DSM - Science topic

Hai. I observed this with a normal person when he is in difficulty and trying to solve a problem, he whispers to himself like talking to his inner-self in a "loud" for an answer.

It seems quite complicated, so it is difficult to find resolution. Anyway, I suggest to:

1. Prepare at least 2 versions of DSM, based on legacy data:

- with the whole dataset of 700 soil profiles (or about 600+ profiles up to year 2002;

- with dataset of 50+ points from the years 2003+,

and than compare their agreement.

2. Be aware, that the soil changes, and the content of SOC could be different at moment of obtaining data and this changes depend on land use (arable, pastures, forest?), fertilization, particularly manuring, and other factors. For this reason the assessment of current status of SC in the points of obtaining legacy data would be very important, if possible.

3. Be aware on some inaccuracies which could have appeared during soil mapping, such as less exact position of soil sampling points or profiles (it was difficult to record precisely geographic coordinates GPS receivers for earlier studies), map generalization, perhaps other methods for determination of SOC?

CBCL and YSR, still is more a screening tool

for sporulation try with Mncl2 Mgcl2

I found this thread helpful. I was trying DPPC w/ Cholesterol and it didn't work with the default surface area in step 2. This is the column that has 40.0 default for Cholesterol and 63.0 for DPPC but because the surface area is probably larger than 63.0 for DPPC, I increased to 75.0 and it worked.

Xylella fastidiosa is a plant pathogenic bacterium, not typically cultured for general purposes. However, if necessary, grow it in a sterile culture medium containing essential nutrients, maintain a pH around 7, and incubate at 28°C. Use appropriate safety precautions due to its potential impact on plants.

The error message you encountered indicates that the input folder you are using does not contain LAS (LiDAR) files, which are necessary for generating a Digital Surface Model (DSM) or orthomosaic. This suggests that the processing software is expecting LAS files as input, but it is not finding them in the specified folder.

World View 3 Satellite Imagery is typically not provided in the form of LAS files, as LiDAR data is different from satellite imagery. Therefore, you need to ensure that you are using the correct data and processing workflow for your specific task.

Here are some steps you can take to resolve the issue:

Verify Data: Double-check the data you have and ensure that it is indeed World View 3 satellite imagery, not LiDAR data. If you intended to process satellite imagery, make sure you have the correct data format.

Confirm Software Settings: Review the settings in your processing software to ensure that you have selected the appropriate data format for the input files. If you are processing satellite imagery, choose the correct file format for that data.

File Locations: Check if the input folder specified in the processing software contains the correct files. Ensure that the file paths are correctly specified in the software.

Supported Formats: Verify that your processing software supports the file format of your World View 3 satellite imagery. Most commonly, satellite imagery is provided in formats like GeoTIFF, JPEG, or other raster formats.

Consult Documentation: Refer to the documentation or user guide of your processing software to understand the correct workflow for handling World View 3 satellite imagery and generating DSM or orthomosaic.

Seek Support: If you are still encountering issues, reach out to the support resources of your processing software or the provider of the World View 3 satellite imagery for assistance.

By following these steps and ensuring that you have the correct data and processing settings, you should be able to successfully generate DSM or orthomosaic from World View 3 satellite imagery.

I suggest you read the paper “Wind energy potential assessment based on wind speed, its direction and power data prepared by Zhiming Wang & Weimin Liu and published by Scientific Report 2021.

What is Cidi-Sam?

The book "Numerical Recipies" contains an algorithm the authors call RFSAFE (I believe) that combines the speed of Newton Raphson with the safety of binary search. As long as you isolate the zero your looking for between two numbers (i.e. bounds) just as required by binary search, you will compute that zero using RFSAFE. Note that there needs to be just one zero that lies between the bounds.

However, in agreement with Mr. Benton's answer, you should check your implementation of binary search first. I recommend trying RFSAFE only if your implementation of binary search is correct and it's still too slow due to the number of instances of its use.

For many of the beneficial bacteria bacteria there fluorescence is not visible in the visiible light spectrum but there fluorsecence is found and detected under ultraviot light exposures.

It is useful to remember two things. The first is that in the US, your insurer requires a diagnosis before they will pay for your treatment. For this reason, DSM tends to have a wide coverage. These are not diseases so much as categories for insurance reimbursement.

