Epidemiologic studies have adapted to the genomics era by forming large international consortia to overcome issues of large data volume and small sample size. Whereas both cohort and well-conducted case-control studies can inform disease risk from genetic susceptibility, cohort studies offer the additional advantages of assessing lifestyle and environmental exposure-disease time sequences often over a life course. Consortium involvement poses several logistical and ethical issues to investigators, some of which are unique to cohort studies, including the challenge to harmonize prospectively collected lifestyle and environmental exposures validly across individual studies. An open forum to discuss the opportunities and challenges of large-scale cohorts and their consortia was held in June 2009 in Banff, Canada, and is summarized in this report.

No description available.

It turns out that for most users of spatial data presents a harmonization of data (as an elimination of heterogeneity) as the greatest problem - a transformation their own data sets to the data specifications produced by the INSPIRE Directive so as not to limit current processes processing, management, sharing and presentation of data. Therefore, they need the widest possible description of spatial data, because it will only eliminate the problems of heterogeneity. The author of this Ph.D. thesis dealt with the opportunities which ontologies bring to the process of data modelling. The aim was to describe using ontologies the selected part (classification systems) of data models of spatial data themes "Land Cover" and "Land Use" which are defined in Annexes II and III of the INSPIRE directive. Developed ontologies serve as a source of information on classification systems. Their evaluation (so-called reasoning) will provide new information (relationships between taxonomy elements) that play an important role in the transformation process of classification systems as part of the harmonization of spatial data. Creating of ontologies consisted of three main steps - selection of appropriate methodology, development of a basic ontology structure and iterative process of populating and specification of...

Background: Subjective cognitive decline (SCD) is recognized as a risk stage for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and other dementias, but its prevalence is not well known. We aimed to use uniform criteria to better estimate SCD prevalence across international cohorts. Methods: We combined individual participant data for 16 cohorts from 15 countries (members of the COSMIC consortium) and used qualitative and quantitative (Item Response Theory/IRT) harmonization techniques to estimate SCD prevalence. Results: The sample comprised 39,387 cognitively unimpaired individuals above age 60. The prevalence of SCD across studies was around one quarter with both qualitative harmonization/QH (23.8%, 95%CI = 23.3–24.4%) and IRT (25.6%, 95%CI = 25.1–26.1%); however, prevalence estimates varied largely between studies (QH 6.1%, 95%CI = 5.1–7.0%, to 52.7%, 95%CI = 47.4–58.0%; IRT: 7.8%, 95%CI = 6.8–8.9%, to 52.7%, 95%CI = 47.4–58.0%). Across studies, SCD prevalence was higher in men than women, in lower levels of education, in Asian and Black African people compared to White people, in lower- and middle-income countries compared to high-income countries, and in studies conducted in later decades. Conclusions: SCD is frequent in old age. Having a quarter of older individuals with SCD warrants further investigation of its significance, as a risk stage for AD and other dementias, and of ways to help individuals with SCD who seek medical advice. Moreover, a standardized instrument to measure SCD is needed to overcome the measurement variability currently dominant in the field.

