ALBERT

Description: Fast radiative transfer (RT) methods are commonplace in most algorithms which retrieve the column-averaged dry-mole fraction of carbon dioxide (XCO2) in the Earth’s atmosphere. These methods are required to keep the computational effort at a manageable level and to allow for operational processing of tens of thousands of measurements per day. Without utilizing any fast RT method, the involved computation times would be one to two orders of magnitude larger. In this study, we investigate three established methods within the same retrieval algorithm, and for the first time, analyze the impact of the fast RT method while keeping every other aspect of the algorithm the same. We perform XCO2 retrievals on measurements from the OCO-2 instrument and apply quality filters and parametric bias correction. We find that the central 50% of scene-by-scene differences in XCO2 between retrieval sets, after threshold filtering and bias correction, that use different fast RT methods, are less than 0.40 ppm for land scenes, and less than 0.11 ppm for ocean scenes. Significant regional differences larger than 0.3 ppm are observed and further studies with larger samples and regional-scale subsets need to be undertaken to fully understand the impact on applications that utilize space-based XCO2.

Description: Background: despite the efforts of multiple stakeholders to promote appropriate care throughout the healthcare system, studies show that two out of three lower back pain (LBP) patients expect to receive imaging. We used the Choosing Wisely Canada patient-oriented framework, prioritizing patient engagement, to develop an intervention that addresses lower back pain imaging overuse. Methods: to develop this intervention, we collaborated with a multidisciplinary advisory team, including two patient partners with lower back pain, researchers, clinicians, healthcare administrators, and the Choosing Wisely Canada lead for Saskatchewan. For this qualitative study, data were collected through two advisory team meetings, two individual interviews with lower back pain patient partners, and three focus groups with lower back pain patient participants. A lower back pain prescription pad was developed as an outcome of these consultations. Results: participants reported a lack of interactive and informative communication was a significant barrier to receiving appropriate care. The most cited content information for inclusion in this intervention was treatments known to work, including physical activity, useful equipment, and reliable sources of educational material. Participants also suggested it was important that benefits and risks of imaging were explained on the pad. Three key themes derived from the data were also used to guide development of the intervention: (a) the role of imaging in LBP diagnosis; (b) the impact of the patient-physician relationship on LBP diagnosis and treatment; and (c) the lack of patient awareness of Choosing Wisely Canada and their recommendations. Conclusions: the lower back pain patient-developed prescription pad may help patients and clinicians engage in informed conversations and shared decision making that could support reduce unnecessary lower back pain imaging.