PubMed · 11374199
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
N J Wade. 2001. Web sights.. https://doi.org/10.1068/p30edwad
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Flow cytometers, like all things electronic, have undergone rapid evolution since the introduction of the first commercial instruments 30 years ago. Cytometers then had so little automation and sophistication that the operator had to be expert in many different scientific disciplines to be able to coax any data at all out of the instrument. But trends in electronic components toward higher speed, smaller size, and lower power consumption have allowed the instruments to become faster, more sensitive, and actually quasi-intelligent. Automation of complex processes that once required considerable operator expertise, such as running a high-speed sort or correctly compensating a multicolor experiment, has expanded the number of flow cytometry applications and the number of flow cytometry users; there is no reason to expect that trend to stop. This review discusses the electronic components of a current "generic" flow cytometer from a functional point of view with the hope that a better understanding of what is going on "inside the box" will lead to a better understanding of how operator-selectable instrument settings can influence the quality of the data produced.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Reports in the scientific literature and lay press have suggested that computer users are at increased risk of upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs). Early studies often found elevated rates of MSD outcomes among keyboard users when compared to non-users. Attention soon focused on specific aspects of keyboard work that might be responsible for the observed rate increase. In this review, the epidemiological evidence examining associations between MSD outcomes and computer user posture and keyboard use intensity (hours of computer use per day or per week) are examined. Results of epidemiological studies of posture and MSD outcomes have not been entirely consistent. Reasons for the inconsistency in results include cross-sectional study design (with possible failure to assure that measured exposure preceded health effect), imprecision of posture measures used, and difficulties involved in analyzing multiple related variables. Despite the inconsistencies, it appears from the literature that posture is an independent risk factor of modest magnitude for MSDs among computer users. It appears that lowering the height of the keyboard to or below the height of the elbow and resting the arms on the desk surface or chair armrests is associated with reduced risk of neck and shoulder MSDs. Results of epidemiological studies examining computer use (hours keying per day or per week) are more consistent than those examining posture, although some inconsistency is observed. Reasons for the inconsistency include possible selective survival bias resulting from cross-sectional study design, differences in exposure categorization, and possible interaction with other exposure variables. Overall, the literature shows that daily or weekly hours of computer use is more consistently associated with hand and arm MSDs than with neck and shoulder MSDs.