Evidence of CF2 Loss from Fluorine-Rich Cluster Anions Generated from Laser Ablation of Graphite Fluoride.

A mass spectrometric analysis of the anionic and cationic species generated by laser ablation of graphite fluoride (GF) and graphite targets performed under identical sets of conditions is presented. Under conditions that produce typical C n- cluster mass distributions from ablation of graphite, the mass spectra of anionic species generated by ablation of GF are congested with overlapping stoichiometric patterns such as C nF2 n and C nF(2 n-2). Some of the molecular formulas for these clusters, such as C6F6, C6F12, and C7F8, are evocative of stable neutral fluorocarbons. Additionally, the GF-ablation generated mass peaks broaden at higher masses more than the graphite-based counterparts, which may indicate cluster fragmentation. Furthermore, a pattern of fragmentation via loss of CF2 is observed and is reminiscent of previous studies which determined CF2 loss during thermal decomposition. No species were seen in the mass spectra of the cationic species generated from laser ablation of GF, while, under the same conditions, typical C n+ cluster distributions were observed.

Ten-Year Comparison of Medication Complications Rates in Public and Private Hospitals in Victoria, Australia.

Medication errors occur as a result of failure in the treatment process at any point in the healthcare system. This is a retrospective study aimed at determining the rates of medication-related errors over a 10-year period in hospitals in Victoria, Australia. From 2009 to 2019, the overall rate for adverse drug events, accidental poisoning and undetermined intent were 86.15, 1.3 and 0.17 per 10,000 hospital separations, respectively. Medication complications occurred more in public hospitals. Adverse drug events account for less than 1% of all hospital separations. Medication errors contributing factors should be investigated in out of hospital environment.

Characterization of multi-layered fish scales (Atractosteus spatula) using nanoindentation, X-ray CT, FTIR, and SEM.

The hierarchical architecture of protective biological materials such as mineralized fish scales, gastropod shells, ram's horn, antlers, and turtle shells provides unique design principles with potentials for guiding the design of protective materials and systems in the future. Understanding the structure-property relationships for these material systems at the microscale and nanoscale where failure initiates is essential. Currently, experimental techniques such as nanoindentation, X-ray CT, and SEM provide researchers with a way to correlate the mechanical behavior with hierarchical microstructures of these material systems1-6. However, a well-defined standard procedure for specimen preparation of mineralized biomaterials is not currently available. In this study, the methods for probing spatially correlated chemical, structural, and mechanical properties of the multilayered scale of A. spatula using nanoindentation, FTIR, SEM, with energy-dispersive X-ray (EDX) microanalysis, and X-ray CT are presented.

Biobanking, consent, and certificates of confidentiality: does the ANPRM muddy the water?

In its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rule Making (ANPRM), the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services proposed substantial changes to how biospecimen research is treated under the regulations governing human subjects research. Currently, much of this research can be conducted without consent because it may not be considered "human subjects" research, is considered exempt, or consent may be waived. Responding to criticisms that scientific changes have made biospecimen research riskier than contemplated when the Common Rule was last amended, the ANPRM proposes to require written consent for biospecimen research, even if they have been stripped of identifiers or initially collected for a non-research purpose. The ANPRM's recognition of these risks is consistent with relatively recent NIH recommendations that research projects involving genetics, genomics, or biospecimen repositories should consider getting a Certificate of Confidentiality to provide additional protections to participants where breach of confidentiality is typically the primary risk. Ironically, the ANPRM proposals may make it more difficult to provide these protections. Our paper explores the implications of the conflicting requirements of the Certificate and the ANPRM proposals and makes recommendations for achieving the dual goals of appropriate consent and adequate confidentiality protections.

Certificates of Confidentiality: Protecting Human Subject Research Data in Law and Practice.

Researchers often require and collect sensitive information about individuals to answer important scientific questions that impact individual health and well-being and the public health. Researchers recognize they have a duty to maintain the confidentiality of the data they collect and typically make promises, which are documented in the consent form. The legal interests of others, however, can threaten researchers' promises of confidentiality, if they seek access to the data through subpoena. Certificates of Confidentiality (Certificates), authorized by federal statute, are an important tool for protecting individually identifiable sensitive research data from compelled disclosure. However, questions persist in the research community about the strength of Certificate protections, and the evidence on which to judge the strength is scant. In this article, we address those questions through a careful examination of the legislation and regulations concerning Certificates and the reported and unreported cases we have identified through our legal research and interviews with legal counsel about their experiences with Certificates. We also analyze other statutes that protect research data to compare them to the Certificate's protections, and we review other legal strategies available for protecting research data. Based on our analysis, we conclude with recommendations for how to strengthen protection of sensitive research data.

Certificates of confidentiality: legal counsels' experiences with and perspectives on legal demands for research data.

The certificate of confidentiality (Certificate) is an important tool for protecting identifiable, sensitive human subjects research data in the United States. However, little is known about the Certificate's effectiveness in protecting identifiable data. We interviewed 24 legal counsel representing U.S. research institutions about their experiences with legal demands for research data. Our respondents reported few, if any, legal demands over the course of their tenure, but two-thirds had experience with legal demands for data protected by a Certificate. They reported such demands often were resolved without disclosure of identifiable research data, typically without court intervention. While our respondents reported similar success protecting identifiable data in court, they often did not rely on the Certificate to do so.