The second is that every diagnosis in DSM is fought over. Researchers who disagree do research, bring data to the table, argue their case. For example, the original DSM diagnosis of bulimia did not include any psychological symptoms, and resulted in a slew of research that resulted in significant changes to the next version. Likewise, the inclusion of borderline personality disorder (which required some hard-won battles!) resulted in a surge of interest in developing therapies and refining the diagnostic criteria. And the current DSM is still struggling to get useful criteria for personality disorders – far from being settled, the controversy continues!

So DSM is a work in progress, always. It will always arouse controversy, but I regard this as a vital function.

Dear Tanjii,

depending on the equipment you use the viscosity of the slurry can vary but of course must be very liquid and fluid.

Check about jet grouting method where you pump at very high pressure the slurry (few seconds on Marsh cone test) in the ground till 40-50 meters in depth. In this case the standard product used are Portland based. I think you will find there all the specifications.

If you use less powerful system you can use more creamy consistency but still with low Marsh cone time, to be pumped in the ground through thin pipes using till 5-6 Bar of air pressure, at 3-4 m of depth.

Using Geopolymers I had good results using both equipments adjusting the fluidity using extra water (quite low however because I designed very fluid GP binder).

But I think you are working with AAM alkali activated materials that have completely different balancing. Because GP and AAM aren’t the same and also they have very different way to harden.

For this application I suggest to check about your precursor because specially fly ash is polluted material with lot of heavy metals and often even lead so pumping into the ground couldn’t be the best solution (I’m thinking about water source ).

But I don’t know your project.

Best regards

Alex Reggiani

Do you mean the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association? And if so are you looking for diagnostic data on patients or what? No-one has answered this because it's not at all clear what you want.

Shangharsha Thapa

Thank you bro

Thank you for your answer Dr. Qamar Ul Islam . But I want to learn and discuss the metrics or indices that can be used in evaluation of the DSM performance.

Best regards,

The determination of flight conditions varies based on the UAV model, flight application, and the

size of the imaging area; thus, preparing a manual for flight conditions is extremely dicult. There

are many issues to consider for UAV utilization, such as various flight conditions and dierences in

tree species. Therefore, in order to utilize UAV in forest management, it is important to accumulate

basic data related to estimates of tree height and volume using UAV, for verification of accuracy.

In DSM 5 there is a specifier for Major Depressive Disorder, "with peripartum onset". This concerns major depressive episodes that start during pregnancy or within the four weeks following delivery. The four week postpartum specifier has been a source of considerable discussion in the literature however that's what is in DSM 5.

No, but if you tell me I will.

Most software package uses IDW and TIN based interpolation.

Narcissism and neuroticism are not the same. The former is a personality disorder and from that often the environment suffers more than the person him/her self. A neurotic person suffers more than the environment from his/her symptoms. There is also a difference in reality perception.

Dear Emily

I thin this site can be useful for you:

If you load the polygons into a file geodatabase it will add a perimeter field. Or just add a field to the shapefile caller "Perim" and then right-click and "Calculate Geometry > Perimeter"

It sounds like you're trying to extract raster data to a polygon file. If that's the case, the extraction tools in ArcGIS should do the trick: https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/tools/spatial-analyst-toolbox/extract-by-polygon.htm

My guess is that this particular tool is the one that you're looking for: https://desktop.arcgis.com/en/arcmap/10.3/tools/spatial-analyst-toolbox/extract-by-polygon.htm

As a logical, normal and adaptive worry or affliction and not as an irrational, hysteroid or hypochondriac cognitive-emotional nanifestation ... moreover, I would classify it as a healthy response and, I reiterate, ADAPTIVE

Yes Randy. I too really liked multi axial system of DSM IV. Its very convenient when formulating a case. DSM V diagnostic trees are bit confusing sometimes. ICD 11 seems to be much better.

Features of Cabin fever are very similar to that of quarantine fatigue. The syndrome comes in different disguises. I have seen a number of patients presenting with symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Following the suggestion of Saheed Olaniyi about using the point cloud, I would recommend the open source solution CloudCompare. You can classify your point cloud and create a DEM using its plugins.

yes, thank you!

I think maybe you need pay attention to the initial concentration of Bacillus cereus you inoculated and the culture time of Bacillus cereus. And sporulation is a normal stage of many spore bacteria.

Best wishes.

