Control groups design

Cook, C. Quasi-Experiments Nonequivalent Control Group Designs, Fankhauser, G., Ed. Rand McNally Chicago, 1979 137-146. 

CIA 1990. A Approach to the Categorization of Process Plant Hazard and Control Building Design. Prepared by Working Group 3 of the Major Hazards Steering Group. Issued by the Safety Committee of the Chemical Industry Safety and Health Council of the Chemical Industries Association, Eondon. 

Resources are not limited to human resources, as stated in Part 2 Chapter 1. You need to ensure that the design groups are equipped with the necessary design tools, equipment, and facilities with which to execute the tasks. Once you have asked each group to propose how they are to meet the requirements, you then need to ensure that they have the capability of doing so. This is less of a problem in-house as with subcontractors. Due to their remoteness and the keen competition, they may make claims they cannot fulfill. In controlling the design you need to ensure that adequate resources are deployed by the subcontractors and to do this pre-contract surveys and assessments need to be performed. This is implied in clause 4.6. 

This technique sets out to collect data about near-incidents or critical events that have been experienced by the operating team but that are unlikely to be documented. The basic premise of the technique is that events that could have led to serious consequences would tend to be remembered by the workers. Through individual or group interviews, significant events are recalled which are then analyzed in order to generate useful information about the difficulties involved in the performance of a task, the adequacy of the operating procedures, any problems with the equipment or control panel design and so on. The technique can be used in three areas ... 

Products in Group 3 seem to us to represent the future of practical batch process control. In such systems, modern workstations perform the single-user functions (e.g control system design, set-up, and maintenance operator interface data collection historical reporting) for which they were designed, while powerful multitasking controllers perform actual control. As computer hardware and software standards continue to evolve toward distributed networks of processors optimized for specific kinds of tasks, such systems will, we feel, proliferate rapidly. 

The PRO ACT-11 trial was designed to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of lA r-pro-UK. In this study, 180 patients were enrolled in a 2 1 randomization scheme to receive either 9 mg lA r-pro-UK plus 4 hours of low-dose IV heparin, or low-dose IV heparin alone. The primary clinical outcome, the proportion of patients with slight or no disability at 90 days (mRS of < 2), was achieved in 40% of the 121 patients in the r-pro-UK treatment group, compared to 25% of the 59 patients in the control group (absolute benefit 15%, relative benefit 58%, number need to treat = 7 p = 0.04). The recanalization rate (TlMl 2 and 3) was 66% for the r-pro-UK group and 18% for the control group (p < 0.001). Symptomatic ICH within 24 hours occurred in 10% of r-pro-UK patients and 2% of control patients (p = 0.06). All symptomatic ICHs occurred in patients with a baseline NIHSS... 

Experimental design (human study details or strain, number of animals per exposure/control groups, sex, dose administration details) ... 

---