United Nations Industrial Development Organization

La declaración PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), publicada en 2009, se diseñó para ayudar a los autores de revisiones sistemáticas a documentar de manera transparente el porqué de la revisión, qué hicieron los autores y qué encontraron. Durante la última década, ha habido muchos avances en la metodología y terminología de las revisiones sistemáticas, lo que ha requerido una actualización de esta guía. La declaración prisma 2020 sustituye a la declaración de 2009 e incluye una nueva guía de presentación de las publicaciones que refleja los avances en los métodos para identificar, seleccionar, evaluar y sintetizar estudios. La estructura y la presentación de los ítems ha sido modificada para facilitar su implementación. En este artículo, presentamos la lista de verificación PRISMA 2020 con 27 ítems, y una lista de verificación ampliada que detalla las recomendaciones en la publicación de cada ítem, la lista de verificación del resumen estructurado PRISMA 2020 y el diagrama de flujo revisado para revisiones sistemáticas. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews. Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en

La declaración PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses), publicada en 2009, se diseñó para ayudar a los autores de revisiones sistemáticas a documentar de manera transparente el porqué de la revisión, qué hicieron los autores y qué encontraron. Durante la última década, ha habido muchos avances en la metodología y terminología de las revisiones sistemáticas, lo que ha requerido una actualización de esta guía. La declaración prisma 2020 sustituye a la declaración de 2009 e incluye una nueva guía de presentación de las publicaciones que refleja los avances en los métodos para identificar, seleccionar, evaluar y sintetizar estudios. La estructura y la presentación de los ítems ha sido modificada para facilitar su implementación. En este artículo, presentamos la lista de verificación PRISMA 2020 con 27 ítems, y una lista de verificación ampliada que detalla las recomendaciones en la publicación de cada ítem, la lista de verificación del resumen estructurado PRISMA 2020 y el diagrama de flujo revisado para revisiones sistemáticas. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews. Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en

ABSTRACT The medium of exchange in acquisitions is studied in a model where (i) bidders' offers bring forth potential competition and (ii) targets and bidders are asymmetrically informed. In equilibrium, both securities and cash offers are observed. Securities have the advantage of inducing target management to make an efficient accept/reject decision. Cash has the advantage of serving, in equilibrium, to “preempt” competition by signaling a high valuation for the target. Implications concerning the medium of exchange of an offer, the probability of acceptance, the probability of competing bids, expected profits, and the costs of bidders are derived.

The availability, access, utilization and stability of food supply over time are the four pillars of food security which support nutrition outcomes. Addressing the issues raised globally around these pillars remains a challenge. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) 2017 report “The future of food and agriculture: trends and challenges” outlined the challenges which will have to be addressed in order for sustainable agricultural services to cost-effectively meet the growing food demand of the world population. In this study, we systematically analyzed the future challenges of the agriculture and food systems by focusing on (1) their root causes and trends; and (2) the interlinkages among the solutions proposed to address the challenges using social network analysis tools. It found that, if trends leading to extreme poverty are reversed, several other challenges will also be partially addressed and that climate change has the highest impact on the network of trends. Improving food security would have positive impacts on food access and utilization. The clear outline of the qualitative relationships among challenges presented and insights will help their prioritization by decision makers. However, additional in-depth quantitative analysis is necessary before measures identified to tackle the challenges could be effectively implemented.

Summary. We have published previously a prototype of a decision model for anaemic patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), in which transfusion need and serum erythropoietin (S‐Epo) were used to define three groups with different probabilities of erythroid response to treatment with granulocyte colony‐stimulating factor (G‐CSF) + Epo. S‐Epo ≤ 500 U/l and a transfusion need of < 2 units/month predicted a high probability of response to treatment, S‐Epo > 500 U/l and ≥ 2 units/month for a poor response, whereas the presence of only one negative prognostic marker predicted an intermediate response. A total of 53 patients from a prospective study were included in our evaluation sample. Patients with good or intermediate probability of response were treated with G‐CSF + Epo. The overall response rate was 42% with 28·3% achieving a complete and 13·2% a partial response to treatment. The response rates were 61% and 14% in the good and intermediate predictive groups respectively. The model retained a significant predictive value in the evaluation sample ( P < 0·001). Median duration of response was 23 months. Scores for global health and quality of life (QOL) were significantly lower in MDS patients than in a reference population, and fatigue and dyspnoea was significantly more prominent. Global QOL improved in patients responding to treatment ( P = 0·01). The validated decision model defined a subgroup of patients with a response rate of 61% (95% confidence interval 48–74%) to treatment with G‐CSF + Epo. The majority of these patients have shown complete and durable responses.