Abdelkader BOUAZIZ Thanks for the reply, my latest finding is that the same dope solution diluted in benzyl alcohol cures much faster, like in 18 hours. Does this follow with your guess? Also, is there any inhibitor to keep this reaction happenning?

Viktor E. Frankl: Man's search for meaning has profoundly impacted my way of thinking. As a general rule textbooks are rather old and review articles are more

fresh and useful. This I have discovered. It is impossible to know what you are most interested in. I can attach some papers of my logotherapeutic interest:

In general, I concur with the responses from McColloch, Philpott, and Repisti. McCulloch's last sentence, " I personally am happy to see the term used as long as I understand what is being measured in what population. ", is what I would like to focus on. In diagnosing using the DSM-5, we use the terms prevalence and incidence as related to individuals receiving a particular diagnosis with prevalence being the number of individuals receiving that diagnosis at a particular point in time (ex. today or this day) and incidence being the number of NEW cases of a disorder within a given point in time (ex. new cases within the past year). However, prevalence, as stated by the above researchers, does not simply refer to a diagnosis. Like McCulloch, I would happily accept the use of the term prevalence if the research thoroughly describes how prevalence is being used.

Hi Saroj Kumar Dash, you could work directly with UAV point clouds and exporting them in CloudCompare, after that try to get the DTM using the CSF plugin.

https://www.cloudcompare.org/doc/wiki/index.php?title=CSF_(plugin)

Refer this it may be useful

Hi Sarah,

Please take also into account that the number of copies of 16S rRNA on the genome can vary across bacteria from different species (1 to 15). If you will experimentally contaminate your samples with your E. coli strain of interest, this difference is of course not relevant, but it can lead to misleading results if you have more complex microbial communities.

If you can to west coast, you are welcome to visit our lab.

What is the significance of considering discrete soil-element columns? In practice, regular spacing is usually used. If necessary, the spacing may be varied to mitigate the liquefaction susceptibility of the specified cites.

Dear Shreya,

You might consider reading the following articles by Tandon et al.

"Data suggest that changes from DSM-IV to DSM-5 in the definition of criterion A symptoms should have little impact on caseness of schizophrenia, with less than 2% of patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia not meeting DSM-5 criteria because of these changes. Our findings are similar to those of the two other studies that have investigated this issue (Peralta and Cuesta, 1999, Allardyce et al., 2007)... the explicit conceptualization of schizophrenia as a psychotic disorder and a requirement that psychotic pathology in the form of delusions, hallucinations, or disorganized speech be present in order for it to be diagnosed... should have little influence on the prevalence of schizophrenia as over 96% of individuals diagnosed with DSM-IV schizophrenia were found to have at least one of these “positive” symptoms."

If you are looking for a software, FME has an efficien attribute fusion pipeline. Else, the paper may provide you with additional methodology bulletpoints

I'm agree with Dr Riedel. In addition you can follow this link:

I hope this will help you

Since 1980, the DSM-III and its various iterations through the DSM-IV-TR have systematically excluded individuals from the diagnosis of major depressive disorder if symptoms began within months after the death of a loved one (2 months in DSM-IV), unless the depressive syndrome was 'severely' impairing and/or accompanied by specific features. This criterion became known as the 'bereavement exclusion'. No other adverse life events were noted to negate the diagnosis of major depressive disorder if all other symptomatic, duration, severity and distress/impairment criteria were met. However, studies since the inception of the bereavement exclusion have shown that depressive syndromes occurring after bereavement share many of the same features as other, non-bereavement related depressions, tend to be chronic and/or recurrent if left untreated, interfere with the resolution of grief, and respond to treatment. Furthermore, the bereavement exclusion has had the unintended consequence of suggesting that grief should end in only 2 months, or that grief and major depressive disorder cannot co-occur. To prevent the denial of diagnosis and the consideration of sometimes much needed care, even after bereavement or other significant losses, the DSM-5 no longer contains the bereavement exclusion. Instead, the DSM-5 now permits the diagnosis of major depressive disorder after and during bereavement and includes a note and a comprehensive footnote in the major depressive episode criteria set to guide clinicians in making the diagnosis in this context. The decision to make this change was widely and publically debated and remains controversial. This article reports on the rationale for this decision and the way the DSM-5 now addresses the challenges of diagnosing major depressive disorder in the context of someone grieving the loss of a loved one.

