This report is about a project on what families and service providers in NSW think about the move from Early Childhood Intervention services to the NDIS. Early Childhood Intervention services are supports for children with disabilities and their families.The NDIS is a new government program to support people with disabilities in Australia. The NDIS is run by the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA).The move from Early Childhood Intervention services to the NDIS gives families new choices about services for their children. This report is about a project on what families and service providers in NSW think about the move to the NDIS.
The Department of Social Services (DSS) commissioned the Social Policy Research Centre (SPRC) to conduct a review of the implementation of the National Disability Strategy 2010-2020 (Strategy). The aim was to examine effective implementation processes and measures of the Strategy to inform the reform that will develop a new national disability framework for beyond 2020.The review methodology consisted of a desktop review of documents about the implementation of the Strategy and targeted stakeholder consultations. The desktop review included publicly available Australian and international documents from government, community organisations and the service sector and reports internal to DSS. The consultations were held with stakeholders from organisations with a role in designing and implementing the Strategy and stakeholders from organisations that represent people with disability and their families, carers and allies. Approximately 150 people from 81 organisations participated in the targeted stakeholder consultations, which were held in all State and Territory capitals, over the phone or skype, and by e-mail. The next stage of the reform by DSS will include comprehensive online and face-to-face public engagement.This report presents the findings and implications from this review, focusing on the key factors that affected implementation of the Strategy and the areas in which implementation could be improved.
Artificial intelligence (AI) has made impressive progress over the past few years, including many applications in medical imaging. Numerous commercial solutions based on AI techniques are now available for sale, forcing radiology practices to learn how to properly assess these tools. While several guidelines describing good practices for conducting and reporting AI-based research in medicine and radiology have been published, fewer efforts have focused on recommendations addressing the key questions to consider when critically assessing AI solutions before purchase. Commercial AI solutions are typically complicated software products, for the evaluation of which many factors are to be considered. In this work, authors from academia and industry have joined efforts to propose a practical framework that will help stakeholders evaluate commercial AI solutions in radiology (the ECLAIR guidelines) and reach an informed decision. Topics to consider in the evaluation include the relevance of the solution from the point of view of each stakeholder, issues regarding performance and validation, usability and integration, regulatory and legal aspects, and financial and support services. KEY POINTS: • Numerous commercial solutions based on artificial intelligence techniques are now available for sale, and radiology practices have to learn how to properly assess these tools. • We propose a framework focusing on practical points to consider when assessing an AI solution in medical imaging, allowing all stakeholders to conduct relevant discussions with manufacturers and reach an informed decision as to whether to purchase an AI commercial solution for imaging applications. • Topics to consider in the evaluation include the relevance of the solution from the point of view of each stakeholder, issues regarding performance and validation, usability and integration, regulatory and legal aspects, and financial and support services.
