3CIA collaboration

Filtering

2018 - 201912020 - 20241

Settings

Author search.filters.isAuthorOfPublication.2c73db43-f137-45ec-886a-6ff7e375ff6e

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    The gift of ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΙΑ in pauline writings
    (Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra, 2024) 3CIA collaboration
    This work studies the gift of διδασκαλία in the writings of the Apostle Paul. It is a study that has become necessary due to the perceived relegation of this gift in Pauline theology of charismata. The objective is to rediscover the role that the gift of teaching will need to play in the New Evangelization mission of the Modern-day Church. The gift of teaching when received and employed diligently and faithfully will facilitate according to the Apostle Paul the building up of the Church (οỉκοδομή), the unity of faith, maturity in faith, knowledge of the Son of God and combat false doctrines. The gift of διδασκαλία complements other gifts in the Pauline charismata including the gifts of evangelizing, exhorting, pastoring, prophecy, and apostolate. It facilitates the functioning of other charisms in the Church. It is a gift synonymous with Christian education (παιδεύω), Catechesis (κατηχέω), and Transmission of the Christian Faith (παραδίδωμι). Sources and methodology are mainly biblical and theological. The work has three parts. The first part looks at the reality of διδασκαλία in the Greek context including the LXX, Philo, Josephus, and the NT. The Second part underlines the gift of διδασκαλία in Pauline writings including 1Corinthians, Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 2Thessalonians, 1-2Timothy, Titus, and Hebrews. The third part is a theological reflection on the gift of διδασκαλία in the Modernday Church. Those who have this gift in the Church are urged to fan it into flame. Teaching preserves continuity: with teaching a community of faith will not die.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Large-scale external validation and comparison of prognostic models: an application to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
    (2018) Sobradillo, P. (Patricia); Haile, S.R. (Sara R.); Esteban, C. (Cristóbal); 3CIA collaboration; Cosio, B.G. (Borja G.); Johannessen, A. (Ane); Celli, B.R. (Bartolomé R.); Casanova, C. (Ciro); Han, M.K. (Meilan K.); Ramirez, A.S. (Ana S.); Burgel, P.R.(Pierre-Régis); Soler-Cataluña, J.J. (Juan José); Lamprecht, B. (Bernd); Turner, A.M. (Alice M.); Ancochea-Bermúdez, J. (Julio); García-Aymerich, J. (Judith); Marin, J.M. (José M.); Langhammer, A. (Arnulf); Oga, T. (Toru); Almagro, P. (Pere); Torres, J.P. (Juan P.) de; Soriano, J.B. (Joan B.); Bakke, P. (Per); Guerra, B. (Beniamino); Roche, N. (Nicolás); Martinez-Camblor, P. (Pablo); Leivseth, L. (Linda); Miravitlles, M. (Marc); Antó, J.M. (Josep M.); Lange, P. (Peter); Echazarreta, A. (Andrés); Puhan, M.A. (Milo A.); Kaiser, B. (Bernhard); Alfageme, I. (Inmaculada); Sin, D.D. (Don D.); Riet, G. (Gerben) ter
    Background: External validations and comparisons of prognostic models or scores are a prerequisite for their use in routine clinical care but are lacking in most medical fields including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). Our aim was to externally validate and concurrently compare prognostic scores for 3-year all-cause mortality in mostly multimorbid patients with COPD. Methods: We relied on 24 cohort studies of the COPD Cohorts Collaborative International Assessment consortium, corresponding to primary, secondary, and tertiary care in Europe, the Americas, and Japan. These studies include globally 15,762 patients with COPD (1871 deaths and 42,203 person years of follow-up). We used network meta-analysis adapted to multiple score comparison (MSC), following a frequentist two-stage approach; thus, we were able to compare all scores in a single analytical framework accounting for correlations among scores within cohorts. We assessed transitivity, heterogeneity, and inconsistency and provided a performance ranking of the prognostic scores. Results: Depending on data availability, between two and nine prognostic scores could be calculated for each cohort. The BODE score (body mass index, airflow obstruction, dyspnea, and exercise capacity) had a median area under the curve (AUC) of 0.679 [1st quartile-3rd quartile = 0.655-0.733] across cohorts. The ADO score (age, dyspnea, and airflow obstruction) showed the best performance for predicting mortality (difference AUC(ADO) - AUC(BODE) = 0.015 [95% confidence interval (CI) = - 0.002 to 0.032]; p = 0.08) followed by the updated BODE (AUCBODE updated - AUCBODE = 0.008 [95% CI = -0.005 to +0.022]; p = 0.23). The assumption of transitivity was not violated. Heterogeneity across direct comparisons was small, and we did not identify any local or global inconsistency. Conclusions: Our analyses showed best discriminatory performance for the ADO and updated BODE scores in patients with COPD. A limitation to be addressed in future studies is the extension of MSC network meta-analysis to measures of calibration. MSC network meta-analysis can be applied to prognostic scores in any medical field to identify the best scores, possibly paving the way for stratified medicine, public health, and research.