I believe that the prevalence of ID in the overall population is around 1%, and the prevalence of severe ID within the population of people with an intellectual disability is 6 in 1000.

That is, 6 in 1000 individuals with an ID have a severe ID.

I have read that about 85% of individuals with ID have a mild ID, about 10% have a moderate ID, and about 10-15% have a moderate ID, and a small percentage (under 1%), have a severe ID. This fits with what is written in DSM-5.

Try Japanase data AW3D : http://www.aw3d.jp/en/ or WordDEM(TM): http://www.intelligence-airbusds.com/elevation30/

I would recommend the LAStools software distributed by Rapidlasso (free and commercial versions) that is specially designed to work with large clouds of 3D points.

A multilayer perceptron (MLP) is a class of feedforward artificial neural network. An MLP consists of at least three layers of nodes. In input instead of pixel's value I suggest to use a aggregate pixel's value that is a patch. For example the mean of patch of 100x100 pixel so you taking into accunt adjacent pixel, shape and so on. Patch dimension is function of image sizew and what do you want to classify

thank you Lokeshgupta Bhamidi , you can use simulation data .

You can convert from 3D to 2D using an averaging technique mentioned in ppt for numerical simulation of DEEP MIXED column using plaxis 2d

Hello-

My recommendation would be to contact the vendor for an explanation. There are no standard folder naming conventions for LiDAR data. The standards referenced by the ASPRS website are in regards to the las files, not folder names. I also wouldn't assume that c1 and c2 are the DTM and DSM only because there's no standard for folder naming. Of course all of this could be resolved if there was metadata written, but I'm assuming this doesn't exist either.

Good luck

-al

The legacy version of the HOMER energy https://users.homerenergy.com/pages/homer_legacy contains some useful case studies for you. You may also build a model for a small system (like a household) using the HOMER QuickStart http://quickstart.homerenergy.com/#/intro

Hello!

I think you need to work from whole to part, instead of part to whole. In ERDAS imagine mark all GCP and supply respective coordinates, while rectifying select elevation source from DEM either cartsat or dem.

"though may be accurate are not directly usable because the hill tops and valleys may not accurately register with the GCPs available." I dont think it has much effect if you use 90m, 30m, or 10 m DEM. Since the smallest measurable unit in RS is pixel. If you have GCP whose precision is +_ 5 cm, that will fall any where on 10 m pixel.

In such scenario, do we need to go for LIDAR based elevation values which is a costly affair? Or is it suggested to use stereo pair which is also a costly affair?

As you said above methods are costly and doesn't improve your accuracy very much in-terms of orthorectification. 'Economy of the accuracy' is crucial here.

regards

Thanks for your answer. We are looking for a brief diagnostic psychiatric interview for our study, that`s why I was looking for more information about the MINI International Neuropsychiatric Interview.

I just saw your question. It is probably too late, but I the following papers might be of some interest to you.

1.       New directions and new tools for interface management

2.      Interface management of subsea field development

Dear Ahmad

Registered loads include, typically, pool pumps, air conditioners and electric hot water systems. And yes, the utility has full control over these loads. Instead, the consumers are awarded by a way of financial incentive such as recurring annual payment. The consumer may control the local registered loads in a way that the critical peak is not increased, e.g. the consumer may turn off and/or turn down an air-conditioner which is registered in DLC program. Likewise, as Labib said, the consumer control cannot over write the utility control.

Whichever method you ultimately choose will have its imperfections, so a step forward might be to acknowledge this dilemma and justify the method you've chosen and how it suits your research purposes but not others'. 

Please go through the link, then only you can visualize our issues.

(Page No - 12 and 13)

Dear Tobi, dear Edwin,

thank you so much for your answers, they have been very helpful for my research!  

Best regards,

Laura.

Did you see this? The link is more of what you seem to be looking for

Looks like things  will change in 2018:

Journal List

World Psychiatry

v.15(3); 2016 Oct

PMC5032513

Logo of worldpsych

World Psychiatry. 2016 Oct; 15(3): 291–292.

