore in 2019 within the panel discussion "How Can We Collectively Achieve the Standardisation of Fabric Measurements for Digital Materials?"This paper investigates, on the one hand, the suitability of the current available measurement technologies for retrieving fabric parameters for precise virtual fabric and garment simulations. The focus is on the main properties required by the software packages—bending, shear, tensile and friction—aiming to identify and specify the most suitable methods to retrieve mechanical fabric properties and to start a standardization process for fabric measurements for virtual simulations.Seven fabric measurement methods and their output data are reviewed, namely the Kawabata Evaluation System (KES), the Fabric Assurance by Simple Testing (FAST), the Fabric Touch Tester (FTT), the CLO Fabric Kit 2.0, the Fabric Analyser by Browzwear (FAB), the Optitex Mark 10, and the cantilever principle. A set of fabrics with different mechanical behavior and physical drape has been tested with the FAB method. Other measurement methods have been discussed with expert users. In addition, fabrics have been tested with ZwickRoell’s (ZwickRoell) measuring systems applying various standard measurement methods, developed for similar materials. This publication will give for each property an overview of the different measurement methods, as well as recommendations based on their accuracy. Further, a SWOT analysis is provided. The outcome of this research can be used to pave the foundation for further work on the standardization of the fabric measurement.
LINK
The ENCHANT project aims to clarify the differences between circular Calcium Carbonate (CCC) and grounded Calcium Carbonate (GCC), in order to expand the applications of the circular alternative CCC in the paint and coating industry. CCC is produced by pyrolysis from paper waste in an innovative process developed by the company Alucha Works B.V., and it can be applied again as filler or binder in consumer products (e.g. plastics, rubbers, paints and coatings) in a cost-effective manner. Products containing CCC have a higher content of circular resources, which minimizes their carbon footprint, and reduces the exploitation of primary resources. Performances of CCC in oil-based paints, however, is not optimal, due to a larger oil adsorption as compared to GCC. A physical and chemical characterization of CCC and GCC samples, including competitive oil-water adsorption measurements, would help Alucha to formulate a solution to match the properties of CCC and GCC, either adjusting the recycling process or applying a surface modification treatment to CCC. This would enable Alucha to expand the market for CCC, making oil-based formulation products more circular.
Human kind has a major impact on the state of life on Earth, mainly caused by habitat destruction, fragmentation and pollution related to agricultural land use and industrialization. Biodiversity is dominated by insects (~50%). Insects are vital for ecosystems through ecosystem engineering and controlling properties, such as soil formation and nutrient cycling, pollination, and in food webs as prey or controlling predator or parasite. Reducing insect diversity reduces resilience of ecosystems and increases risks of non-performance in soil fertility, pollination and pest suppression. Insects are under threat. Worldwide 41 % of insect species are in decline, 33% species threatened with extinction, and a co-occurring insect biomass loss of 2.5% per year. In Germany, insect biomass in natural areas surrounded by agriculture was reduced by 76% in 27 years. Nature inclusive agriculture and agri-environmental schemes aim to mitigate these kinds of effects. Protection measures need success indicators. Insects are excellent for biodiversity assessments, even with small landscape adaptations. Measuring insect biodiversity however is not easy. We aim to use new automated recognition techniques by machine learning with neural networks, to produce algorithms for fast and insightful insect diversity indexes. Biodiversity can be measured by indicative species (groups). We use three groups: 1) Carabid beetles (are top predators); 2) Moths (relation with host plants); 3) Flying insects (multiple functions in ecosystems, e.g. parasitism). The project wants to design user-friendly farmer/citizen science biodiversity measurements with machine learning, and use these in comparative research in 3 real life cases as proof of concept: 1) effects of agriculture on insects in hedgerows, 2) effects of different commercial crop production systems on insects, 3) effects of flower richness in crops and grassland on insects, all measured with natural reference situations
In het PRIMa mond CARE project wordt onderzocht in hoeverre de mondgezondheid bijdraagt aan de voorspelling van kwetsbaarheid bij thuiswondende ouderen.Doel Het doel van het PRIMa mond CARE project is te onderzoeken in hoeverre mondgezondheid bijdraagt aan de voorspelling van kwetsbaarheid bij thuiswonende ouderen. Resultaten Voor het onderzoek zijn 1202 ouderen geïncludeerd, waarvan 45% mannen. De gemiddelde leeftijd van de participanten was 73 jaar. De eerste resultaten laten verbanden zien tussen kwetsbaarheid en onderstaande gezondheidsfactoren: • het bezoeken van de tandarts voor een spoedconsult; • het ervaren van ongemakken in de mond; • het aanpassen van de voeding als gevolg van ongemakken in de mond en • het dragen van een gebitsprothese. De volgende artikelen over dit onderzoek zijn inmiddels gepubliceerd: 'Probing problems and priorities in oral health among community dwelling elderly in the Netherlands' in het International Journal of Health Sciences and Research. In het International Journal of Health Services is het artikel 'Needs in Sevice Provision for Older People: An comparison Between Greater Manchester (United Kingdom) and Utrecht (the Netherlands)' gepubliceerd. Recentelijk verscheen ‘’Measurement properties of oral health assessments for non-dental professionals in older people: a systematic review’’ in het BMC Geriatrics. Looptijd 01 november 2016 - 01 juli 2020 Aanpak De huisarts brengt met een softwareprogramma genaamd ‘’U-PRIM’’ de groep potentieel kwetsbare ouderen in kaart. De mensen uit deze screening komen in fase twee: U-CARE. Zij ontvangen een vragenlijst: de Groningen Frailty Indicator. Met de uitkomsten van de vragenlijsten worden de domeinen van kwetsbaarheid gedefinieerd. Deze mensen krijgen huisbezoek van een praktijkverpleegkundige die een zorgplan op maat maakt. De verpleegkundige screent tijdens dit bezoek de oudere ook op mondgezondheidsproblemen, naast de algemene gezondheidscontrole. Daarnaast zijn de gegevens uit het tandartsenbestand gekoppeld aan de gegevens van de huisarts. Ook zijn twee vragen over mondgezondheid toegevoegd aan de Groningen Frailty Indicator. Aan de deelnemers van het onderzoek is toestemming gevraagd om de tandartsgegevens op te vragen bij de tandarts en deze te koppelen aan de huisartsgegevens. Daarnaast zijn alle gegevens anoniem verwerkt.
