Thesis (M. Sc.)--University of Hong Kong, 1990.

Thesis (M.P.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2000. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 147-151). Also available in print.

Thesis (M.P.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2001. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 172-177). Also available in print.

Thesis (J.C.L.)--Catholic University of America, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 57-61).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1974. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 274-280).

Thesis (M.U.D.)--University of Hong Kong, 1997. / Includes bibliographical references. Also available in print.

Thesis--Freie Universität Berlin. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 384-416).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hong Kong, 2006. / Title proper from title frame. Also available in printed format.

A produção arquitetônica de Rem Koolhaas e seu Office for Metropolitan Architecture pode ser considerada, sem o risco de se incorrer em exageros, uma das mais influentes do fim do século XX e início do século XXI. Figuras influentes da arquitetura contemporânea passaram por seu escritório e trabalharam sob sua tutela, diversas publicações dedicam edições inteiras às suas obras e seu reconhecimento internacional torna-se incontestável após ser laureado em 2000 com o prêmio Pritzker. Apesar do reconhecimento, o caminho que Koolhaas trilhou junto a seu escritório desde sua fundação, em 1972, até as primeiras obras concluídas e o reconhecimento da crítica especializada, em 1992, é relativamente desconhecido, com a maior parte do material disponível dispersado em periódicos diversos. Percebe-se também que publicações que analisam projetos do OMA tendem a abordar a obra através de seu valor simbólico ou sócio-econômico, com uma tendência a relacionar diretamente a biografia de Koolhaas e seus textos às formas produzidas. Esta dissertação tem como objetivo organizar, sistematizar e categorizar informações sobre as duas primeiras décadas de produção do OMA—1972 a 1992, coincidindo com o período abordado por Koolhaas em seu tomo S, M, L, XL. Através da análise formal dos projetos, com ênfase nos diferentes tipos de estrutura utilizados em projetos ao longo da carreira do OMA, pretende-se elucidar a transformação das estratégias projetuais do escritório e reiterar a presença da tradição moderna nos projetos de Koolhaas. / Rem Koolhaas and his Office for Metropolitan Architecture projects can be considered, without the risk of exaggeration, one of the most influential body of works of the end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st. Influential professionals in contemporary architecture worked at the office and learned from Koolhaas’s teachings, several magazines dedicate entire issues to his works, and his international recognition became indisputable after he was awarded the Pritzker Prize in 2000. Although Koolhaas and his office were internationally recognized, the path that led to this recognition-from its foundation in 1972 to its first works being built and subsequent success with specialized critics in 1992-is relatively unknown, with most of the available material being spread out among different magazines. It is also noteworthy that the critics who analyze Koolhaas’s work projects tend to approach the work through its symbolic or socio-economic value, with a tendency to directly relate the biography of Koolhaas and his texts to the forms of his designs. This dissertation aims to organize, systematize and categorize information on the first two decades of OMA’s production — from 1972 to 1992, coinciding with the period covered by Koolhaas in his book S, M, L, XL. Through a formal analysis of his works, focusing on the different types of structure utilized in projects throughout the years, this dissertation intends to clarify the office’s transformation of design strategies and reaffirm the continuation of the modern tradition present in Koolhaas’s work.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend long-term treatment for opioid use disorder including the use of buprenorphine; however, little is known about patients in long-term treatment. OBJECTIVE: Examine the prevalence and patient characteristics associated with long-term treatment retention (≥1 year) in an Office Based Opioid Treatment (OBOT) program with buprenorphine. Study Design: This is a 12-year retrospective cohort study of adults on buprenorphine in OBOT in a large urban safety-net primary care practice. METHODS: The primary outcome was retention in OBOT for ≥1 continuous year. Patients who re-enrolled multiple times in the program contributed repeated observations. Potential predictors of ≥1 year retention assessed were: age, race/ethnicity, psychiatric diagnoses, hepatitis C, employment, prior buprenorphine, ever heroin use, current cocaine, benzodiazepine and alcohol use on enrollment. Factors associated with ≥1 year OBOT retention were identified using generalized estimating equation logistic regression models. The different reasons for clinic disengagement by retention status (i.e. ≥1 year vs. <1 year) were also described. RESULTS: OBOT treatment periods (n=1605) among 1237 patients were assessed. Almost half, 44.7% (717/1605), of all treatment periods were ≥1 year and a majority, 53.7% (664/1237), of patients had at least one ≥ 1 year period. In adjusted analyses, female gender (Adjusted Odds Ratio [AOR] 1.55, 95% CI [1.20, 2.00]) psychiatric diagnosis (AOR 1.75 [1.35, 2.27]) and age (AOR 1.19 per 10 year increase [1.05, 1.34]) were associated with greater odds of ≥1 year retention. Unemployment (AOR 0.72 [0.56, 0.92]), Hepatitis C (AOR 0.59 [0.45, 0.76]), black race/ethnicity (AOR 0.53 [0.36, 0.78]) and Hispanic race/ethnicity (AOR 0.66 [0.48, 0.92]), compared to white, were associated with lower odds of ≥1 year retention. Relapse to substance use appeared to be a less common reason for disengagement for the ≥1 year (23.3%) compared to the <1 year (40.1%) treatment periods. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of patients were successfully retained in Office Based Opioid Treatment with buprenorphine for ≥1 year. However, significant disparities in one-year treatment retention were seen, including poorer retention for patients who were younger, black, Hispanic, unemployed, or with hepatitis C. / 2018-11-09T00:00:00Z