Published online 2016 Sep 22. doi: 10.1002/wps.20353

PMCID: PMC5032513

Bodily distress disorder in ICD‐11: problems and prospects

Oye Gureje 1 and Geoffrey M. Reed 2

Classifying the disorders associated with burdensome somatic concerns has been a challenging exercise in psychiatric nosology1. The classifications of these conditions in ICD‐10 and DSM‐IV have not fared much better than earlier attempts2. Even though not exactly identical, these classifications were broadly similar and criticisms of either system are therefore generally applicable to both. Among the most salient criticisms are those relating to their utility in routine clinical practice. These include the rarity of the major categories of the group, both in the community and in general clinical practice, as well as the evidence suggesting poor diagnostic reliability3.

A central feature of the definition of these disorders, that the symptoms are not due to physical or medical causes, has been criticized for being unreliable and for posing a fundamental nosological problem: defining a disorder on the basis of the absence of a feature rather than the presence of a problem4. Labels assigned to burdensome somatic preoccupations that have come to be seen as pejorative create another problem for clinical utility. Some patients object to the term “somatoform”, which they think may imply that their symptoms are of doubtful clinical importance and are “in their heads” or not real. Furthermore, the notion that the symptoms are medically unexplained is often rejected by patients as essentially an issue of detection.

As part of the activities designed to lead to the approval of ICD‐11 by the World Health Assembly in 2018, the World Health Organization, through its International Advisory Group5, constituted the Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders Working Group, which, among other tasks, was asked to propose changes to the section on somatoform disorders in ICD‐10. The Working Group has proposed a new and much simplified category of bodily distress disorder, which replaces all of ICD‐10 categories within the group of somatoform disorders (F45.0) and, to a large extent, neurasthenia (F48.0), bringing these together under a single category. The only ICD‐10 somatoform condition excluded from BDD is hypochondriasis (F45.2).

In the proposed new classification, bodily distress disorder is defined as “characterized by the presence of bodily symptoms that are distressing to the individual and excessive attention directed toward the symptoms, which may be manifest by repeated contact with health care providers. If a medical condition is causing or contributing to the symptoms, the degree of attention is clearly excessive in relation to its nature and progression. Excessive attention is not alleviated by appropriate clinical examination and investigations and appropriate reassurance. Bodily symptoms and associated distress are persistent, being present on most days for at least several months, and are associated with significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning. Typically, the disorder involves multiple bodily symptoms that may vary over time. Occasionally there is a single symptom – usually pain or fatigue – that is associated with the other features of the disorder” (this is the proposed brief definition for bodily distress disorder; for the format of ICD‐11 diagnostic guidelines, see First et al6).

Responding to the same set of criticisms, the DSM‐5 created a new grouping called Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders, in which the prototypic condition is somatic symptom disorder. Even though this diagnosis can be given to a condition with “one or more somatic symptoms”, it nevertheless requires that “excessive thoughts, feelings, or behaviors are related to the somatic symptoms or associated health concerns”. Specifically, for a diagnosis of somatic symptom disorder, at least one of three psychological criteria should be present: health anxiety, disproportionate and persistent concerns about the medical seriousness of the symptoms, and excessive time and energy devoted to the symptoms or health concerns.

In both the proposed bodily distress disorder and somatic symptom disorder, the most fundamental revision has been the abolition of the distinction between medically explained and medically unexplained somatic complaints. On the other hand, there are now specific psychological criteria that need to be fulfilled before the diagnosis can be given. The revised classifications thus address the problem of defining somatoform disorders on the basis of the absence of a feature (a physical or medical cause) by specifying the features that must be present, such as distress and excessive thoughts and behaviors7.

Dropping the criterion of “medically unexplained” is not without its consequences and has been criticized in somatic symptom disorder. It has been argued that patients with medical conditions and with a justifiable reason for somatic complaints may receive an inappropriate psychiatric diagnosis, with the possibility of associated stigma8. The specification in bodily distress disorder that “if a medical condition is causing or contributing to the symptoms, the degree of attention is clearly excessive in relation to its nature and progression” is meant to address this concern.

A single somatic symptom may lead to a diagnosis of bodily distress disorder or somatic symptom disorder. A good justification for this revision is that a single symptom, for example pain, may sometimes be as bothersome as multiple somatic symptoms. However, the point has been made that this lowering of the threshold for the diagnosis may lead to an inappropriate labeling of apparently healthy persons as having a psychological disorder8. This concern is addressed in bodily distress disorder by the requirement that other features, in particular associated psychological features, as well as significant functional impairment, be present before the diagnosis is given. Also, further information is provided in the proposed diagnostic guidelines that seeks to delineate mild bodily distress disorder from normal somatic concerns which may exist in the community and do not require clinical attention.

