Adriana Fernández

We characterize the sets of all Π2 and all equation image theorems of IΠ−1 in terms of restricted exponentiation, and use these characterizations to prove that both sets are not deductively equivalent. We also discuss how these results generalize to n > 0. As an application, we prove that a conservation theorem of Beklemishev stating that IΠ−n + 1 is conservative over IΣ−n with respect to equation image sentences cannot be extended to Πn + 2 sentences. © 2011 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim

For a theory T, we study relationships among IΔ n +1 (T), LΔ n+1 (T) and B * Δ n+1 (T). These theories are obtained restricting the schemes of induction, minimization and (a version of) collection to Δ n+1 (T) formulas. We obtain conditions on T (T is an extension of B * Δ n+1 (T) or Δ n+1 (T) is closed (in T) under bounded quantification) under which IΔ n+1 (T) and LΔ n+1 (T) are equivalent. These conditions depend on Th Πn +2 (T), the Π n+2 –consequences of T. The first condition is connected with descriptions of Th Πn +2 (T) as IΣ n plus a class of nondecreasing total Π n –functions, and the second one is related with the equivalence between Δ n+1 (T)–formulas and bounded formulas (of a language extending the language of Arithmetic). This last property is closely tied to a general version of a well known theorem of R. Parikh. Using what we call Π n –envelopes we give uniform descriptions of the previous classes of nondecreasing total Π n –functions. Π n –envelopes are a generalization of envelopes (see [10]) and are closely related to indicators (see [12]). Finally, we study the hierarchy of theories IΔ n+1 (IΣ m ), m≥n, and prove a hierarchy theorem

In this paper we continue the study of the theories IΔ n+1 (T), initiated in [7]. We focus on the quantifier complexity of these fragments and theirs (non)finite axiomatization. A characterization is obtained for the class of theories such that IΔ n+1 (T) is Π n+2 –axiomatizable. In particular, IΔ n+1 (IΔ n+1 ) gives an axiomatization of Th Π n+2 (IΔ n+1 ) and is not finitely axiomatizable. This fact relates the fragment IΔ n+1 (IΔ n+1 ) to induction rule for Δ n+1 –formulas. Our arguments, involving a construction due to R. Kaye (see [9]), provide proofs of Parsons’ conservativeness theorem (see [16]) and (a weak version) of a result of L.D. Beklemishev on unnested applications of induction rules for Π n+2 and Δ n+1 formulas (see [2])

A corpus of 60 articles published in Spanish, English, and Portuguese was analyzed to account for the integrative literature review on the concept of vulnerability from bioethics, identifying the following thematic trends: risk, susceptibility, autonomy, and culture in people and communities. The methodological approach has been mainly qualitative. We found that the disciplines that most addressed the concept belong to the human and social sciences. The authors recommend conducting studies of the concept from people’s perspectives and that ethics committees review the informed consent and information guides according to these results. The categories give way to the concept of vulnerability, which must be analyzed beyond principlism in bioethics.

This paper investigates the status of the fragments of Peano Arithmetic obtained by restricting induction, collection and least number axiom schemes to formulas which are Δ1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\Delta_1}$$\end{document} provably in an arithmetic theory T. In particular, we determine the provably total computable functions of this kind of theories. As an application, we obtain a reduction of the problem whether IΔ0+¬exp\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${I\Delta_0 + \neg \mathit{exp}}$$\end{document} implies BΣ1\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${B\Sigma_1}$$\end{document} to a purely recursion-theoretic question.

People with lived experience are individuals who have first-hand experience of the medical condition being considered. The value of including the viewpoints of people with lived experience in health policy, health care, and health care and systems research has been recognized at many levels, including by funding agencies. However, there is little guidance or established best practices on how to include non-academic reviewers in the grant review process. Here we describe our approach to the inclusion of people with lived experience in every stage of the grant review process. After a budget was created for a specific call, a steering committee was created. This group included researchers, people with lived experience, and health systems administrators. This group developed and issued the call. After receiving proposals, stage one was scientific review by researchers. Grants were ranked by this score and a short list then reviewed by people with lived experience as stage two. Finally, for stage three, the Steering Committee convened and achieved consensus based on information drawn from stages one and two. Our approach to engage people with lived experience in the grant review process was positively reviewed by everyone involved, as it allowed for patient perspectives to be truly integrated. However, it does lengthen the review process. The proposed model offers further practical insight into including people with lived experience in the review process.