Prognosis Techniques

A brief survey of prognostic approaches is given in [3], According to [2], prognosis techniques may be classified into three categories. 

The first technique applies probabilistic methods to historical data from previous failures for a given class of systems. Parameters of probability functions are estimated from collected data. An advantage of probabilistic methods is that no detailed information is needed. However, the determination of parameters that faithfully describes an observed degradation phenomenon requires a significant amount of legacy statistical fault data. If these data are available, confidence limits can be determined that give an indication of the accuracy of a prediction. 

Model-based prognostic starts from physical laws to develop an analytical dynamical model of a system under consideration including the evolution of degradation phenomena. 

Failure prognosis is an essential part of condition-based management (CBM) and numerous papers on CBM have been published [1, 4, 5]. Some research work on failure prognosis recently reported in the literature may be found in [2, 6-9]. 

---

Still, we believe that widespread use of monoclonal antibodies in CSF immuno-cytology in tumor disease as part of the arsenal of routine techniques of examination will markedly improve the prognosis of patients because it offers the possibility of establishing the diagnosis early and prompt initiation of specific therapy. 

Proteins are the functional units of a cell. They have constantly changing expression levels, locations, and PTMs that may be associated with the onset, progression, and remission of disease. Proteomic technologies (as described in Section 2) are used to detect patterns of differentially expressed proteins that have numerous potential clinical applications. Techniques such as 2D-PAGE and HPLC combined with MS can be used to identify proteins for early detection, diagnosis, prognosis, and response to treatment. 

Exposure assessment is done under the strong assumptions that (1) an adequate model for exposure calculation is on hand and (2) sufficient data about all influential exposure factors are available. The calculation is a prognosis about the expected level of exposure or the burden. Direct methods of exposure assessment, such as personal sampling (air, radiation), duplicate studies (nutrition) and human biomonitoring, provide information on a measurement level. The exposure assessors and the risk managers should balance the reasons for using prognostic techniques instead of direct exposure measurement methods. Both should anticipate critical questions about the validity of the exposure assessment technique in the course of public risk communication. Questions heard by the authors from concerned persons include, for example ... 

The prognosis of extensive CVST is unpredictable and variable. The 5%-30% mortality of CVST still reported in studies between 1991 and 1999 (Strupp et al. 2003) has significantly dropped. In our experience early diagnosis with noninvasive techniques of MRI and MRA has an important influence on prognosis. 

There is no good evidence (i.e. there are no large randomized trials) (Coward et al. 2005) that surgery improves the prognosis for patients with vertebrobasilar ischemia. There is, however, no shortage of ingenious, if technically demanding, techniques, which are far from risk free (Box 26.1). 

Basically, the prioritization of methods within a diagnostic flow diagram should be determined by the question of whether (7.) use of an examination technique is indicated, (2.) indication applies at the given moment, and (5.) definitive diagnosis is likely to be obtained. Usually, only a definitive diagnosis allows statements to be made on therapy and prognosis ... 

---