Gran parte de la investigación biomédica es de tipo observacional, pero la información difundida sobre esas investigaciones es a menudo insuficiente, lo que dificulta la evaluación de sus puntos fuertes y débiles para la generalización de sus conclusiones En el marco de la iniciativa STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology), se formularon recomendaciones sobre lo que debería contener una notificación precisa de un estudio observacional. Decidimos limitar el alcance de las recomendaciones a tres grandes modalidades de estudio: de cohortes, de casos y controles, y transversales. En septiembre de 2004 organizamos un taller de 2 días con metodólogos, investigadores y editores de revistas para elaborar una lista de verificación de distintos puntos. Esta lista fue revisada posteriormente en varias reuniones del grupo de coordinación y en discusiones mantenidas por correo electrónico con los principales participantes en STROBE, teniendo en cuenta la evidencia empírica y diversas consideraciones metodológicas. El taller y el posterior proceso iterativo de consulta y revisión desembocaron en una lista de verificación de 22 puntos (la declaración STROBE) que guardan relación con el título, el resumen, la introducción y las secciones de métodos, resultados y discusión de los artículos. Dieciocho puntos son comunes a las 3 modalidades de estudio, y 4 se refieren específicamente a los estudios de cohortes, de casos y controles o transversales. Se ha publicado separadamente un documento de explicación y elaboración al que puede accederse libremente en los sitios web de PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine y Epidemiology. Esperamos que la declaración STROBE contribuya a mejorar la calidad de la publicación de los estudios observacionales. Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study’s generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a che-cklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

Abstract New estimates of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the food system were developed at the country level, for the period 1990–2018, integrating data from crop and livestock production, on-farm energy use, land use and land use change, domestic food transport and food waste disposal. With these new country-level components in place, and by adding global and regional estimates of energy use in food supply chains, we estimate that total GHG emissions from the food system were about 16 CO 2 eq yr −1 in 2018, or one-third of the global anthropogenic total. Three quarters of these emissions, 13 Gt CO 2 eq yr −1 , were generated either within the farm gate or in pre- and post-production activities, such as manufacturing, transport, processing, and waste disposal. The remainder was generated through land use change at the conversion boundaries of natural ecosystems to agricultural land. Results further indicate that pre- and post-production emissions were proportionally more important in developed than in developing countries, and that during 1990–2018, land use change emissions decreased while pre- and post-production emissions increased. We also report results on a per capita basis, showing world total food systems per capita emissions decreasing during 1990–2018 from 2.9 to 2.2 t CO 2 eq cap −1 , with per capita emissions in developed countries about twice those in developing countries in 2018. Our findings also highlight that conventional IPCC categories, used by countries to report emissions in the National GHG inventory, systematically underestimate the contribution of the food system to total anthropogenic emissions. We provide a comparative mapping of food system categories and activities in order to better quantify food-related emissions in national reporting and identify mitigation opportunities across the entire food system.

Abstract Fat Cats : The production of biodiesel from vegetable oils and animal fats through transesterification and cracking is an emerging sector of the modern chemical industry, which, as many others, relies on the use of catalysis. Recent advances in the application of various homogeneous, heterogeneous, and enzymatic catalytic systems to biofuel production are presented in this Review. magnified image The predicted shortage of fossil fuels and related environmental concerns have recently attracted significant attention to scientific and technological issues concerning the conversion of biomass into fuels. First‐generation biodiesel, obtained from vegetable oils and animal fats by transesterification, relies on commercial technology and rich scientific background, though continuous progress in this field offers opportunities for improvement. This Review focuses on new catalytic systems for the transesterification of oils to the corresponding ethyl/methyl esters of fatty acids. It also addresses some innovative/emerging technologies for the production of biodiesel, such as the catalytic hydrocracking of vegetable oils to hydrocarbons. The special role of the catalyst as a key to efficient technology is outlined, together with the other important factors that affect the yield and quality of the product, including feedstock‐related properties and various system conditions.

