@misc{DoedingBraunEhrenbrusthoffetal., author = {D{\"o}ding, Rebekka and Braun, Tobias and Ehrenbrusthoff, Katja and Elsner, Bernhard and Kopkow, Christian and Lange, Toni and L{\"u}dtke, Kerstin and Jung, Andres and Miller, Clint and Owen, Patrick J and Saueressig, Tobias and Sch{\"a}fer, Axel and Sch{\"a}fer, Robin and Schleimer, Tim and Shala, Rilind and Szikszay, Tibor and Zebisch, Jochen and Belav{\´y}, Daniel L}, title = {Evidence gaps in conservative non-pharmacological interventions and guideline implementation for high-burden non-communicable diseases: protocol for an overview of reviews}, series = {BMJ Open Sport \& Exercise Medicine}, volume = {10}, journal = {BMJ Open Sport \& Exercise Medicine}, number = {4}, publisher = {BMJ}, issn = {2055-7647}, doi = {10.1136/bmjsem-2024-002032}, abstract = {Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) represent a high burden for the society and affected individuals. Conservative non-pharmacological interventions play a first-line role in the treatment and management of most NCDs. Systematic reviews (SRs) provide the highest level of evidence and significantly influence clinical decision-making. The primary aim of this study is to provide an overview of the evidence on the effectiveness of recommended conservative non-pharmacological interventions for highly burdensome NCDs. The secondary aim is to provide an overview of the evidence for guideline implementation. A literature search was performed in Medline (PubMed), EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL. Six reviewers will, in duplicate, independently screen and select studies following eligibility criteria. The population will include individuals with NCDs from disease categories chosen based on WHO burden of disease data and the importance of conservative rehabilitation for their management. Eligible interventions will encompass conservative non-pharmacological approaches recommended by clinical practice guidelines (ie, physical, psychological and education/advice). Eligible comparator will include no or minimal intervention and other competitive interventions. Outcomes will comprise proposed core outcomes for the respective diseases, including patient-reported (eg, pain) and performance-based (eg, physical functioning) outcomes. SRs published in the last 5 years as peer-reviewed journal article in the English language will be eligible. The overview will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Overviews of reviews.}, language = {en} } @book{ZundelBlaettelMinkBrohmannetal., author = {Zundel, Stefan and Bl{\"a}ttel-Mink, Birgit and Brohmann, Bettina and Defila, Rico and Di Giulio, Antonietta and Fischer, Daniel and Fuchs, Doris and G{\"o}lz, Sebastian and G{\"o}tz, Konrad and Homburg, Andreas and Kaufmann-Hayoz, Ruth and Matthies, Ellen and Michelsen, Gerd and Sch{\"a}fer, Martina and Tews, Kerstin and Wassermann, Sandra}, title = {Konsum-Botschaften : was Forschende f{\"u}r die gesellschaftliche Gestaltung nachhaltigen Konsums empfehlen}, edition = {1. Auflage}, publisher = {Hirzel Verlag}, address = {Stuttgart}, isbn = {978-3-7776-2371-9}, pages = {198}, language = {de} } @misc{HomfeldtReseBrenneretal., author = {Homfeldt, Felix and Rese, Alexandra and Brenner, Hanno and Baier, Daniel and Sch{\"a}fer, Fabio}, title = {Identification and Generation of Innovative Ideas in the Procurement of the Automotive Industry: The Case of AUDI AG}, series = {International Journal of Innovation Management}, volume = {21}, journal = {International Journal of Innovation Management}, number = {7}, issn = {1363-9196}, doi = {10.1142/S1363919617500530}, pages = {31}, language = {en} } @misc{WerderRegnathSchaeferetal., author = {Werder, Dina von and Regnath, Franziska and Sch{\"a}fer, Daniel and J{\"o}rres, Rudolf and Lehnen, Nadine and Glasauer, Stefan}, title = {Post-COVID breathlessness: a mathematical model of respiratory processing in the brain}, series = {European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience}, journal = {European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience}, issn = {0940-1334}, doi = {10.1007/s00406-023-01739-y}, abstract = {Breathlessness is among the most common post-COVID symptoms. In a considerable number of patients, severe breathlessness cannot be explained by peripheral organ impairment. Recent concepts have described