Ian Cunningham.

A gifted scientist and a natural leader, Ian Cunningham was one of Scotland's pre-eminent biological scientists; he also directed and chaired a number of key research and educational organisations.

Baseline burnout symptoms predict visuospatial executive function during survival school training in special operations military personnel.

Burnout symptoms, which are characterized by exhaustion, cynicism, and a reduced sense of professional efficacy, may deleteriously affect cognitive function in military personnel. A total of 32 U.S. Military Special Operations personnel enrolled in Survival School completed measures of trauma history, dissociation, and burnout before training. They then completed the Groton Maze Learning Test (GMLT), a neuropsychological measure of integrative visuospatial executive function during three field-based phases of Survival School-enemy evasion, captivity/interrogation, and escape/release from captivity. Lower pre-training perceptions of professional efficacy were associated with reduced executive function during all of the field-based phases of Survival School, even after adjustment for years of education, cynicism, and baseline GMLT scores. Magnitudes of decrements in executive function in Marines with low efficacy relative to those with high efficacy increased as training progressed and ranged from .58 during enemy evasion to .99 during escape/release from captivity. Pre-training perceptions of burnout may predict visuospatial executive function during naturalistic training-related stress in military personnel. Assessment of burnout symptoms, particularly perceptions of professional efficacy, may help identify military personnel at risk for stress-related executive dysfunction.

Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the interobserver variability in descriptions of breast masses by dedicated breast imagers and radiology residents and determine how any differences in lesion description affect the performance of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) computer classification system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Institutional review board approval was obtained for this HIPAA-compliant study, and the requirement to obtain informed consent was waived. Images of 50 breast lesions were individually interpreted by seven dedicated breast imagers and 10 radiology residents, yielding 850 lesion interpretations. Lesions were described with use of 11 descriptors from the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, and interobserver variability was calculated with the Cohen κ statistic. Those 11 features were selected, along with patient age, and merged together by a linear discriminant analysis (LDA) classification model trained by using 1005 previously existing cases. Variability in the recommendations of the computer model for different observers was also calculated with the Cohen κ statistic. RESULTS: A significant difference was observed for six lesion features, and radiology residents had greater interobserver variability in their selection of five of the six features than did dedicated breast imagers. The LDA model accurately classified lesions for both sets of observers (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve = 0.94 for residents and 0.96 for dedicated imagers). Sensitivity was maintained at 100% for residents and improved from 98% to 100% for dedicated breast imagers. For residents, the computer model could potentially improve the specificity from 20% to 40% (P < .01) and the κ value from 0.09 to 0.53 (P < .001). For dedicated breast imagers, the computer model could increase the specificity from 34% to 43% (P = .16) and the κ value from 0.21 to 0.61 (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Among findings showing a significant difference, there was greater interobserver variability in lesion descriptions among residents; however, an LDA model using data from either dedicated breast imagers or residents yielded a consistently high performance in the differentiation of benign from malignant breast lesions, demonstrating potential for improving specificity and decreasing interobserver variability in biopsy recommendations.

Prioritizing verification checks and preventive maintenance.

The role of the equipment technician has not changed in 30 years, but the equipment and the staff using it has. It is clearly time to update our procedures and methodology. Some of these time-consuming PM tasks yield no measurable benefit to neither our industry nor to our customers. All of the additional requirements placed onto us recently indicate that our customers' needs have changed and negates our obsession to place inspection stickers all over the place. We need to adapt to the changing environment and become the technicians of the 21st century by abandoning long, outdated practices such as mindless monthly inspections. We are valuable to our customers and our employers for what we know--not what we do. Not just anyone can walk into anactive operating room theater and find a bad patient cableon the spot. We alone can control the work that we do. We are the pinnacle of all electronics repair with the duties and responsibilities that go along with it. Isn't it abouttime we acted like it?