One of the important differences between the proposed ICD‐11 and the DSM‐5 approaches is the name of the prototype disorder. While the DSM‐5 has retained the word “somatic”, the proposed ICD category has avoided this term altogether. While no label can prevent completely the risk of negative connotations and misinterpretations, a more descriptive label that avoids the term “somatic” might prove more acceptable to both patients and primary care clinicians.

While the DSM‐5 has retained hypochondriasis (or health anxiety) within the cluster of Somatic Symptom and Related Disorders, the current proposal for ICD‐11 has placed hypochondriasis within the grouping of Obsessive‐Compulsive and Related Disorders. The position of DSM‐5 is supported by evidence suggesting a high co‐occurrence of hypochondriasis with somatization disorder as well as shared cognitive perceptual styles between the two conditions. On the other hand, the position of the ICD‐11 Working Group is supported by findings associating repetitive cognition and behaviors as well as task‐related neural activation patterns on brain imaging with hypochondriasis1. Also, there is evidence that, unlike somatization disorders, hypochondriasis responds to some treatments used for obsessive‐compulsive and related disorders9.

The new proposals for bodily distress disorder are being systematically tested in the field studies conducted as part of the ICD revision process. These studies include Internet‐based approaches, in which a large number of clinicians participate through the Global Clinical Practice Network (http://gcp.network), as well field studies conducted in clinical settings. It is hoped that the findings from the field studies will provide opportunities for a further strengthening of the utility and validity of the classification of burdensome somatic concerns in ICD‐11 prior to its approval by the World Health Assembly.

Oye Gureje1, Geoffrey M. Reed2

1WHO Collaborating Centre for Research and Training in Mental Health, Neuroscience and Substance Abuse, Department of Psychiatry, University of Ibadan, Ibadan, Nigeria; 2World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland and School of Psychology, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico

O. Gureje is Chair of the WHO Working Group on Somatic Distress and Dissociative Disorders. G.M. Reed is a member of the WHO Secretariat, Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and, except as specifically indicated, do not represent the official positions of the WHO Working Group, the International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD‐10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders or the WHO.

Go to:

References

1. Gureje O. Curr Opin Psychiatry 2015;5:345‐9. [PubMed]

2. Mayou R, Kirmayer LJ, Simon G et al. Am J Psychiatry 2005;162:847‐55. [PubMed]

3. Creed F, Gureje O. Int Rev Psychiatry 2012;24:556‐67. [PubMed]

4. Voigt K, Nagel A, Meyer B et al. J Psychosom Res 2010;68:403‐14. [PubMed]

5. International Advisory Group for the Revision of ICD‐10 Mental and Behavioural Disorders . World Psychiatry 2011;10:86‐92. [PubMed]

6. First MB, Reed GM, Saxena S et al. World Psychiatry 2015;14:82‐90. [PubMed]

7. Rief W, Martin A. Annu Rev Clin Psychol 2014;10:339‐67. [PubMed]

8. Frances A. J Nerv Ment Dis 2013;201:530‐1. [PubMed]

9. Greeven A, Van Balkom AJ, Visser S et al. Am J Psychiatry 2007;164:91‐9. [PubMed]

Articles from World Psychiatry are provided here courtesy of The World Psychiatric Association

Thank you for your answer! I reframed my question and will look into that paper as well!

Dear Verly, 

check  if these  papers help you:

you can ask Cargill to see if they have them.

Hi Maureen,

The individual (or group) psychotherapy intervention for the treatment of depression with the strongest empirical evidence is called Behavioral Activation; this is the "active ingredient" in Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. If you review the scientific literature, you will find it is as effective as medications at treating depression and more effective at preventing relapse. FYI, while there are undoubtedly cases where it makes sense to consider a purely biological source of depression (e.g., thyroid or brain disease) and to treat the underlying medical condition accordingly, there are compelling reasons to question the medical model of depression as simply reflecting a neurotransmitter imbalance (you can read more in the link below). Also, it may be worth considering that "having" everything doesn't necessarily result in fulfillment; for many (all?) people greater satisfaction is to be found in what you are "giving" through purposeful activity guided by personal values (check out the literature on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, which combines behavioral activation, mindfulness practice, and values clarification to treat depression).