how such persistent breathlessness could arise from dysfunctional processing of respiratory information in the brain. In this paper, we present a first quantitative and testable mathematical model of how processing of respiratory-related signals could lead to breathlessness perception. The model is based on recent theories that the brain holds an adaptive and dynamic internal representation of a respiratory state that is based on previous experiences and comprises gas exchange between environment, lung and tissue cells. Perceived breathlessness reflects the brain's estimate of this respiratory state signaling a potentially hazardous disequilibrium in gas exchange. The internal respiratory state evolves from the respiratory state of the last breath, is updated by a sensory measurement of CO2 concentration, and is dependent on the current activity context. To evaluate our model and thus test the assumed mechanism, we used data from an ongoing rebreathing experiment investigating breathlessness in patients with post-COVID without peripheral organ dysfunction (N = 5) and healthy control participants without complaints after COVID-19 (N = 5). Although the observed breathlessness patterns varied extensively between individual participants in the rebreathing experiment, our model shows good performance in replicating these individual, heterogeneous time courses. The model assumes the same underlying processes in the central nervous system in all individuals, i.e., also between patients and healthy control participants, and we hypothesize that differences in breathlessness are explained by different weighting and thus influence of these processes on the final percept. Our model could thus be applied in future studies to provide insight into where in the processing cascade of respiratory signals a deficit is located that leads to (post-COVID) breathlessness. A potential clinical application could be, e.g., the monitoring of effects of pulmonary rehabilitation on respiratory processing in the brain to improve the therapeutic strategies.}, language = {en} } @misc{vonWerderAubeleRegnathetal., author = {von Werder, Dina and Aubele, Maria and Regnath, Franziska and Tebbe, Elisabeth and Mladenov, Dejan and von Rheinbaben, Victoria and Hahn, Elisabeth and Sch{\"a}fer, Daniel and Biersack, Katharina and Adorjan, Kristina and Stubbe, Hans C. and Bogaerts, Katleen and J{\"o}rres, Rudolf A. and Nowak, Dennis and Van den Bergh, Omer and Glasauer, Stefan and Lehnen, Nadine}, title = {Increased breathlessness in post-COVID syndrome despite normal breathing patterns in a rebreathing challenge}, series = {Scientific reports}, volume = {15}, journal = {Scientific reports}, number = {1}, publisher = {Springer Nature}, address = {[London]}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {10.1038/s41598-025-11728-x}, pages = {1 -- 15}, abstract = {Severe symptoms in the absence of measurable body pathology are a frequent hallmark of post-COVID syndrome. From a Bayesian Brain perspective, such symptoms can be explained by incorrect internal models that the brain uses to interpret sensory signals. In this pre-registered study, we investigate whether induced breathlessness perception during a controlled CO2rebreathing challenge is reflected by altered respiratory measures (physiology and breathing patterns), and propose different computational mechanisms that could explain our findings in a Bayesian Brain framework. We analysed data from 40 patients with post-COVID syndrome and 40 healthy participants. Results from lung function, neurological and neurocognitive examination of all participants were within normal limits on the day of the experiment. Using a Bayesian repeated-measures ANOVA, we found that patients' breathlessness was strongly increased (BF10,baseline =8.029, BF10,rebreathing =11636, BF10,recovery =43662) compared to controls. When excluding patients who hyperventilated (N = 8, 20\%) during the experiment from the analysis, differences in breathlessness remained (BF10,baseline =1.283, BF10,rebreathing =126.812, BF10,recovery =751.282). For physiology and breathing patterns, all evidence pointed towards no difference between the two groups (0.307  BF10 \< 0.704). In summary, we found intact breathing patterns and physiology but increased symptom perception in patients with post-COVID syndrome.}, language = {en} }