To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Certain ways of responding to psychotic experiences (PEs) appear more commonly associated with clinical distress (e.g. avoidance) and other ways with benign or positive outcomes (e.g. reappraisal and acceptance). Past research has largely been limited to retrospective self-report. We aimed to compare clinical and non-clinical individuals on experimental analogues of anomalous experiences.
Response styles of two groups with persistent PEs (clinical n = 84; non-clinical n = 92) and a control group without PEs (n = 83) were compared following experimental analogues of thought interference (Cards Task, Telepath) and hearing voices (Virtual Acoustic Space Paradigm).
The non-clinical group with PEs were less likely to endorse unhelpful response styles, such as passive responding or attempts to avoid, suppress, worry about or control mental experiences, compared with the clinical group on all three tasks. The clinical group were more likely to endorse unhelpful response styles compared with controls on two out of three tasks (Cards Task and Telepath). The non-clinical group performed similarly to controls on unhelpful responding across all tasks. There were no group differences for helpful response styles, such as cognitive reappraisal or mindful acceptance of experiences.
In line with cognitive models of psychosis, the findings suggest that the way in which individuals respond to unusual experiences may be an important factor in understanding clinical distress, supporting the therapeutic rationale of targeting potentially unhelpful patterns of response.
We describe diet quality by demographic factors and weight status among Barbadian children and examine associations with excess energy intake (EI). A screening tool for the identification of children at risk of excess EI was developed.
In a cross-sectional survey, the Diet Quality Index–International (DQI-I) was used to assess dietary intakes from repeat 24h recalls among 362 children aged 9–10 years. Participants were selected by probability proportional to size. A model to identify excess energy intake from easily measured components of the DQI-I was developed.
Primary-school children in Barbados.
Over one-third of children were overweight/obese, and mean EI for boys (8644 (se 174·5) kJ/d (2066 (se 41·7) kcal/d)) and girls (8912 (se 169·9) kJ/d (2130 (se 40·6) kcal/d)) exceeded the RDA. Children consuming a variety of food groups, more vegetables and fruits, and lower percentage energy contribution from empty-calorie foods showed reduced likelihood of excess EI. Intake of more than 2400 mg Na/d and higher macronutrient and fatty acid ratios were positively related to the consumption of excess energy. A model using five DQI-I components (overall food group variety, variety for protein source, vegetables, fruits and empty calorie intake) had high sensitivity for identification of children at risk of excess EI.
Children’s diet quality, despite low intakes of fruit and vegetables, was within acceptable ranges as assessed by the DQI-I and RDA; however, portion size was large and EI high. A practical model for identification of children at risk of excess EI has been developed.
We explicitly describe the isomorphism between two combinatorial realizations of Kashiwara’s infinity crystal in types B and C. The first realization is in terms of marginally large tableaux and the other is in terms of Kostant partitions coming from PBW bases. We also discuss a stack notation for Kostant partitions which simplifies that realization.
Hearing voices can be a distressing and disabling experience for some, whilst it is a valued experience for others, so-called ‘healthy voice-hearers’. Cognitive models of psychosis highlight the role of memory, appraisal and cognitive biases in determining emotional and behavioural responses to voices. A memory bias potentially associated with distressing voices is the overgeneral memory bias (OGM), namely the tendency to recall a summary of events rather than specific occasions. It may limit access to autobiographical information that could be helpful in re-appraising distressing experiences, including voices.
We investigated the possible links between OGM and distressing voices in psychosis by comparing three groups: (1) clinical voice-hearers (N = 39), (2) non-clinical voice-hearers (N = 35) and (3) controls without voices (N = 77) on a standard version of the autobiographical memory test (AMT). Clinical and non-clinical voice-hearers also completed a newly adapted version of the task, designed to assess voices-related memories (vAMT).
As hypothesised, the clinical group displayed an OGM bias by retrieving fewer specific autobiographical memories on the AMT compared with both the non-clinical and control groups, who did not differ from each other. The clinical group also showed an OGM bias in recall of voice-related memories on the vAMT, compared with the non-clinical group.
Clinical voice-hearers display an OGM bias when compared with non-clinical voice-hearers on both general and voices-specific recall tasks. These findings have implications for the refinement and targeting of psychological interventions for psychosis.
