Table 3. Appendix Information
Table 3. .2: Worked out example of calculating the monitoring quality score of a population for population trend Attribute Country Importance Quality (qij) Weight (wij) wij × qij T MA 2 1 30.0 30.0 T MR 3 2 75.0 150.0 T SN 1 2 2.5 5.0 T GW 1 3 2.5 7.5 T GN 1 3 2.5 7.5 T SL 1 3 2.5 7.5 Sums: 115.0 207.5 Weighted mean rounded to the nearest integer: 2.0
Table 3. Intervention studies on the effect of statins on FMD in patients with DM2 without CVD Author N Design Dmax method Inflation mmHg Cuff Statin dose mg LDL† % F-up weeks D mm FMDbl % FMDf-up % p NMDbl % NMDf-up % Sheu21 21 non-rand NA 200 NA simva 10 36 24 4.71 6.1 7.7 NS 14.5 13.3 Sheu32 6 non-rand NA 200 NA simva 20-40 >2.1 mmol/L 12 NA 4.4 8.2 0.173† NA NA 6 <2.1 mmol/L 12 NA 5.6 13.6 <0.028† NA NA Tsunekawa33 14 RCT open at 60 s. 250 forearm ceriva 0.15 2 0.5 NA 4.0* 8.5* <0.05 7.0* 7.4* 8 21 14 NA 4.0* 8.5* <0.05 6.5* 7.5* Venrooij28 46 RCT db per 15 s. 20>BPsys forearm atorva 10 46 30 4.89 3.41 3.20 >0.8 6.80 6.87 43 atorva 80 51 30 4.77 3.18 3.10 >0.8 6.01 6.59 Ceriello16 30 cross-over 45-90 s. 300 forearm simva 40 3 0.5 NA 4.8 7.3 <0.001 NA NA RCT db b-t-b 30 28 14 NA 4.9 9.2 <0.05 NA NA Economides31 19 RCT db NA 50>BPsys forearm atorva20 41 14 3.7 4.2 5.6 0.07† 12.5 11.9 present study 103 RCT db 30-120 s. b-t-b 50>BPsys forearm ceriva 0.4 / simva 20 25 104 4.67 1.66 2.10 0.37 10.98 10.27 N = number of patients in the statin treated group; NA = data not available non-rand = non-randomized trial; RCT = randomized controlled trial; db = double blind; b-t-b = beat-to-beat analysis BPsys = systolic blood pressure; LDL† % = percentage decrease in LDL cholesterol; F-up = Follow-up D = lumendiameter; FMDbl = FMD at baseline; FMDf-up = FMD at follow-up; NMDbl = NMD at baseline; NMDf-up = NMD at follow-up p = p-value for comparison of changes in FMD between statin and placebo; † p-value for comparison of FMD at follow-up with FMD at baseline * = estimated from figure reduction on the one hand and no difference in FMD on the other, imply that statin-induced risk reduction in DM2 is either not mediated through restoration of endothelial dependent dilation or that FMD is not a proper test to detect changes in endothelial dysfunction in DM2 patients. The latter possibility is less likely, because forearm blood flow measured by venous occlusion plethysmography, another parameter for endothelial function, also showed no improvement after statin therapy in diabetic patients39;40. Other interventions in patients with recent-onset DM2 have resulted in an improvement in FMD41, indicating that FMD is not simply irreversibly impaired in DM2. Moreover, diabetes duration, carotid IMT and ves- sel diameter together only explain 11% of the variance in FMD, indicating that irreversible diabetic vessel wall changes may not have an important impact on FMD in this population. The...
