RESUMO
Pesticide contamination is a global issue, affecting nearly 44% of the global farming population, and disproportionately affecting farmers and agricultural workers in developing countries. Despite this, global pesticide usage is on the rise, with the growing demand of global food production with increasing population. Different types of porous materials, such as carbon and zeolites, have been explored for the remediation of pesticides from the environment. However, there are some limitations with these materials, especially due to lack of functional groups and relatively modest surface areas. In this regard, metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) provide us with a better alternative to conventionally used porous materials due to their versatile and highly porous structure. Recently, a number of MOFs have been studied for the extraction of pesticides from the environment as well as for targeted and controlled release of agrochemicals. Different types of pesticides and conditions have been investigated, and MOFs have proved their potential in agricultural applications. In this review, the latest studies on delivery and extraction of pesticides using MOFs are systematically reviewed, along with some recent studies on greener ways of pest control through the slow release of chemical compounds from MOF composites. Finally, we present our insights into the key issues concerning the development and translational applications of using MOFs for targeted delivery and pesticide control.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: National initiatives, such as the UK Improving Access to Psychological Therapies program (IAPT), demonstrate the feasibility of conducting empirical mental health assessments on a large scale, and similar initiatives exist in other countries. However, there is a lack of international consensus on which outcome domains are most salient to monitor treatment progress and how they should be measured. The aim of this project was to propose (1) an essential set of outcome domains relevant across countries and cultures, (2) a set of easily accessible patient-reported instruments, and (3) a psychometric approach to make scores from different instruments comparable. METHODS: Twenty-four experts, including ten health outcomes researchers, ten clinical experts from all continents, two patient advocates, and two ICHOM coordinators worked for seven months in a consensus building exercise to develop recommendations based on existing evidence using a structured consensus-driven modified Delphi technique. RESULTS: The group proposes to combine an assessment of potential outcome predictors at baseline (47 items: demographics, functional, clinical status, etc.), with repeated assessments of disease-specific symptoms during the treatment process (19 items: symptoms, side effects, etc.), and a comprehensive annual assessment of broader treatment outcomes (45 items: remission, absenteeism, etc.). Further, it is suggested reporting disease-specific symptoms for depression and anxiety on a standardized metric to increase comparability with other legacy instruments. All recommended instruments are provided online ( www.ichom.org ). CONCLUSION: An international standard of health outcomes assessment has the potential to improve clinical decision making, enhance health care for the benefit of patients, and facilitate scientific knowledge.