Extinction is the complete loss of a species, but the accuracy of that status depends on the overall information about the species. Dracaena umbraculifera was described in 1797 from a cultivated plant attributed to Mauritius, but repeated surveys failed to relocate it and it was categorized as Extinct on the IUCN Red List. However, several individuals labelled as D. umbraculifera grow in botanical gardens, suggesting that the species’ IUCN status may be inaccurate. The goal of this study was to understand (1) where D. umbraculifera originated, (2) which species are its close relatives, (3) whether it is extinct, and (4) the identity of the botanical garden accessions and whether they have conservation value. We sequenced a cpDNA region of Dracaena from Mauritius, botanical garden accessions labelled as D. umbraculifera, and individuals confirmed to be D. umbraculifera based on morphology, one of which is a living plant in a private garden. We included GenBank accessions of Dracaena from Madagascar and other locations and reconstructed the phylogeny using Bayesian and parsimony approaches. Phylogenies indicated that D. umbraculifera is more closely related to Dracaena reflexa from Madagascar than to Mauritian Dracaena. As anecdotal information indicated that the living D. umbraculifera originated from Madagascar, we conducted field expeditions there and located five wild populations; the species’ IUCN status should therefore be Critically Endangered because < 50 wild individuals remain. Although the identity of many botanical garden samples remains unresolved, this study highlights the importance of living collections for facilitating new discoveries and the importance of documenting and conserving the flora of Madagascar.
To say that for us this book has been a bit of an adventure would be an understatement. It has been a wonderful experience, thinking about and examining the role of the CDO and committing all this to paper. We have enjoyed and been privileged to beg and borrow knowledge from our fellow data professionals, who have been most generous with their time and ideas, and we both know we have added massively to our own experience and learning through this process. There were also times that we both wondered why we thought this would be a good idea in the first place, but thankfully they were relatively few and far between! On the contrary, we have found this a rewarding and stimulating exercise.
We hope that we have given the more business-oriented among you the case for why you need to take your data seriously and why an investment in a Chief Data Officer will pay you dividends. Such a fundamental asset to your business as your data can't be expected to look after itself. Filling in all the steps to understanding how to find the right CDO for your company and how to set them up to succeed, as well as helping you understand what (roughly) to expect from them, should help you remove a few hurdles and increase the speed on the return of value you get from your nice new shiny CDO.
For the already converted ‘data cheerleaders’ we have aimed to give you clues as to how to answer the question quoted in the Preface – ‘I would like to know how my organisation gets from where we are now to be in a position to exploit the opportunities in our data; to extract the sort of value which you have all been talking about.’ – which is what started this in the first place. We haven't given you a handbook because we have tried really hard to make sure that we weren't being pre - scriptive. There are so many different organisations across many sectors that there really is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution that will make everything better. On top of that, we are all different and we will bring our own personalities, skills and experiences to our roles.
We were recently on a panel at a conference discussing how to harness value from data – we've changed the discussion topic slightly so as to not identify the conference, event or other participants; to protect the ‘not-so-innocent’. This topic, or a closely related one, has been a regular feature of the panels and discussions we've been involved with over the past two years. It seems everyone is trying to get to the heart of that question and find the answer. Data has been seen as such an inconsequential thing, that just seemed to be there, in the past; but there is a growing respect for data as a really fundamental asset – which is a great thing.
Everyone knows, because we've all been told many times recently, that data is the new oil. The question that then leads out of this is the one we have been facing: if data is the new oil, how does an organisation get value out of it? It is all very well having struck oil, but if you don't know how to get it out of the ground, or how to refine it into useful products, or that it can be transformed and manufactured into valuable products or consumed to create energy – what use is the oil in the ground?
On that recent panel we began by responding to some prepared questions. There were some great and experienced minds on the panel: leaders in their respective fields and all practitioners from the hard edge of industry, business and commerce. We each took turns to discuss the great value that could be derived from data. We each provided stunning examples of what could be done with data to transform, disrupt and innovate organisations and industries. It is interesting to note that the topic was definitely worded as ‘digital assets’ but we all spoke about ‘data’, and used the term data and not digital asset.