Table 3. Materials Design Pillar Timelines of Activities, Milestones, Metrics, and Anticipated Outcomes Goal 1.1: Selec Objectiv Objectiv Objective 1.1a tion of optimal hard e 1.1a: Design and e 1.1b: Characterize CCBSE RESmaterials as porou optimize nanoclay the scaffolds and EARCH GOALS: Materials Design Pillar s bone-mimetic scaffolds scaffolds demonstrate cancer cell growth Specific milestones Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Responsible parties Activity 1: Prepare nanoclay scaffolds with amino acids for cancer cell growth Activity 2: Assist non-RU campuses involved in Activity 1 with compliance protocols Prepare scaffolds based on prior studies Assist with the initiation of conversations between non-RU faculty and RU campuses for the administration of necessary compliance protocols (IBC, MTAs) [Approved by NSF on 7/28/21] Optimize amino acid structure based on modeling, the loading amount, prepare two additional scaffolds, provide scaffolds to nanomaterials sub-group and Cellular Systems Pillar Ensure that all necessary compliance protocols are in place at the non- RU campuses [Approved by NSF on 7/28/21] Provide feedback to the Computational Approaches Pillar, optimize scaffold materials, provide the scaffolds for nanomaterials testing Ensure that all necessary compliance protocols are in place at the non- RU campuses [Approved by NSF on 7/28/21] Continue to prepare the optimized scaffold, provide them to Cellular Systems Pillar Ensure that all necessary compliance protocols are in place at the non-RU campuses [Approved by NSF on 7/28/21] Continue to prepare the optimized scaffold Ensure that all necessary compliance protocols are in place at the non-RU campuses [Approved by NSF on 7/28/21] Lead: X. Xxxxx, Co-lead: X. Xx, X. Xxx, (Computational Approaches Pillar liaison), New Hire at NDSU [Approved by NSF 9/8/21] Leads: X. Xxxxx, X. Xxxxx, X. Xxxxxx, X. Xxxx Objective 1.1b Specific milestones Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Responsible parties Activity 1: Mechanical Continue with Optimize scaffold Continue to prepare Continue to prepare Lead: X. Xxxxx Characterize characterization, characterization, and cancer cell the optimized the optimized Co-lead: G. the scaffolds biocompatibility optimize cell growth conditions, scaffolds with scaffolds with cancer Xx, X. Xxx and culture of testing, spheroid growth, nanomechanics cancer cells and cells and patient- (Computational breast and nanomechanics, nanomechanics patient-derived derived samples Approaches pros...
Table 3. All dimensions side to side SERVQUAL e-SERVQUAL Mobile quality Virtual Assistants Chatbot Reliability Assurance Tangibles Empathy Responsiveness (RATER) Reliability Security/Privacy Efficiency Responsiveness Outcome quality Interaction quality (=assurance+ empathy) Environment quality Visual look Personality traits Reliability (=Functionality + Trustworthiness) Safety/intrusion Efficiency Graphical appearance Humanity Empathy Responsiveness Fulfilment Compensation Contact Form of implementation Speech synthesis unit Knowledge base Presentation of knowledge and additional functionalities Conversational abilities Language skills and context sensitiveness Personalisation options Emergency responses in unexpected situations The categorization of the chatbot attributes and the corresponding dimensions can be found in table 4. The chatbot quality dimensions listed up in table 3 were used for this. Table 4: Dimensions and attributes DIMENSIONS ITEM QUALITY ATTRIBUTE FUNCTIONALITY 1 Interpret commands accurately 2 Flexible in interpreting knowledge 3 Able to maintain a discussion 4 Activation 5 Number of services available in the chatbot TRUSTWORTHINESS 6 Trustworthiness 7 Possibility of Rating the Chatbot 8 Contains breadth of knowledge 9 Robustness to unexpected input 10 Transparency SAFETY/INTRUSION 11 Protect and respect privacy 12 Safe from intrusion EFFICIENCY 13 Ease of use 14 Quick replies vs free text 15 Available at all times 16 Accessibility 17 Clarity of purpose 18 Ease of communication GRAPHICAL APPEARANCE 19 User-interface 20 Use of emojis and pictures/gifs HUMANITY 21 Realness of the chatbot 22 Create an enjoyable interaction 23 Convey personality 24 Read and respond to moods EMPATHY 25 Personalization options RESPONSIVENESS 26 Productivity Up until now, the attributes have only been shown without further explanation. In the next section, sufficient effort is taken to explain each of the 26 attributes in the same context as was used in the work of the original founders of each attribute.
