Search

This study challenges the conventional perception of waste as a discarded object devoid of use and aims to redefine its nature by dissociating it from the boundaries of value. To achieve this, the term sslgi (sweeping) is proposed to shift the focus of waste management from relegation to obsolescence to active disposition that retains latent value. This conceptual shift redefines "reuse" in design as the activation of the inherent value in objects. This research also explores the creation of novel materials, exemplified by the extraterrestrial material StarCrete, which is composed of dust, soil, and minimal organic additives, along with designers' use of new materials derived from limestone dust and material-driven speculative design that experiments with synthetic (plastic) and natural substances. These cases illuminate the inherent [re]usability of material entities that are ready for activation in multiple interconnected contexts. From this perspective, we can re-view the role of the designer as [re]assembling existing materials and negotiating various influencing factors. Ultimately, this research demonstrates that transcending the binary perceptions of value and worthlessness allows designers to approach [re]use beyond the confines of the production-consumption-disposal paradigms, thereby decoupling objects from the deterministic use values imposed on them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study aimed to examine the reliability and validity of the Korean version of the Utrecht Grief Rumination Scale (UGRS) among healthcare workers who witnessed patient deaths. We also examined whether grief rumination may impact the cognitive‐behavioral model of hypochondriasis. Methods: This study was conducted via an anonymous online survey targeting healthcare workers who had worked at a tertiary hospital and had witnessed patient deaths over the previous 2 years. Demographic data and responses to the UGRS, the Pandemic Grief Scale (PGS) for healthcare workers, the Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemic‐9 (SAVE‐9), the Obsession with COVID‐19 Scale (OCS), and the Coronavirus Reassurance‐Seeking Behaviors Scale (CRBS) were collected by requesting participants to recall their emotional state during the 2 weeks after witnessing a patient's death. Results: The Korean version of the UGRS is reliable (Cronbach's alpha = 0.941) and valid (comparative fit index = 0.920, Tucker–Lewis index = 0.900, root‐mean‐square‐error of approximation = 0.102, standardized root‐mean‐square residual = 0.050) for measuring grief rumination in healthcare workers. The OCS was predicted by CRBS (β = 0.19, p < 0.001), SAVE‐9 (β = 0.45, p < 0.001), UGRS (β = 0.16, p = 0.010), and PGS (β = 0.16, p = 0.010, adjusted R2 = 0.49, F = 52.9, p < 0.001). In mediation analysis, grief rumination directly influenced coronavirus preoccupation; the relationship was mediated by viral anxiety and coronavirus reassurance‐seeking behavior. Conclusion: Grief rumination of healthcare workers who witnessed patient death requires further exploration as it may influence hypochondriacal responses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Oxaliplatin is an anticancer drug used primarily for cancers of the gastrointestinal tract, and oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reaction is a rare but serious side effect. This study aimed to identify the clinical characteristics and risk factors for oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions in patients with colorectal cancer.This retrospective study included 280 patients who developed oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions and 476 patients who did not.Logistic regression analysis indicated that a history of allergy (odds ratio (OR) = 2.232, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.209, 4.119), P = .010), previous oxaliplatin exposure (OR = 8.081, 95% CI (3.024, 21.593), P < .001), and chemotherapy regimen (OR = 2.148, 95% CI (1.411, 3.271), P < .001) were risk factors for oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions. These reactions averaged 7.29 ± 2.78 (median 7, 1–16) cycles, with a mean cumulative dose of 589.53 ± 274.43 mg. Grade 2 oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions were the most common, occurring in 197 patients (70.4%), followed by grade 3 reactions in 68 patients (24.3%), and grade 4 reactions in 9 patients (3.2%). The most common symptom of oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions was itching (211 patients, 75.4%), followed by facial flushing (133 patients, 47.5%), and chest discomfort (77 patients, 27.5%).We identified a history of allergy to previous oxaliplatin exposure and chemotherapy regimens as risk factors for oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions. Healthcare providers should be aware of the risk factors for oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions and carefully monitor patients receiving oxaliplatin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The extent to which performance validity (PVT) and symptom validity (SVT) tests measure separate constructs is unclear. Prior research using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2 & RF) suggested that PVTs and SVTs are separate but related constructs. However, the relationship between Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) SVTs and PVTs has not been explored. This study aimed to replicate previous MMPI research using the PAI, exploring the relationship between PVTs and overreporting SVTs across three subsamples, neurodevelopmental (attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)/learning disorder), psychiatric, and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Participants included 561 consecutive referrals who completed the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and the PAI. Three subgroups were created based on referral question. The relationship between PAI SVTs and the PVT was evaluated through multiple regression analysis. The results demonstrated the relationship between PAI symptom overreporting SVTs, including Negative Impression Management (NIM), Malingering Index (MAL), and Cognitive Bias Scale (CBS), and PVTs varied by referral subgroup. Specifically, overreporting on CBS but not NIM and MAL significantly predicted poorer PVT performance in the full sample and the mTBI sample. In contrast, none of the overreporting SVTs significantly predicted PVT performance in the ADHD/learning disorder sample but conversely, all SVTs predicted PVT performance in the psychiatric sample. The results partially replicated prior research comparing SVTs and PVTs and suggested that constructs measured by SVTs and PVTs vary depending upon population. The results support the necessity of both PVTs and SVTs in clinical neuropsychological practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]