Resumen La sociedad del conocimiento y la tecnología han traído consigo un nuevo mapa en el que los jóvenes sienten inquietudes que la educación no siempre ha sabido satisfacer. Estos nuevos escenarios hacen que los intereses de los alumnos cambien, por lo que los profesores necesitan explorar nuevas estrategias y recursos en sus clases para aumentar la motivación y el compromiso con sus alumnos. El objetivo de este trabajo es hacer una revisión teórica de los beneficios del uso de la gamificación y conocer su aplicación en el contexto educativo. Para ello, se han examinado diversas publicaciones académicas provenientes de bases de datos internacionales presentadas entre 2011 y 2016, relacionadas con la aplicación de la gamificación en educación, la motivación e inmersión, analizando en ellas los tres elementos intervinientes. La elección de este periodo de años para la realización de la revisión teórica ha sido escogida para ofrecer una panorámica y un recorrido sobre la evolución que ha ido teniendo el tema tratado a lo largo de esos cinco años. Para ello se estudian, según Werbach y Hunter (2012), las dinámicas, las mecánicas y los componentes siguiendo una metodología cualitativa basada en el análisis de contenido. Los resultados indican que los procesos de gamificación en educación generan en los alumnos importantes beneficios, no exentos de dificultades en algunos de los trabajos del estudio. Tras esta argumentación, el artículo concluye a favor de beneficios de la gamificación en educación como la motivación, la inmersión para posibilitar la anticipación y planificación de situaciones; el compromiso y la socialización a través de la interactividad y la interacción; así como de la variedad de elementos que intervienen, lo que hace la actividad educativa más motivante y estimulante para los alumnos.

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.

Understanding the interplay between multiple climate change risks and socioeconomic development is increasingly required to inform effective actions to manage these risks and pursue sustainable development. We calculate a set of 14 impact indicators at different levels of global mean temperature (GMT) change and socioeconomic development covering water, energy and land sectors from an ensemble of global climate, integrated assessment and impact models. The analysis includes changes in drought intensity and water stress index, cooling demand change and heat event exposure, habitat degradation and crop yield, amongst others. To investigate exposure to multi-sector climate impacts, these are combined with gridded socioeconomic projections of population and those 'vulnerable to poverty' from three Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP) (income <$10/day, currently 4.2 billion people). We show that global exposure to multi-sector risks approximately doubles between 1.5 C and 2 C GMT change, doubles again with 3 C GMT change and is 6x between the best and worst cases (SSP1/1.5 C vs SSP3/3 C, 0.8-4.7bi). For populations vulnerable to poverty, the exposure is an order of magnitude greater (8-32x) in the high poverty and inequality scenarios (SSP3) compared to sustainable socioeconomic development (SSP1). Whilst 85%-95% of global exposure falls to Asian and African regions, they have 91%-98% of the exposed and vulnerable population (depending on SSP/GMT combination), approximately half of which in South Asia. In higher warming scenarios, African regions have growing proportion of the global exposed and vulnerable population, ranging from 7%-17% at 1.5 C, doubling to 14%-30% at 2 C and again to 27%-51% at 3 C. Finally, beyond 2 C and at higher risk thresholds, the world's poorest are disproportionately impacted, particularly in cases (SSP3) of high inequality in Africa and southern Asia. Sustainable development that reduces poverty, mitigates emissions and meets targets in the water, energy and land sectors has the potential for order-of-magnitude scale reductions in multi-sector climate risk for the most vulnerable.

