Databases other uses

Reports are created differently in different systems. Some use a standard tool in a fourth generation language, where you hardly need to understand the database others use proprietary reporting tools and/or tools where a thorough understanding of tables, fields, and relations in the database is necessary. A standard reporting tool is usually the best, and may be possible to use with any LIMS. 

The US-EPA Consolidated Human Activity Database (CHAD) (US-EPA 2007b) contains data obtained from preexisting human activity studies that were collected at city, state, and national levels. CHAD is intended to be an input file for exposure/intake dose modeling and/or statistical analysis. CHAD is a master database providing access to other human activity databases using a consistent format. This facilitates access and retrieval of activity/and questionnaire information from those databases that US-EPA currently has access to and uses in its various regulatory analyses undertaken by program offices. 

We have illustrated the capability of Pipeline Pilot to query all the data on a set of compounds from the internal database and perform simple filtering on them. Additionally, the ability of Pipeline Pilot to easily access other (several) databases (or files) besides the internal database provides us with a very powerful tool for data mining. The utility of accessing multiple databases simultaneously is discussed in the following sections. Here we give an example of how being able to access different databases, other than the in-house one, and perform sophisticated filtering on an the data is in itself a tremendous asset. 

The Nursing Home Survey on Patient Safety Culture 2011 User Comparative Database Report is based on data from 226 nursing homes in the United States and provides initial results that nursing homes can use to compare their patient safety culture to other US nursing homes. The report consists of a narrative description of the findings and four appendices presenting data by nursing home characteristics and respondent characteristics (AHRQ Publication No. 11-0030). 

Miss C eventually reeeived damages from the makers in the Far East in 2010 as eompensation for the distress and pain she had experienced as a result of a poor batch of catheters. Contrary to the findings of a previous study/ it is elear that such failures are not at all uncommon, as a review from 1993 of five failed catheters indicated. Other materials used include polyurethane and natural rubber, and these too have suffered failures, judging by the more than 18 adverse incident reports on the FDA Maude database from US hospitals, from about 2000 to the most recent report from March 2011. Several alerts have also been issued by the MHRA in the period up to 2008/9. Such problems highlight the importance of quality control of manufacture, and close eontrol of the polymers used in forming such products. 

The Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 mandated USA EPA to "upgrade its risk assessment process as part of the tolerance setting procedures" (3), The changes to risk assessment were based in part on recommendations from the National Academy of Sciences report (22), The act required an explicit determination that tolerances were safe to children. US EPA was required to use an extra 10-fold safety factor to take into account both pre-/post natal developmental toxicity and the completeness of the database, unless US EPA determined, based on reliable data, that a different margin would be safe. In addition, US EPA must consider available information on 1/ aggregate exposure from all non-occupational sources 2/ effects of cumulative exposure to the pesticide plus others with a common mechanism of toxicity 3/ effects of in utero exposure 4/ the potential for endocrine disrupting effects. 

Chemicals in FDA indirect additives in FCS database Other chemical names CAS No. Doc. No. Regnum US CFR... 

International Cosmetic Ingredient Dictionary and Handbook. In the unnsnal case that an ingredient does not appear in this database, other sources such as the US Pharmacopeia, the National Formulary, the Food Chemicals Codex and finally the United States Adopted Name (USAN) will be consulted in this order of preference. If the ingredient does not appear in any of the aforementioned databases, the name generally recognized by consumers will be used, or finally the chemical or other technical name or description. 

Database rights Collection of data (only exists in the European Union and some other countries—the US is discussing the proposal) 70 years from the date of creation... 

In an earlier section, we had alluded to the need to stop the reasoning process at some point. The operationality criterion is the formal statement of that need. In most problems we have some understanding of what properties are easy to determine. For example, a property such as the processing time of a batch is normally given to us and hence is determined by a simple database lookup. The optimal solution to a nonlinear program, on the other hand, is not a simple property, and hence we might look for a simpler explanation of why two solutions have equal objective function values. In the case of our branch-and-bound problem, the operationality criterion imposes two requirements ... 

ToxSeek is an NLM metasearch engine and clustering tool that enables the simultaneous searching of many different toxicology and environmental health information databases and web sites. This tool includes 59 databases including the TOXNET Search tool, as well as information sources from NLM, NIH, US Government, International and other sources. 

The Library of Chemical Information is maintained by the US Food and Drug Administration s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and is an excellent database for multiple classes of chemicals including food additives, cosmetics, colour additives, pesticides and other chemicals. 

Eor the economic value creation tests we used Stern Stewart s 2003 US EVA/MVA Annual 1000 ranking database. Eor all other computations, except the M A tests, we used Compustat. For the M A tests, we used the Securities Data Corporation (SDC) database provided by Thomson Financial. 

In 2002, the Association of University Research Parks (AURP) contracted with Association Research Inc. (ARI) to develop a profile of US and Canadian Research Parks [6]. The ARI sent out questionnaires to 195 entities believed to be operating in research parks and received 87 written responses with 79 yielding sufficient information to be stored in a database. Research parks such as the Research Triangle Park occupy vast tracks of land (7000 acres), while others such as the University City Science Center (16 acres) and Audubon (3 acres) are relatively compact. The average size of a research park in the survey was 628 acres and the median 180 acres. Employment ranged from 10000 to 42 000 for 62 research parks. 

The overlap of areas covered by the FQPA factor and those addressed by the traditional UFs was recognized, and it was concluded that the current UFs, if appropriately applied using the approaches recommended in the review (i.e., US-EPA 2002), will be adequate in most cases to cover concerns and uncertainties regarding the potential for pre- and postnatal toxicity and the completeness of the toxicology database. In other words, an additional UF is not needed in the RfC/RfD methodology because the currently available factors are considered sufficient to account for uncertainties in the database from which the reference values are derived (and it does not exclude the possibility that these UFs may be decreased or increased from the default value of 10). 

---