17 pages, 12 figures ; A South Atlantic ring is studied through remote sensing altimetry, hydrographic stations, and drifters' trajectories. The ring's core was characterized by warmer and saltier Indian Ocean waters. At the time of the cruise, the ring's signature extended radially out to 124 km and vertically down to 2000 m, and its core absolute dynamic topography (ADT) exceeded the surrounding Atlantic Ocean waters in 0.4 m. The geostrophic velocities were anticyclonic with maximum speeds about 35 cm s−1 at 100 m and reaching negligible values near 4500 m. The rotational transport inside the ring was 33 Sv in the thermocline and intermediate layers. The drifters' data distinguish a 30-km core revolving as a solid body with periodicity near 5 days and a transitional band that revolves with constant tangential velocity, resembling a Rankine vortex. The ADT data identify the ring's track, showing that it was shed by the Agulhas Current retroflection in November 2009 and propagated northwest rapidly during the first 2 months (mean speed of about 10 cm s−1) but slowed down substantially (3–4 cm s−1) between March and July 2010, when it was last detected. The altimetry data also outlines the evolution of the ring's core ADT, radius, vorticity, and, through a simple calibration with the cruise data, rotational transport. In particular, the ring surface and vertical-mean vorticity decay with time scales of 373 and 230 days, respectively, indicating that most of the property anomalies contained by the ring are diffused out to the subtropical gyre before it reaches the western boundary current system ; This study has been performed as part of projects MOC2 (CTM2008-06438), VA-DE-RETRO (CTM2014-56987-P), and SeVaCan (CTM2013-48695) funded by the Spanish Government through the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad ; Peer Reviewed
Protein kinase C (PKC) isozymes play major roles in human diseases, including cancer. Yet, the poor understanding of isozymes-specific functions and the limited availability of selective pharmacological modulators of PKC isozymes have limited the clinical translation of PKC-targeting agents. Here, we report the first small-molecule PKCd-selective activator, the 7a-acetoxy-6ß-benzoyloxy-12-O-benzoylroyleanone (Roy-Bz), which binds to the PKCd-C1-domain. Roy-Bz potently inhibited the proliferation of colon cancer cells by inducing a PKCd-dependent mitochondrial apoptotic pathway involving caspase-3 activation. In HCT116 colon cancer cells, Roy-Bz specifically triggered the translocation of PKCd but not other phorbol ester responsive PKCs. Roy-Bz caused a marked inhibition in migration of HCT116 cells in a PKCd-dependent manner. Additionally, the impairment of colonosphere growth and formation, associated with depletion of stemness markers, indicate that Roy-Bz also targets drug-resistant cancer stem cells, preventing tumor dissemination and recurrence. Notably, in xenograft mouse models, Roy-Bz showed a PKCd-dependent antitumor effect, through anti-proliferative, pro-apoptotic, and anti-angiogenic activities. Besides, Roy-Bz was non-genotoxic, and in vivo it had no apparent toxic side effects. Collectively, our findings reveal a novel promising anticancer drug candidate. Most importantly, Roy-Bz opens the way to a new era on PKC biology and pharmacology, contributing to the potential redefinition of the structural requirements of isozyme-selective agents, and to the re-establishment of PKC isozymes as feasible therapeutic targets in human diseases. ; We thank European Union (FEDER funds POCI/01/0145/FEDER/007728, FCOMP-01-0124-FEDER-028417 and POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007440, through Programa Operacional Factores de Competitividade—COMPETE) and National Funds (FCT/MEC, Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia and Ministério da Educação e Ciência) under the Partnership Agreement PT2020 UID/MULTI/ 04378/2013, UID/NEU/04539/2013, UID/DTP/04567/2016, and the project (3599-PPCDT) PTDC/DTP-FTO/1981/2014—POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016581, as well as Centro 2020 Regional Operational Programmes (CENTRO-01-0145-FEDER-000012: HealthyAging2020). FCT fellowships: SFRH/BD/87109/2012 (C. Bessa), SFRH/BD/117949/2016 (L. Raimundo), and SFRH/BD/128673/2017 (J. B. Loureiro).