Problématique. Cette thèse examine comment la pression sociale — issue de la norme sociale que voter est un devoir civique — influence la décision d’aller voter ou non. La recherche sur la participation électorale est largement dominée par une vision de l’électeur comme étant un acteur individuel et rationnel. Ce faisant, trop peu d’attention a été portée spécifiquement au rôle du cercle social comme vecteur de pression sociale. De plus, une importante littérature en psychologie sociale démontre de la puissante influence des normes sociales et de la pression sociale qui s’en dégage sur les comportements. En science politique, les études expérimentales associées au projet Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) ont démontré l’effet causal de la pression sociale sur la participation électorale. Cependant, ces études ne nous aident pas à comprendre comment cette pression s’exerce dans la vie quotidienne, ni à en déterminer la fréquence, l’intensité, ou encore qui l’exerce et qui la subit. Quelques études observationnelles récentes traitent de certaines de ces questions et offrent de premiers éléments de réponse. Cette thèse s’inscrit dans cette littérature émergente, avec pour objectifs de mesurer, décrire et comprendre la pression sociale pour aller voter et son influence sur la participation électorale en dehors d’un contexte expérimental. Questions de recherche. Je cherche à répondre à quatre questions fondamentales sur la pression sociale pour aller voter : 1) Combien ? Quelle proportion de personnes rapportent de la pression sociale pour aller voter et combien de pression reçoivent-elles ? 2) Qui ? Qui émet la pression sociale pour aller voter et qui la subit ? 3) Comment ? Comment la pression sociale pour aller voter s’exerce-t-elle ? Par quel mécanisme influence-t-elle la décision de voter ou non ? 4) Quels effets ? Quel est l’effet de la pression sociale sur la participation électorale et comment est-ce que cet effet varie ? Méthodologie. La thèse se divise en trois chapitres empiriques sous forme d’articles scientifiques. Je présente dans le premier chapitre empirique un portrait descriptif et comparatif de la pression sociale à partir de données de 65 études électorales dans 11 pays, totalisant environ 287 000 répondants et plus de 872 000 mesures de pression sociale. Je me concentre dans les deux autres chapitres empiriques sur le rôle et l’influence des attentes de désapprobation de l’abstention sur la participation électorale. Je cherche dans le second chapitre empirique à comprendre les déterminants des attentes de désapprobation ainsi que l’intersection entre le devoir civique et la désapprobation. Pour ce faire, j’utilise les données d’un module de questions original administré dans l’Étude électorale autrichienne de 2019. Je m’intéresse dans le dernier article empirique au rôle de modération de la visibilité du comportement sur la désapprobation ; les gens devraient voter pour éviter la désapprobation des autres seulement s’ils pensent que les autres seront au courant de leur décision. Je mobilise pour ce chapitre les données d’un second module de questions original, administré cette fois dans l’Étude électorale canadienne de 2019. Résultats obtenus. Mes analyses confirment que la pression sociale pour aller voter est très présente dans la société. La pression sociale descriptive est plus fréquente que celle injonctive et ses effets sur la pression sociale sont plus stables. En fait, je trouve que la pression sociale injonctive influence la décision de voter dans la moitié des études. D’autre part, mes analyses montrent que la pression sociale est plus fréquente et plus forte lorsqu’elle provient de personnes plus proches dans notre réseau, comme la famille et le partenaire. Elle est également plus forte chez les personnes plus éduquées, plus riches, et plus âgées. Les personnes ayant un sens élevé du devoir civique rapportent également plus de pression sociale, mais ne semblent pas influencées par cette pression. Contrairement aux attentes théoriques, je ne trouve pas d’effet de modération de la visibilité du comportement sur l’influence de la désapprobation. Enfin, je trouve également que la pression sociale varie surtout sur le plan la mesure. Conclusions. Cette thèse confirme le rôle crucial de la pression sociale comme déterminant de la participation électorale. Elle contribue à notre compréhension générale des normes sociales, et de leur influence spécifique sur la participation. Ceci est important, car la participation électorale est l’un des piliers caractérisant un système démocratique en bonne santé. Mieux comprendre le mécanisme de pression sociale contribuera au développement d’outils de mobilisation efficaces, éthiques et non partisans pour pallier au déclin de la participation électorale au Canada et ailleurs dans le monde. Cette thèse a également des conséquences méthodologiques importantes pour la mesure de la pression sociale et avance de nouvelles théories pour comprendre la participation électorale et l’influence de la pression sociale. En somme, cette thèse pose de bases solides pour de futures recherches sur la pression sociale pour aller voter. / Background. This dissertation examines how social pressure — stemming from the social norm that voting is a civic duty — influences the decision to vote or not. Research on electoral participation is largely dominated by a view of the voter as an individual and a rational actor. Hence, too little attention has been paid specifically to the role of the social circle as a vector of social pressure. Moreover, a large body of literature in social psychology demonstrates the powerful influence of social norms and the social pressure they generate on behaviour. In political science, experimental studies associated with the Get-Out-The-Vote (GOTV) project have demonstrated the causal effect of social pressure on voter turnout. However, these studies do not help us to understand how social pressure is exerted in everyday life, to determine its frequency and intensity, or who exerts it and who receives it. Recent observational studies have sought to answer these questions and offer some initial answers. This thesis is part of this emerging literature, with the objectives of measuring, describing and understanding the social pressure to vote and its influence on electoral participation outside an experimental context. Research questions. I am seeking to answer four fundamental questions about the social pressure to vote: 1) How much? How many people report social pressure to vote, and how much pressure do they report? 2) Who? Who exerts social pressure to vote, and who experiences it? 3) How? How does the social pressure to vote mechanism work? How does it influence the decision to vote or not? 4) What effects? What are the effects of social pressure on voter turnout, and how do these effects vary? Methodology. The dissertation is divided into three empirical chapters in the form of scientific articles. In the first empirical chapter, I present a descriptive and comparative portrait of social pressure based on data from 65 electoral studies in 11 countries, totalling about 287,000 respondents and more than 872,000 measures of social pressure. In the other two empirical chapters, I focus on the role and influence of abstention disapproval expectations on electoral participation. In the second empirical chapter, I seek to understand the determinants of disapproval expectations and the intersection between civic duty and disapproval. To do so, I use data from an original question module administered in the 2019 Austrian Election Study. In the last empirical paper, I focus on the moderating role of behaviour visibility on disapproval; people should vote to avoid disapproval only if they believe that others will be aware of their decision to vote or not. For this chapter, I mobilize data from another original question module, this time administered in the 2019 Canadian Election Study. Results. My analyses confirm that social pressure to vote is quite prevalent in society. Descriptive social pressure is more frequent than injunctive pressure, and its effects on social pressure are more stable. In fact, I find that injunctive social pressure influences the decision to vote in about half the studies. My analyses also show that social pressure is more frequent and stronger from relationships in our social circle, such as family or the partner. Social pressure is stronger among people who are better educated, wealthier and older. Although people with a strong sense of civic duty also report more social pressure, they do not seem to be influenced by it. I find no moderating effect of behavioural visibility on the influence of disapproval contrary to theoretical expectations. At last, I also find that most of the variance in social pressure occurs at the measurement level. Conclusions. This dissertation confirms the crucial role of social pressure as a determinant of electoral participation. It contributes to our general understanding of social norms and their specific influence on voter turnout. This is important because electoral participation is one of the pillars of a healthy democratic system. A better understanding of the social pressure mechanism will help to develop effective, ethical and non-partisan mobilization tools to counter the decline in electoral participation in Canada and the world. This dissertation also has important methodological implications for measuring social pressure and suggests new theories for understanding voter turnout and the influences of social pressure. In sum, this thesis dissertation offers a solid foundation for future research on social pressure to vote.