Institution
Maastricht University
Education•Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands•
About: Maastricht University is a education organization based out in Maastricht, Limburg, Netherlands. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 19263 authors who have published 53291 publications receiving 2266866 citations. The organization is also known as: Universiteit Maastricht & UM.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field using the structured methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to January 2012 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations.
Abstract: studydesign,size,duration: This guideline was produced by a group of experts in the field using the methodology of the Manual for ESHRE Guideline Development, including a thorough systematic search of the literature, quality assessment of the included papers up to January 2012 and consensus within the guideline group on all recommendations. To ensure input from women with endometriosis, a patient representative was part of the guideline development group. In addition, patient and additional clinical input was collected during the scoping and review phase of the guideline.
1,641 citations
••
Heidelberg University1, University of Marburg2, Queen Mary University of London3, University of Leeds4, Rutgers University5, University of New South Wales6, University of Münster7, Aarhus University8, Columbia University9, University of Chieti-Pescara10, Norwegian University of Science and Technology11, Karolinska Institutet12, Université catholique de Louvain13, University of Sydney14, University of Western Australia15, University of Dundee16, Maastricht University17, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven18, National Yang-Ming University19
TL;DR: The IASP Task Force, which comprises pain experts from across the globe, has developed a new and pragmatic classification of chronic pain for the upcoming 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases, termed “multiple parenting.”
Abstract: Chronic pain has been recognized as pain that persists past normal healing time5 and hence lacks the acute warning function of physiological nociception.35 Usually pain is regarded as chronic when it lasts or recurs for more than 3 to 6 months.29 Chronic pain is a frequent condition, affecting an estimated 20% of people worldwide6,13,14,18 and accounting for 15% to 20% of physician visits.25,28 Chronic pain should receive greater attention as a global health priority because adequate pain treatment is a human right, and it is the duty of any health care system to provide it.4,13
The current version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) of the World Health Organization (WHO) includes some diagnostic codes for chronic pain conditions, but these diagnoses do not reflect the actual epidemiology of chronic pain, nor are they categorized in a systematic manner. The ICD is the preeminent tool for coding diagnoses and documenting investigations or therapeutic measures within the health care systems of many countries. In addition, ICD codes are commonly used to report target diseases and comorbidities of participants in clinical research. Consequently, the current lack of adequate coding in the ICD makes the acquisition of accurate epidemiological data related to chronic pain difficult, prevents adequate billing for health care expenses related to pain treatment, and hinders the development and implementation of new therapies.10,11,16,23,27,31,37
Responding to these shortcomings, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) contacted the WHO and established a Task Force for the Classification of Chronic Pain. The IASP Task Force, which comprises pain experts from across the globe,19 has developed a new and pragmatic classification of chronic pain for the upcoming 11th revision of the ICD. The goal is to create a classification system that is applicable in primary care and in clinical settings for specialized pain management.
A major challenge in this process was finding a rational principle of classification that suits the different types of chronic pain and fits into the general ICD-11 framework. Pain categories are variably defined based on the perceived location (headache), etiology (cancer pain), or the primarily affected anatomical system (neuropathic pain). Some diagnoses of pain defy these classification principles (fibromyalgia).
This problem is not unique to the classification of pain, but exists throughout the ICD. The IASP Task Force decided to give first priority to pain etiology, followed by underlying pathophysiological mechanisms, and finally the body site. Developing this multilayered classification was greatly facilitated by a novel principle of assigning diagnostic codes in ICD-11, termed “multiple parenting.” Multiple parenting allows the same diagnosis to be subsumed under more than 1 category (for a glossary of ICD terms refer to Table Table1).1). Each diagnosis retains 1 category as primary parent, but is cross-referenced to other categories that function as secondary parents.
Table 1
Glossary of ICD-11 terms.
The new ICD category for “Chronic Pain” comprises the most common clinically relevant disorders. These disorders were divided into 7 groups (Fig. (Fig.1):1): (1) chronic primary pain, (2) chronic cancer pain, (3) chronic posttraumatic and postsurgical pain, (4) chronic neuropathic pain, (5) chronic headache and orofacial pain, (6) chronic visceral pain, and (7) chronic musculoskeletal pain. Experts assigned to each group are responsible for the definition of diagnostic criteria and the selection of the diagnoses to be included under these subcategories of chronic pain. Thanks to Bedirhan Ustun and Robert Jakob of the WHO, these pain diagnoses are now integrated in the beta version of ICD-11 (http://id.who.int/icd/entity/1581976053). The Task Force is generating content models for single entities to describe their clinical characteristics. After peer review overseen by the WHO Steering Committee,39 the classification of chronic pain will be voted into action by the World Health Assembly in 2017.