ESA ; CNES (France) ; CNRS/INSU-IN2P3-INP (France) ; ASI (Italy) ; CNR (Italy) ; INAF (Italy) ; NASA (USA) ; DoE (USA) ; STFC (UK) ; UKSA (UK) ; CSIC (Spain) ; MINECO (Spain) ; JA (Spain) ; RES (Spain) ; Tekes (Finland) ; AoF (Finland) ; CSC (Finland) ; DLR (Germany) ; MPG (Germany) ; CSA (Canada) ; DTU Space (Denmark) ; SER/SSO (Switzerland) ; RCN (Norway) ; SFI (Ireland) ; FCT/MCTES (Portugal) ; ERC (EU) ; PRACE (EU) ; UK BIS NEI grants ; Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy ; Canada Foundation for Innovation under Compute Canada ; Government of Ontario ; University of Toronto ; Science and Technology Facilities Council ; Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy: DE-AC02-05CH11231 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/L000768/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/L000652/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/J005673/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/M00418X/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/L000393/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/M007065/1 ; Science and Technology Facilities Council: ST/K00333X/1 ; The Planck full mission cosmic microwave background (CMB) temperature and E-mode polarization maps are analysed to obtain constraints on primordial non-Gaussianity (NG). Using three classes of optimal bispectrum estimators - separable template-fitting (KSW), binned, and modal we obtain consistent values for the primordial local, equilateral, and orthogonal bispectrum amplitudes, quoting as our final result from temperature alone f(NL)(local) = 2.5 +/- 5.7, f(NL)(equil) = 16 +/- 70, and f(NL)(ortho) = 34 +/- 33 (68% CL, statistical). Combining temperature and polarization data we obtain f(NL)(local) = 0.8 +/- 5.0, f(NL)(equil) = 4 +/- 43, and f(NL)(ortho) = 26 +/- 21 (68% CL, statistical). The results are based on comprehensive cross-validation of these estimators on Gaussian and non-Gaussian simulations, are stable across component separation techniques, pass an extensive suite of tests, and are consistent with estimators based on measuring the Minkowski functionals of the CMB. The effect of time-domain de-glitching systematics on the bispectrum is negligible. In spite of these test outcomes we conservatively label the results including polarization data as preliminary, owing to a known mismatch of the noise model in simulations and the data. Beyond estimates of individual shape amplitudes, we present model-independent, three-dimensional reconstructions of the Planck CMB bispectrum and derive constraints on early universe scenarios that generate primordial NG, including general single-field models of inflation, axion inflation, initial state modifications, models producing parity-violating tensor bispectra, and directionally dependent vector models. We present a wide survey of scale-dependent feature and resonance models, accounting for the look elsewhere effect in estimating the statistical significance of features. We also look for isocurvature NG, and find no signal, but we obtain constraints that improve significantly with the inclusion of polarization. The primordial trispectrum amplitude in the local model is constrained to be g(NL)(local) = (9.0 +/- 7.7) x 10(4) (68% CL statistical), and we perform an analysis of trispectrum shapes beyond the local case. The global picture that emerges is one of consistency with the premises of the Lambda CDM cosmology, namely that the structure we observe today was sourced by adiabatic, passive, Gaussian, and primordial seed perturbations.
In 1985 the French government created a unique circuit for the dissemination of doctoral theses: References went to a national database "Téléthèses" whereas the documents were distributed to the university libraries in microform. In the era of the electronic document this French network of deposit of and access to doctoral theses is changing. How do you discover and locate a French thesis today, how do you get hold of a paper copy and how do you access the full electronic text? What are the catalogues and databases referencing theses since the disappearance of "Téléthèses"? Where are the archives, and are they open? What is the legal environment that rules the emerging structures and tools? This paper presents national plans on referencing and archiving doctoral theses coordinated by the government as well as some initiatives for creating full text archives. These initiatives come from universities as well as from research institutions and learned societies. "Téléthèses" records have been integrated in a union catalogue of French university libraries SUDOC. University of Lyon-2 and INSA Lyon developed procedures and tools covering the entire production chain from writing to the final access in an archive: "Cyberthèses" and "Cither". The CNRS Centre for Direct Scientific Communication at Lyon (CCSD) maintains an archive ("TEL") with about 2000 theses in all disciplines. Another repository for theses in engineering, economics and management called "Pastel" is proposed by the Paris Institute of Technology (ParisTech), a consortium of 10 engineering and commercial schools of the Paris region.