It is increasingly necessary to have a measuring instrument available in the health field that can be used in clinical practice and research. In order to guarantee the quality of their measurements it is essential that the instruments should be subjected to a process of validation. This process consists in adapting the instrument culturally to the setting where its psychometric characteristics are to be administered and checked, such as: reliability, validity, sensitivity and feasibility. There are measuring instruments from the health field available in other languages but that have not been validated into Spanish. Besides, the methodology for validating an instrument is little understood by the health professionals, which explains the indiscriminate use of instruments that have only been adapted or validated in a way that is not very consistent. The aim of this review is to bring up to date the process of validating an instrument for measuring health, and what it involves, in a practical way. The accessibility of evaluation instruments that have been culturally adapted and validated in different languages will facilitate the comparison of results obtained with the same instrument and the development international studies in different cultures.

The European Commission has designated 2005 as the year of corporate social responsibility in EU countries. Likewise, individual EU member states have taken important steps, such as the UK appointing a Minister for CSR within the Department for Trade and Industry, France legally requiring companies to include social and environmental impact in their annual reports, the Netherlands linking financial support schemes for large companies to compliance with the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and the Danish Government establishing the Copenhagen Centre (a CSR focused research institution). What is this emphasis on CSR all about? The present paper reviews recent trends in CSR theory and practice placing special emphasis on their relevance for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and on the context of economic development in developing countries.

Abstract. We present results from the FAOSTAT emissions shares database, covering emissions from agri-food systems and their shares to total anthropogenic emissions for 196 countries and 40 territories for the period 1990–2019. We find that in 2019, global agri-food system emissions were 16.5 (95 %; CI range: 11–22) billion metric tonnes (Gt CO2 eq. yr−1), corresponding to 31 % (range: 19 %–43 %) of total anthropogenic emissions. Of the agri-food system total, global emissions within the farm gate – from crop and livestock production processes including on-farm energy use – were 7.2 Gt CO2 eq. yr−1; emissions from land use change, due to deforestation and peatland degradation, were 3.5 Gt CO2 eq. yr−1; and emissions from pre- and post-production processes – manufacturing of fertilizers, food processing, packaging, transport, retail, household consumption and food waste disposal – were 5.8 Gt CO2 eq. yr−1. Over the study period 1990–2019, agri-food system emissions increased in total by 17 %, largely driven by a doubling of emissions from pre- and post-production processes. Conversely, the FAOSTAT data show that since 1990 land use emissions decreased by 25 %, while emissions within the farm gate increased 9 %. In 2019, in terms of individual greenhouse gases (GHGs), pre- and post-production processes emitted the most CO2 (3.9 Gt CO2 yr−1), preceding land use change (3.3 Gt CO2 yr−1) and farm gate (1.2 Gt CO2 yr−1) emissions. Conversely, farm gate activities were by far the major emitter of methane (140 Mt CH4 yr−1) and of nitrous oxide (7.8 Mt N2O yr−1). Pre- and post-production processes were also significant emitters of methane (49 Mt CH4 yr−1), mostly generated from the decay of solid food waste in landfills and open dumps. One key trend over the 30-year period since 1990 highlighted by our analysis is the increasingly important role of food-related emissions generated outside of agricultural land, in pre- and post-production processes along the agri-food system, at global, regional and national scales. In fact, our data show that by 2019, pre- and post-production processes had overtaken farm gate processes to become the largest GHG component of agri-food system emissions in Annex I parties (2.2 Gt CO2 eq. yr−1). They also more than doubled in non-Annex I parties (to 3.5 Gt CO2 eq. yr−1), becoming larger than emissions from land use change. By 2019 food supply chains had become the largest agri-food system component in China (1100 Mt CO2 eq. yr−1), the USA (700 Mt CO2 eq. yr−1) and the EU-27 (600 Mt CO2 eq. yr−1). This has important repercussions for food-relevant national mitigation strategies, considering that until recently these have focused mainly on reductions of non-CO2 gases within the farm gate and on CO2 mitigation from land use change. The information used in this work is available as open data with DOI https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5615082 (Tubiello et al., 2021d). It is also available to users via the FAOSTAT database (https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/EM; FAO, 2021a), with annual updates.