Figure 1
Organizational chart of Task Force, IASP, and WHO interactions. The IASP Task Force was created by the IASP council and its scope defined in direct consultation of the chairs (R.D.T. and W.R.) with WHO representatives in 2012. The Task Force reports to ...
2. Classification of chronic pain
Chronic pain was defined as persistent or recurrent pain lasting longer than 3 months. This definition according to pain duration has the advantage that it is clear and operationalized.
Optional specifiers for each diagnosis record evidence of psychosocial factors and the severity of the pain. Pain severity can be graded based on pain intensity, pain-related distress, and functional impairment.
2.1. Chronic primary pain
Chronic primary pain is pain in 1 or more anatomic regions that persists or recurs for longer than 3 months and is associated with significant emotional distress or significant functional disability (interference with activities of daily life and participation in social roles) and that cannot be better explained by another chronic pain condition. This is a new phenomenological definition, created because the etiology is unknown for many forms of chronic pain. Common conditions such as, eg, back pain that is neither identified as musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain, chronic widespread pain, fibromyalgia, and irritable bowel syndrome will be found in this section and biological findings contributing to the pain problem may or may not be present. The term “primary pain” was chosen in close liaison with the ICD-11 revision committee, who felt this was the most widely acceptable term, in particular, from a nonspecialist perspective.
1,627 citations
••
University of Bonn1, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases2, Harvard University3, Maastricht University4, Aix-Marseille University5, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University6, French Institute of Health and Medical Research7, University of Melbourne8, VU University Amsterdam9, New York University10, Mayo Clinic11, City University of New York12, University of New South Wales13, Indiana University14, King's College London15, University of Toulouse16
TL;DR: Research criteria for SCD in pre‐mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are presented and a list of core features proposed for reporting in SCD studies is provided, which will enable comparability of research across different settings.
Abstract: There is increasing evidence that subjective cognitive decline (SCD) in individuals with unimpaired performance on cognitive tests may represent the first symptomatic manifestation of Alzheimer's disease (AD). The research on SCD in early AD, however, is limited by the absence of common standards. The working group of the Subjective Cognitive Decline Initiative (SCD-I) addressed this deficiency by reaching consensus on terminology and on a conceptual framework for research on SCD in AD. In this publication, research criteria for SCD in pre-mild cognitive impairment (MCI) are presented. In addition, a list of core features proposed for reporting in SCD studies is provided, which will enable comparability of research across different settings. Finally, a set of features is presented, which in accordance with current knowledge, increases the likelihood of the presence of preclinical AD in individuals with SCD. This list is referred to as SCD plus.
1,626 citations
••
TL;DR: This article developed a theory of reciprocity for extensive games in which the sequential structure of a strategic situation is made explicit, and proposed a new solution concept, sequential reciprocity equilibrium, for which they proved an equilibrium existence result.
1,609 citations
••
TL;DR: "Radiomics" refers to the extraction and analysis of large amounts of advanced quantitative imaging features with high throughput from medical images obtained with computed tomography, positron emission tomography or magnetic resonance imaging, leading to a very large potential subject pool.
1,608 citations
Authors
Showing all 19492 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Edward Giovannucci | 206 | 1671 | 179875 |
Julie E. Buring | 186 | 950 | 132967 |
Aaron R. Folsom | 181 | 1118 | 134044 |
John J.V. McMurray | 178 | 1389 | 184502 |
Alvaro Pascual-Leone | 165 | 969 | 98251 |
Lex M. Bouter | 158 | 767 | 103034 |
David T. Felson | 153 | 861 | 133514 |
Walter Paulus | 149 | 809 | 86252 |
Michael Conlon O'Donovan | 142 | 736 | 118857 |
Randy L. Buckner | 141 | 346 | 110354 |
Philip Scheltens | 140 | 1175 | 107312 |
Anne Tjønneland | 139 | 1345 | 91556 |
Ewout W. Steyerberg | 139 | 1226 | 84896 |
James G. Herman | 138 | 410 | 120628 |
Andrew Steptoe | 137 | 1003 | 73431 |