Warm regards,

Paul

Could you tell me the refinement of  RPCs with data collection  (differential GPS)

From a clinical perspective sometimes it would be difficult to assess separately fatigue or lack of motivation in a patient with psychomotor inhibition, because this inhibition seems to be a syndrome that includes other 'negative symptoms'. However, in the other hand it is very frequent to find depressed patients with fatigue, lack of energy, lack of interest, etc. in the absence of symptom "psychomotor inhibition"

Hi,

You can get ALOS Global Digital Surface Model from the following website. It is of 30m.

My dear friend: Don't try to procure from your friends. The best way is to directly approach ATCC, NBRC, NCIMB, JCM etc. You can be sure of the purity of the culture inspite of high mortality of the cell in the vials and your work will go unhindered. It is not that your friends are going to give you contaminated cultures but these organisations (listed above) are more reliable. 

Thank You Sir.

To summarize I followed the advice of Dean Gesch at the USGS which is also mirrored in the Kellndorfer et al. 2004 paper.  The SRTM data is the DSM.  I tried following the Kellndorfer approach and had mixed results. I took the DSM from the SRTM and then subtracted a NED DEM to try to produce a CHM (canopy height model). The results looked promising in some areas, but it was also evident that topography had a huge effect on the accuracy and needed to be dealt with in a comprehensive manner. Miliaresis 2008 http://www.mdpi.com/1424-8220/8/5/3134/htm applied a series of aspect/slope/land cover corrections and got decent results, and I attempted some of this using slope and aspect, but never quite followed through to the full extent.  I've got some concerns that using land cover to improve the CHM prediction and then using the CHM to predict land cover may be a bit circular, however.

Hello Sebastian, yes we have to have a Remote Pilot Qualification (Ground School and Flight Test) and be approved by the CAA. This enables the correct insurance and for each operation land owner permissions and risk assessments are required. If in controlled airspace we also need to contact air traffic control. 

Dear Abdelfattah,

Every 'mental' disorder (BPD)  patients need to be addressed with dire sensitivities. It is made easier if it is listed as a diagnosable DSM illness.

BPD being a 'serious' mental illness, talking with a highly dedicated and genuinely caring professionals create great trust to the patient.

To the patient, it makes it very worthwhile at one instant to know that someone sympathizes, care and most willing to 'treat' him/her. That's when the talking session, even done once would be very effective.

When this fails, there are several approaches you could apply using -

- treatments include individual therapy, group skills training and phone coaching

- treatments include recognizing and changing the patient's belief system

- treatments include talking out the patient's feeling and addresing it accordingly

- treatment includes situational based scenarios brought upon by the therapist for the patient to apply elsewhere

- not useful but not detriment to include supplement like Omega 3 (not vetted) yet could relieve BPD symptoms nonetheless

- educating the patient on the importance of caring for one self  at all time

In order to minimise remissions, always refrain verbally from labeling BPD as a PSY patient to or among other healthcare team. 

This is  because such patient (knowing the gravity of this illness) will either walk away for good or die a brutal death because the doctor-patient trust and privacy have been broken totally.

Best regards - Mariam

Note that DSM-5 should be written with a "5" not "V". See here: http://www.apa.org/monitor/2013/04/dsm.aspx where they say "The idea is that there will be versions 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 and that these sorts of mini-editions can come along more frequently than they had in the past so that the manual can be more responsive to research as things unfold"

If you mean in simulink, then you only neec to replace the accumulator by ct integrator (1/s)....

The Iris Center put out a great side-by-side comparison. I've attached it for you here.

Such a 'big big question'. The response you get may also depend upon the area your respondents are in (Psychiatrists, pharmacology, psychology...). It is possible it is a wait and see...

Dear Rojas,

thanks for you recomendation. i will read it soon....

Dear Mahyad,

I have played with B. subtilis DB104 before I got B. megaterium DSM 319 project. I've found promising method for B. subtilis electroporation. You right that we must increasing the recovery time, it would give best effect to the transformation efficiency. But unfortunately I did't got  good result when applied that method to B. megaterium DSM 319. 

I treat my B.subtilis with glycine and sucrose before i did electroporation. how about you? did you give different treatment to your subtilis? maybe it will help me with this megaterium.