Much biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalisability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September, 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. 18 items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed explanation and elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the websites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies.

Over the last decades, changes in the global economy and the emergence of Global Value Chains (GVCs) have raised the interest in understanding the specific conditions and cross-company interactions within and across locations. For companies, the need to choose the right location for specific activities moved from an operational to a strategic issue. For countries, regions and cities, competition raised the stakes of understanding how to improve productivity and attract firms in specific fields beyond providing low factor costs and subsidies. Many countries, from natural-resource-rich, to transition economies, and to developed countries have launched competitiveness policies and cluster initiatives involving various stakeholders. The paper addresses how clusters can be leveraged for economic policy and what the role of different stakeholders in this process is. This paper summarises the cluster concept, focusing on the main theoretical framework and on recent empirical findings, and discusses key pillars of a cluster-based economic policy approach. The paper concludes with an application of the concept to resource-rich, oil-dependent economies.

The protocol of a clinical trial serves as the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and appraisal. However, trial protocols and existing protocol guidelines vary greatly in content and quality. This article describes the systematic development and scope of SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013, a guideline for the minimum content of a clinical trial protocol. The 33-item SPIRIT checklist applies to protocols for all clinical trials and focuses on content rather than format. The checklist recommends a full description of what is planned; it does not prescribe how to design or conduct a trial. By providing guidance for key content, the SPIRIT recommendations aim to facilitate the drafting of high-quality protocols. Adherence to SPIRIT would also enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review boards, peer reviewers, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other key stakeholders.

The emergence of COVID-19 in Brazil further explained the massive discrepancy between different social realities coexisting in the country, rekindling the discussions about food and nutrition security, similarly to what has been happening in other countries facing the same pandemic situation. In this paper, we argue that the risks to hunger and food security in Brazil have been present since 2016 and are now being exacerbated due to the emergence of the COVID-19 epidemic. This situation requires knowing the extent and magnitude of the issue and articulation of measures in the three governmental spheres(federal, municipal and state) to ensure access to adequate and healthy food and reduce the disease's adverse effectson the diet, health, and nutrition among the most vulnerable people. Thus, this work aims to contribute to the debate on the measures to be adopted by governments and society to promote and ensure food and nutrition security and prevent insecurity and the expansion of hunger during and after the social and health crisis created by the pandemic.

The interaction of solid-state qubits with environmental degrees of freedom strongly affects the qubit dynamics, and leads to decoherence. In quantum information processing with solid-state qubits, decoherence significantly limits the performances of such devices. Therefore, it is necessary to fully understand the mechanisms that lead to decoherence. In this review, we discuss how decoherence affects two of the most successful realizations of solid-state qubits, namely, spin qubits and superconducting qubits. In the former, the qubit is encoded in the spin 1/2 of the electron, and it is implemented by confining the electron spin in a semiconductor quantum dot. Superconducting devices show quantum behaviour at low temperatures, and the qubit is encoded in the two lowest energy levels of a superconducting circuit. The electron spin in a quantum dot has two main decoherence channels, a (Markovian) phonon-assisted relaxation channel, due to the presence of a spin–orbit interaction, and a (non-Markovian) spin bath constituted by the spins of the nuclei in the quantum dot that interact with the electron spin via the hyperfine interaction. In a superconducting qubit, decoherence takes place as a result of fluctuations in the control parameters, such as bias currents, applied flux and bias voltages, and via losses in the dissipative circuit elements.

Energy access metrics are needed to track the progress towards providing sustainable energy for all. This paper presents advancements in the development of the Multidimensional Energy Poverty Index (MEPI), as well as results and analysis for a number of developing countries. The MEPI is a composite index designed to shed light on energy poverty by assessing the services that modern energy provides. The index captures both the incidence and intensity of energy poverty. It provides valuable insights–allowing the analysis of determinants of energy poverty–and, subsequently insights into policy efficacy. Building on previous work, this paper presents results obtained as a result of both increased data availability and enhanced methodology. Specifically, this analysis (i) includes an increased number of countries, and (ii) tracks the evolution of energy poverty over time of energy poverty in selected countries is reported.