Institution
Queensland Government
Government•Brisbane, Queensland, Australia•
About: Queensland Government is a government organization based out in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Public health. The organization has 553 authors who have published 585 publications receiving 13396 citations. The organization is also known as: State of Queensland & Government of Queensland.
Topics: Population, Public health, Health care, Vegetation, Climate change
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
University of Alabama at Birmingham1, College of Health Sciences, Bahrain2, University of Hohenheim3, Jimma University4, Queensland Government5, University of Queensland6, Mekelle University7, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation8, University of Cartagena9, Komfo Anokye Teaching Hospital10, University of Manitoba11, University of Gondar12, University of São Paulo13, Aga Khan University14, New Generation University College15, Public Health Foundation of India16, Duy Tan University17, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention18, Bielefeld University19, University of Basel20, Imperial College London21, Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute22, Boston Children's Hospital23, Baylor College of Medicine24, Yonsei University25, Tehran University of Medical Sciences26, Jordan University of Science and Technology27, University of London28, University of Melbourne29, University of Liverpool30, Aintree University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust31, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg32, United Nations Population Fund33, Iran University of Medical Sciences34, University of Ulm35, University of Sydney36, University of Porto37, University of British Columbia38, A.T. Still University39, Golestan University40, Harvard University41, Case Western Reserve University42, Marshall University43, University of KwaZulu-Natal44, AIIMS, New Delhi45, Utkal University46, Haramaya University47, Queensland University of Technology48, Jagiellonian University Medical College49, Wrocław Medical University50, Johns Hopkins University51, Hanoi Medical University52, National Research University – Higher School of Economics53, Norwegian Institute of Public Health54, University of Bergen55, Karolinska Institutet56, University of Tromsø57, Kyoto University58, Jackson State University59, Wuhan University60, University of Washington61
TL;DR: In this article, the authors report results of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2015 study on primary liver cancer incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries or territories from 1990 to 2015, and present global, regional, and national estimates on the burden of liver cancer attributable to hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and alcohol, and an “other” group that encompasses residual causes.
Abstract: Importance Liver cancer is among the leading causes of cancer deaths globally. The most common causes for liver cancer include hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection and alcohol use. Objective To report results of the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2015 study on primary liver cancer incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) for 195 countries or territories from 1990 to 2015, and present global, regional, and national estimates on the burden of liver cancer attributable to HBV, HCV, alcohol, and an “other” group that encompasses residual causes. Design, Settings, and Participants Mortality was estimated using vital registration and cancer registry data in an ensemble modeling approach. Single-cause mortality estimates were adjusted for all-cause mortality. Incidence was derived from mortality estimates and the mortality-to-incidence ratio. Through a systematic literature review, data on the proportions of liver cancer due to HBV, HCV, alcohol, and other causes were identified. Years of life lost were calculated by multiplying each death by a standard life expectancy. Prevalence was estimated using mortality-to-incidence ratio as surrogate for survival. Total prevalence was divided into 4 sequelae that were multiplied by disability weights to derive years lived with disability (YLDs). DALYs were the sum of years of life lost and YLDs. Main Outcomes and Measures Liver cancer mortality, incidence, YLDs, years of life lost, DALYs by etiology, age, sex, country, and year. Results There were 854 000 incident cases of liver cancer and 810 000 deaths globally in 2015, contributing to 20 578 000 DALYs. Cases of incident liver cancer increased by 75% between 1990 and 2015, of which 47% can be explained by changing population age structures, 35% by population growth, and −8% to changing age-specific incidence rates. The male-to-female ratio for age-standardized liver cancer mortality was 2.8. Globally, HBV accounted for 265 000 liver cancer deaths (33%), alcohol for 245 000 (30%), HCV for 167 000 (21%), and other causes for 133 000 (16%) deaths, with substantial variation between countries in the underlying etiologies. Conclusions and Relevance Liver cancer is among the leading causes of cancer deaths in many countries. Causes of liver cancer differ widely among populations. Our results show that most cases of liver cancer can be prevented through vaccination, antiviral treatment, safe blood transfusion and injection practices, as well as interventions to reduce excessive alcohol use. In line with the Sustainable Development Goals, the identification and elimination of risk factors for liver cancer will be required to achieve a sustained reduction in liver cancer burden. The GBD study can be used to guide these prevention efforts.
