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: A quantitative meta-analysis of previous research on the technology acceptance model indicated a significant influence of subjective norm on perceived usefulness and behavioral intention to use.
1,400 citations
••
Sapienza University of Rome1, Charité2, University of Barcelona3, University of Erlangen-Nuremberg4, University of Trieste5, Institut national de la recherche agronomique6, Sahlgrenska University Hospital7, Uppsala University8, University of Turin9, University of Edinburgh10, University of Parma11, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis12, Maastricht University13
TL;DR: The definition of cachexia, pre-cachexia and sarc Openia as well as the criteria for the differentiation between cachexia and other conditions associated with sarcopenia, which have been developed in cooperation with the ESPEN SIG on nutrition in geriatrics are reported.
1,380 citations
••
Medical University of Vienna1, Maastricht University2, Leiden University3, Paris Descartes University4, University of Leeds5, Pierre-and-Marie-Curie University6, Utrecht University7, Humboldt State University8, University of Montpellier9, University of Genoa10, University of Santiago, Chile11, Autonomous University of Madrid12, University of Glasgow13, Charles University in Prague14, Radboud University Nijmegen15, King's College London16, Sapienza University of Rome17, Karolinska Institutet18, Oregon Health & Science University19, Tufts University20, Charité21
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present a set of recommendations for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects.
Abstract: Treatment of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) may differ among rheumatologists and currently, clear and consensual international recommendations on RA treatment are not available. In this paper recommendations for the treatment of RA with synthetic and biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and glucocorticoids (GCs) that also account for strategic algorithms and deal with economic aspects, are described. The recommendations are based on evidence from five systematic literature reviews (SLRs) performed for synthetic DMARDs, biological DMARDs, GCs, treatment strategies and economic issues. The SLR-derived evidence was discussed and summarised as an expert opinion in the course of a Delphi-like process. Levels of evidence, strength of recommendations and levels of agreement were derived. Fifteen recommendations were developed covering an area from general aspects such as remission/low disease activity as treatment aim via the preference for methotrexate monotherapy with or without GCs vis-a-vis combination of synthetic DMARDs to the use of biological agents mainly in patients for whom synthetic DMARDs and tumour necrosis factor inhibitors had failed. Cost effectiveness of the treatments was additionally examined. These recommendations are intended to inform rheumatologists, patients and other stakeholders about a European consensus on the management of RA with DMARDs and GCs as well as strategies to reach optimal outcomes of RA, based on evidence and expert opinion.
1,372 citations
••
TL;DR: This work has shown that the outer leaflet of eukaryotic plasma membranes is formed predominantly with the cholinephospholipids (sphingomyelin and phosphatidylcholine [PC], whereas the majority of the
1,360 citations
••
TL;DR: This article advances a simple conception of test validity: A test is valid for measuring an attribute if (a) the attribute exists and (b) variations in the attribute causally produce variation in the measurement outcomes.
Abstract: This article advances a simple conception of test validity: A test is valid for measuring an attribute if (a) the attribute exists and (b) variations in the attribute causally produce variation in the measurement outcomes. This conception is shown to diverge from current validity theory in several respects. In particular, the emphasis in the proposed conception is on ontology, reference, and causality, whereas current validity theory focuses on epistemology, meaning, and correlation. It is argued that the proposed conception is not only simpler but also theoretically superior to the position taken in the existing literature. Further, it has clear theoretical and practical implications for validation research. Most important, validation research must not be directed at the relation between the measured attribute and other attributes but at the processes that convey the effect of the measured attribute on the test scores.
1,357 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 |