Table 3. Applicable Preconstruction Survey and Notification Requirements based on Land Cover Types and Habitat Elements Identified in Table 2a. Species Preconstruction Survey and Notification Requirements None San Xxxxxxx kit xxx (p. 6-38) Map all dens (>5 in. diameter) and determine status. Determine if breeding or xxxxxxx foxes are in the project area. Provide written preconstruction survey results to USFWS and CDFW within 5 working days after surveying. Western burrowing owl (p. 6-40) Giant garter snake (p. 6- 44) California tiger salamander (p. 6-46) (notification only) California red-legged frog (p. 6-47) (notification only) Covered shrimp species (p. 6-47) Xxxxxxxx’x big-eared bat (p. 6-37) Swainson’s hawk (p. 6- 42) Map all xxxxxxx and determine status. Document use of habitat (e.g. breeding, foraging) in/near disturbance area (within 500 ft.) Delineate aquatic habitat up to 200 ft. from water’s edge. Document any sightings of garter snake. Provide written notification to USFWS and CDFW regarding timing of construction and likelihood of occurrence in the project area. Provide written notification to USFWS and CDFW regarding timing of construction and likelihood of occurrence in the project area. Document and evaluate use of all habitat features (e.g., vernal pools, rock outcrops). Document occurrences of covered shrimp. Determine if site is occupied or shows signs of recent occupation (guano). Determine whether nests are occupied. Golden eagle (p. 6-39) Determine whether nests are occupied. Note: Page numbers refer to the HCP/NCCP. Preconstruction Surveys as Required for Selected Covered Wildlife in Table 3 Describe the preconstruction survey’s or notification conditions applicable to any species checked in Table 3. All preconstruction surveys shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 6.4.3, Species-Level Measures, and Table 6-1 of the HCP/NCCP. San Xxxxxxx Kit Fox Prior to any ground disturbance related to covered activities, a USFWS/CDFW–approved biologist will conduct a preconstruction survey in areas identified in the planning survey as supporting suitable breeding or xxxxxxx habitat for San Xxxxxxx kit fox. The survey will establish the presence or absence of San Xxxxxxx kit foxes and/or suitable dens and evaluate use by kit foxes in accordance with USFWS survey guidelines (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1999). Preconstruction survey will be conducted within 30 days of ground disturbance. On the parcel where the activit...
Table 3. 1.1 – Royalty Payments Aggregate Annual Net Sales of all OpenBiome Royalty Products in the LMIC Territory Royalty Rate [***] [***] [***] [***] [***] [***] [***] [***] [***] [***]
Table 3. 14: Additional types of support from Venture Capital or Private Equity fund, percentage of GIF beneficiaries Appointment of a non-executive director 64% Financial advice 42% General business planning 54% Specialist business advice 37% Use of a mentor 25% Access to a network 50% Other 21% Source: EIM and CSES, 2011. Multiple answers possible Beneficiaries who received several forms of support were asked to name the type of support they appreciated most. Foremost among these was getting access to a specific network, followed by support on general business planning, and the appointment of a non-executive business director. Growth of the beneficiaries During the past three years a majority of beneficiaries achieved growth. 48% percent of GIF beneficiaries can be labelled as high growth SMEs; and 28% of the SMEG beneficiaries. Among eco-innovative SMEG beneficiaries there are less high growth enterprises (25%). For the GIF, these percentages are not surprising since these SMEs are selected on the basis of high growth potential, percentages might even get higher during better economic times. See table 3.15. 38% of GIF beneficiaries state that they are in the seed or start up stage; in these cases the capital provided by the GIF facility can be regarded as early stage venture capital. Among eco-innovative GIF beneficiaries there are more high growth enterprises (54%).
Table 3. 19: Share of the investment that would have been made without the financial support, percentage of beneficiaries GIF SMEG Up to 25% 28% 17% 26% to 50% 29% 24% 51% to 100% 41% 47% Do not know / no answer 0% 12% Source: EIM and CSES, 2011 The results from the survey indicate that positive changes have been brought about by the EIP financial instruments, including a good indication that beneficiaries have grown, despite economic conditions. Turnover levels in the year beneficiaries received financial support are presented in table 3.20.
Table 3. 20: Size of the turnover in the year financing was received (euro), percentage of beneficiaries GIF SMEG Less then 100.000 45% 40% 100.000-500.000 9% 25% 500.000-2 million 11% 13% 2 million- 10 million 17% 6% 10 million- 50 million 8% 1% 50 million or more 2% 0% Do not know / no answer / refusal 8% 15% Source: EIM and CSES, 2011 When asked after the levels of growth in annual turnover that can be attributed to the financial support, the GIF beneficiaries especially are very positive. Further additional growth is also expected for 2011. For the SMEG uncertainty is higher, but the difference can mostly be explained by the higher capital intensity and longer investment period, for the GIF recipients, making growth more likely. See table 3.2.
