Displaying all 5 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Grøvslien A, Torng HH, Moro GE, Simpson J, Barnett D
    J Hum Lact, 2013 Aug;29(3):310-2.
    PMID: 23855030 DOI: 10.1177/0890334413487509
  2. Tagg T, McAdam CJ, Robinson BH, Simpson J
    Acta Crystallogr E Crystallogr Commun, 2015 Jul 1;71(Pt 7):816-20.
    PMID: 26279875 DOI: 10.1107/S2056989015011494
    The title compound, C16H10, crystallizes with four unique mol-ecules, designated 1-4, in the asymmetric unit of the monoclinic unit cell. None of the mol-ecules is planar, with the benzene rings of mol-ecules 1-4 inclined to one another at angles of 42.41 (4), 24.07 (6), 42.59 (4) and 46.88 (4)°, respectively. In the crystal, weak C-H⋯π(ring) interactions, augmented by even weaker C C-H⋯π(alkyne) contacts, generate a three-dimensional network structure with inter-linked columns of mol-ecules formed along the c-axis direction.
  3. Azlan HA, Overton PG, Simpson J, Powell PA
    J Behav Med, 2020 06;43(3):377-390.
    PMID: 31865486 DOI: 10.1007/s10865-019-00130-4
    Disgust-driven stigma may be motivated by an assumption that a stigmatized target presents a disease threat, even in the absence of objective proof. Accordingly, even non-contagious diseases, such as cancer, can become stigmatized by eliciting disgust. This study had two parts: a survey (n = 272), assessing the association between disgust traits and cancer stigma; and an experiment, in which participants were exposed to a cancer surgery (n = 73) or neutral video (n = 68), in order to test a causal mechanism for the abovementioned association. Having a higher proneness to disgust was associated with an increased tendency to stigmatize people with cancer. Further, a significant causal pathway was observed between disgust propensity and awkwardness- and avoidance-based cancer stigma via elevated disgust following cancer surgery exposure. In contrast, those exposed to cancer surgery not experiencing elevated disgust reported less stigma than controls. Exposure-based interventions, which do not elicit disgust, may be profitable in reducing cancer stigma.
  4. Macann A, Fauzi F, Simpson J, Sasso G, Krawitz H, Fraser-Browne C, et al.
    Oral Oncol, 2017 12;75:75-80.
    PMID: 29224827 DOI: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2017.10.021
    PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S): To model in a subset of patients from TROG 07.03 managed at a single site the association between domiciliary based humidification use and mucositis symptom burden during radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (HNC) when factoring in volumetric radiotherapy parameters derived from tumour and normal tissue regions of interest.

    MATERIALS/METHODS: From June 2008 through June 2011, 210 patients with HNC receiving RT were randomised to either a control arm or humidification using the Fisher & Paykel Healthcare MR880 humidifier. This subset analysis involves patients recruited from Auckland City Hospital treated with a prescribed dose of ≥70 Gy. Regression models included control variables for Planning Target Volume 70 GY (PTV70Gy); Equivalent Uniform Dose (EUD) MOIST and TSV (surrogates of total mucosal and total swallowing volumes respectively).

    RESULTS: The analysis included 39 patients (humidification 20, control 19). There was a significant odds reduction in CTCAE v3.0 functional mucositis score of 0.29 associated with the use of humidification (p

  5. Gopalakrishna G, Langendam M, Scholten R, Bossuyt P, Leeflang M, Noel-Storr A, et al.
    Diagn Progn Res, 2017;1:11.
    PMID: 31095132 DOI: 10.1186/s41512-017-0011-4
    [This corrects the article DOI: 10.1186/s41512-016-0001-y.].
Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator ([email protected])

External Links