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) ; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) ; Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) ; FINEP (Brazil) ; NSFC (China) ; CNRS/IN2P3 (France) ; BMBF (Germany) ; DFG (Germany) ; HGF (Germany) ; SFI (Ireland) ; INFN (Italy) ; NASU (Ukraine) ; STFC (UK) ; NSF (USA) ; BMWFW (Austria) ; FWF (Austria) ; FNRS (Belgium) ; FWO (Belgium) ; Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) ; MES (Bulgaria) ; CAS (China) ; MoST (China) ; COLCIENCIAS (Colombia) ; MSES (Croatia) ; CSF (Croatia) ; RPF (Cyprus) ; MoER (Estonia) ; ERC IUT (Estonia) ; ERDF (Estonia) ; Academy of Finland (Finland) ; MEC (Finland) ; HIP (Finland) ; CEA (France) ; GSRT (Greece) ; OTKA (Hungary) ; NIH (Hungary) ; DAE (India) ; DST (India) ; IPM (Iran) ; NRF (Republic of Korea) ; WCU (Republic of Korea) ; LAS (Lithuania) ; MOE (Malaysia) ; UM (Malaysia) ; CINVESTAV (Mexico) ; CONACYT (Mexico) ; SEP (Mexico) ; UASLP-FAI (Mexico) ; MBIE (New Zealand) ; PAEC (Pakistan) ; MSHE (Poland) ; NSC (Poland) ; FCT (Portugal) ; JINR (Dubna) ; MON (Russia) ; RosAtom (Russia) ; RAS (Russia) ; RFBR (Russia) ; MESTD (Serbia) ; SEIDI (Spain) ; CPAN (Spain) ; MST (Taipei) ; ThEPCenter (Thailand) ; IPST (Thailand) ; STAR (Thailand) ; NSTDA (Thailand) ; TUBITAK (Turkey) ; TAEK (Turkey) ; SFFR (Ukraine) ; DOE (USA) ; MPG (Germany) ; FOM (The Netherlands) ; NWO (The Netherlands) ; MNiSW (Poland) ; NCN (Poland) ; MEN/IFA (Romania) ; MinES (Russia) ; FANO (Russia) ; MinECo (Spain) ; SNSF (Switzerland) ; SER (Switzerland) ; Marie-Curie programme ; European Research Council ; EPLANET (European Union) ; Leventis Foundation ; A. P. Sloan Foundation ; Alexander von Humboldt Foundation ; Belgian Federal Science Policy Office ; Fonds pour la Formation a la Recherche dans l'Industrie et dans l'Agriculture (FRIABelgium) ; Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium) ; Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic ; Council of Science and Industrial Research, India ; Foundation for Polish Science ; European Union, Regional Development Fund ; Compagnia di San Paolo (Torino) ; Consorzio per la Fisica (Trieste) ; MIUR (Italy) ; Thalis programme ; Aristeia programme ; EU-ESF ; Greek NSRF ; National Priorities Research Program by Qatar National Research Fund ; EPLANET ; Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions ; ERC (European Union) ; Conseil general de Haute-Savoie ; Labex ENIGMASS ; OCEVU ; Region Auvergne (France) ; XuntaGal (Spain) ; GENCAT (Spain) ; Royal Society (UK) ; Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 (UK) ; MIUR (Italy): 20108T4XTM ; The standard model of particle physics describes the fundamental particles and their interactions via the strong, electromagnetic and weak forces. It provides precise predictions for measurable quantities that can be tested experimentally. The probabilities, or branching fractions, of the strange B meson (B-s(0)) and the B-0 meson decaying into two oppositely charged muons (mu(+) and mu(-)) are especially interesting because of their sensitivity to theories that extend the standard model. The standard model predicts that the B-s(0)->mu(+)mu(-) and B-0 ->mu(+)mu(-) decays are very rare, with about four of the former occurring for every billion B-s(0) mesons produced, and one of the latter occurring for every ten billion B-0 mesons(1). A difference in the observed branching fractions with respect to the predictions of the standard model would provide a direction in which the standard model should be extended. Before the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN2 started operating, no evidence for either decay mode had been found. Upper limits on the branching fractions were an order of magnitude above the standard model predictions. The CMS (Compact Muon Solenoid) and LHCb(Large Hadron Collider beauty) collaborations have performed a joint analysis of the data from proton-proton collisions that they collected in 2011 at a centre-of-mass energy of seven teraelectronvolts and in 2012 at eight teraelectronvolts. Here we report the first observation of the B-s(0)->mu(+)mu(-) decay, with a statistical significance exceeding six standard deviations, and the best measurement so far of its branching fraction. Furthermore, we obtained evidence for the B-0 ->mu(+)mu(-) decay with a statistical significance of three standard deviations. Both measurements are statistically compatible with standard model predictions and allow stringent constraints to be placed on theories beyond the standard model. The LHC experiments will resume taking data in 2015, recording proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 teraelectronvolts, which will approximately double the production rates of B-s(0) and B-0 mesons and lead to further improvements in the precision of these crucial tests of the standard model.
