Diss. (sammanfattning) Stockholm : Karol. inst. / Härtill 6 uppsatser.

Bakalauro darbas „Akademinės ir džiazinės grojimo trimitu mokyklų lyginamoji analizė lūpų traumų prevencijos edukaciniame procese požiūriu“ parengtas 2014 metais. Darbe aptariamas trimito akademinės ir džiazo mokyklų metodų praktinis pritaikymas mokymo procese, siekiant išvengti lūpų traumų. Darbo tikslas – išanalizuoti akademinės bei džiazo grojimo trimitu mokyklų metodikas ir remiantis darbo temai aktualiais šių mokyklų atstovų teiginiais įrodyti, kad akademinė (klasikinė) grojimo mokyklos metodika yra tinkamesnė mokyti groti trimitu lūpų traumų prevencijos aspektu. Tyrimo uždaviniai: pateikti trimito naudojimo akademinėje bei džiazo muzikoje istoriją; pristatyti akademinę mokymo groti trimitu mokyklą bei pasirinktų jos atstovų edukacinius metodus; pristatyti džiazo mokymo groti trimitu mokyklą bei pasirinktų jos atstovų edukacinius metodus; atlikti lyginamąją dviejų mokyklų metodikų analizę; aprašyti meninį projektą. Išanalizavus mokslinę literatūrą, padarytos šios išvados: akademinės grojimo trimitu mokyklos atstovų mokymo proceso tikslas yra paruošti atlikėjus, turinčius stiprų techninį pagrindą, sugebančius pilnai išnaudoti savo fiziologines savybes: teisingai valdyti lūpų raumenis, kontroliuoti kvėpavimo aparatą, derinti pirštų, lūpų, liežuvio bei kvėpavimo organų darbą. Kasdieninis darbas – nuoseklus apgalvotų muzikinių schemų praktikavimas, gamų, etiudų grojimas, skaitymas iš lapo – visa tai paruošia muzikantą, galintį atlikti įvairių žanrų muziką, sugebantį... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Bachelor thesis "Comparative analysis of academic and jazz playing trumpet schools of lip injury prevention in terms of the educational process" is developed in 2014. The object of research – jazz and academic trumpet paying schools practical application techniques in the teaching process in order to avoid lip injuries. The aim - analysis of jazz and academical playing trumpet schools selected representatives and their educational methods and to prove that the academic (classical) playing school methodology is more appropriate to teach trumpet in order to prevent lip injury. Objectives of the study: to present the use of trumpet in academical and jazz music and its history; present academic school learning methods how to play the trumpet and to describe the selected representatives and their educational methods; present jazz playing trumpet school and its selected representatives with their educational methods; perform a comparative analysis of the two schools of methodologies; describe the artistic project. An analysis of the scientific literature draws the following conclusions: academic playing trumpet school represents the teaching process which aims to prepare artists with the strong technical fundamentals and the ability to fully utilize its physiological properties: properly managed lip muscles; fully control the breathing apparatus and the ability to combine the fingers, lips, tongue, and respiratory work all together. Educational process and long – term deliberate... [to full text]

Background: Survival analysis is sometimes called time-to-event analysis. The Cox model is used widely in survival analysis, where the covariates act multiplicatively on unknown baseline hazards. However, the Cox model requires the proportionality assumption, which limits its applications. The additive hazards model has been used as an alternative to the Cox model, where the covariates act additively on unknown baseline hazards. Objectives and methods: In this thesis, performance of the Cox multiplicative hazards model and the additive hazards model have been demonstrated and applied to the transfer, lifting and repositioning (TLR) injury prevention study. The TLR injury prevention study was a retrospective, pre-post intervention study that utilized a non-randomized control group. There were 1,467 healthcare workers from six hospitals in Saskatchewan, Canada who were injured from January 1, 1999 to December 1, 2006. De-identified data sets were received from the Saskatoon Health Region and Regina Quappelle Health Region. Time to repeated TLR injury was considered as the outcome variable. The models goodness of fit was also assessed. Results: Of a total of 1,467 individuals, 149 (56.7%) in the control group and 114 (43.3%) in the intervention group had repeated injuries during the study period. Nurses and nursing aides had the highest repeated TLR injuries (84.8%) among occupations. Back, neck and shoulders were the most common body parts injured (74.9%). These covariates were significant in both Cox multiplicative and additive hazards models. The intervention group had 27% fewer repeated injuries than the control group in the multiplicative hazards model (HR= 0.63; 95% CI=0.48-0.82; p-value=0.0002). In the additive model, the hazard difference between the intervention and the control groups was 0.002. Conclusion: Both multiplicative and additive hazards models showed similar results, indicating that the TLR injury prevention intervention was effective in reducing repeated injuries. The additive hazards model is not widely used, but the coefficient of the covariates is easy to interpret in an additive manner. The additive hazards model should be considered when the proportionality assumption of the Cox model is doubtful.

Background: Survival analysis is sometimes called time-to-event analysis. The Cox model is used widely in survival analysis, where the covariates act multiplicatively on unknown baseline hazards. However, the Cox model requires the proportionality assumption, which limits its applications. The additive hazards model has been used as an alternative to the Cox model, where the covariates act additively on unknown baseline hazards. Objectives and methods: In this thesis, performance of the Cox multiplicative hazards model and the additive hazards model have been demonstrated and applied to the transfer, lifting and repositioning (TLR) injury prevention study. The TLR injury prevention study was a retrospective, pre-post intervention study that utilized a non-randomized control group. There were 1,467 healthcare workers from six hospitals in Saskatchewan, Canada who were injured from January 1, 1999 to December 1, 2006. De-identified data sets were received from the Saskatoon Health Region and Regina Quappelle Health Region. Time to repeated TLR injury was considered as the outcome variable. The models goodness of fit was also assessed. Results: Of a total of 1,467 individuals, 149 (56.7%) in the control group and 114 (43.3%) in the intervention group had repeated injuries during the study period. Nurses and nursing aides had the highest repeated TLR injuries (84.8%) among occupations. Back, neck and shoulders were the most common body parts injured (74.9%). These covariates were significant in both Cox multiplicative and additive hazards models. The intervention group had 27% fewer repeated injuries than the control group in the multiplicative hazards model (HR= 0.63; 95% CI=0.48-0.82; p-value=0.0002). In the additive model, the hazard difference between the intervention and the control groups was 0.002. Conclusion: Both multiplicative and additive hazards models showed similar results, indicating that the TLR injury prevention intervention was effective in reducing repeated injuries. The additive hazards model is not widely used, but the coefficient of the covariates is easy to interpret in an additive manner. The additive hazards model should be considered when the proportionality assumption of the Cox model is doubtful.