We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support staff from our institutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated efficiently. We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWF and FWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI, Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMT CR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF, DNSRC and Lundbeck Foundation, Denmark; EPLANET, ERC and NSRF, European Union; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM/IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, DFG, HGF, MPG and AvH Foundation, Germany; GSRT and NSRF, Greece; ISF, MINERVA, GIF, DIP and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan; CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; BRF and RCN, Norway; MNiSW, Poland; GRICES and FCT, Portugal; MERYS (MECTS), Romania; MES of Russia and ROSATOM, Russian Federation; JINR; MSTD, Serbia; MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST/NRF, South Africa; MICINN, Spain; SRC and Wallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SER, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; NSC, Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, the Royal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular from CERN and the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden), CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT/GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain), ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA) and in the Tier-2 facilities worldwide.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11 827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long-term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.
Background Surgery is the main modality of cure for solid cancers and was prioritised to continue during COVID-19 outbreaks. This study aimed to identify immediate areas for system strengthening by comparing the delivery of elective cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in periods of lockdown versus light restriction. Methods This international, prospective, cohort study enrolled 20 006 adult (≥18 years) patients from 466 hospitals in 61 countries with 15 cancer types, who had a decision for curative surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic and were followed up until the point of surgery or cessation of follow-up (Aug 31, 2020). Average national Oxford COVID-19 Stringency Index scores were calculated to define the government response to COVID-19 for each patient for the period they awaited surgery, and classified into light restrictions (index 60). The primary outcome was the non-operation rate (defined as the proportion of patients who did not undergo planned surgery). Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to explore the associations between lockdowns and non-operation. Intervals from diagnosis to surgery were compared across COVID-19 government response index groups. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04384926. Findings Of eligible patients awaiting surgery, 2003 (10·0%) of 20 006 did not receive surgery after a median follow-up of 23 weeks (IQR 16–30), all of whom had a COVID-19-related reason given for non-operation. Light restrictions were associated with a 0·6% non-operation rate (26 of 4521), moderate lockdowns with a 5·5% rate (201 of 3646; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·77–0·84; p<0·0001), and full lockdowns with a 15·0% rate (1775 of 11 827; HR 0·51, 0·50–0·53; p<0·0001). In sensitivity analyses, including adjustment for SARS-CoV-2 case notification rates, moderate lockdowns (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·80–0·88; p<0·001), and full lockdowns (0·57, 0·54–0·60; p<0·001), remained independently associated with non-operation. Surgery beyond 12 weeks from diagnosis in patients without neoadjuvant therapy increased during lockdowns (374 [9·1%] of 4521 in light restrictions, 317 [10·4%] of 3646 in moderate lockdowns, 2001 [23·8%] of 11827 in full lockdowns), although there were no differences in resectability rates observed with longer delays. Interpretation Cancer surgery systems worldwide were fragile to lockdowns, with one in seven patients who were in regions with full lockdowns not undergoing planned surgery and experiencing longer preoperative delays. Although short-term oncological outcomes were not compromised in those selected for surgery, delays and non-operations might lead to long-term reductions in survival. During current and future periods of societal restriction, the resilience of elective surgery systems requires strengthening, which might include protected elective surgical pathways and long- term investment in surge capacity for acute care during public health emergencies to protect elective staff and services. Funding National Institute for Health Research Global Health Research Unit, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, Medtronic, Sarcoma UK, The Urology Foundation, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research.