1,208 citations
West Virginia University1, Yale University2, Food and Agriculture Organization3, Landcare Research4, University of Udine5, Max Planck Society6, University of Alaska Fairbanks7, Technische Universität München8, Université du Québec à Montréal9, University of the French West Indies and Guiana10, University of Freiburg Faculty of Biology11, Cornell University12, Wageningen University and Research Centre13, University of Sydney14, Polytechnic Institute of Viseu15, University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto Douro16, University of Göttingen17, Russian Academy of Sciences18, Oeschger Centre for Climate Change Research19, Lakehead University20, University of La Frontera21, Seoul National University22, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg23, University of Cambridge24, Center for International Forestry Research25, James Cook University26, University of Zurich27, University of Yaoundé I28, University of Wisconsin-Madison29, Queensland Government30, Institut national de la recherche agronomique31, Florida International University32, Forest Research Institute33, Polish Academy of Sciences34, University of Minnesota35, Warsaw University of Life Sciences36, Ştefan cel Mare University of Suceava37, University of Florence38, University of Warsaw39, Spanish National Research Council40, King Juan Carlos University41, International Trademark Association42, National University of Austral Patagonia43, National Scientific and Technical Research Council44, Wildlife Conservation Society45, College of African Wildlife Management46, University of York47, Durham University48, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources49, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador50, Centre national de la recherche scientifique51, Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi52, University College London53, University of Leeds54
TL;DR: A consistent positive concave-down effect of biodiversity on forest productivity across the world is revealed, showing that a continued biodiversity loss would result in an accelerating decline in forest productivity worldwide.
Abstract: The biodiversity-productivity relationship (BPR) is foundational to our understanding of the global extinction crisis and its impacts on ecosystem functioning. Understanding BPR is critical for the accurate valuation and effective conservation of biodiversity. Using ground-sourced data from 777,126 permanent plots, spanning 44 countries and most terrestrial biomes, we reveal a globally consistent positive concave-down BPR, showing that continued biodiversity loss would result in an accelerating decline in forest productivity worldwide. The value of biodiversity in maintaining commercial forest productivity alone-US$166 billion to 490 billion per year according to our estimation-is more than twice what it would cost to implement effective global conservation. This highlights the need for a worldwide reassessment of biodiversity values, forest management strategies, and conservation priorities.
889 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a functional model is presented to demonstrate the impact of urbanization on coastal wetland structure and function, and the model is used to assess the effects of urbanisation at the ecosystem level.
Abstract: Urbanization is a major cause of loss of coastal wetlands. Urbanization also exerts significant influences on the structure and function of coastal wetlands, mainly through modifying the hydrological and sedimentation regimes, and the dynamics of nutrients and chemical pollutants. Natural coastal wetlands are characterized by a hydrological regime comprising concentrated flow to estuarine and coastal areas during flood events, and diffused discharge into groundwater and waterways during the non-flood periods. Urbanization, through increasing the amount of impervious areas in the catchment, results in a replacement of this regime by concentrating rain run-off. Quality of run-off is also modified in urban areas, as loadings of sediment, nutrients and pollutants are increased in urban areas. While the effects of such modifications on the biota and the physical environment have been relatively well studied, there is to date little information on their impact at the ecosystem level. Methodological issues, such as a lack of sufficient replication at the whole-habitat level, the lack of suitable indices of urbanization and tools for assessing hydrological connectivity, have to be overcome to allow the effects of urbanization to be assessed at the ecosystem level. A functional model is presented to demonstrate the impact of urbanization on coastal wetland structure and function.
341 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors evaluated the effect of irrigation applied with subsurface drip irrigation on field corn (Zea mays L.) evapotranspiration (ETc), yield, water use efficiencies (WUE), and drymatter production in the semiarid climate of west central Nebraska.
257 citations
TL;DR: Some existing process frameworks can provide a good starting‐point to capturing knowledge in the public sector, and some practical models to assist governments develop and capitalize on more effective knowledge‐based stakeholder partnerships are suggested.
Abstract: Purpose – How knowledge management theories and frameworks are applied in the public sector is not well understood due to little evidence being published in the literature. This paper aims to identify core issues and challenges that governments face in delivering effective public policy, particularly challenges presented by increasing community expectations, and to highlight the importance of developing public policy via knowledge‐based partnerships with its stakeholders.Design/methodology/approach – Arguments draw on relevant theory in knowledge management and related fields as well as from public sector experiences.Findings – The main discussion examines some issues, challenges and opportunities in public policy developments and proposes some practical models to assist governments develop and capitalize on more effective knowledge‐based stakeholder partnerships.Practical implications – This paper suggests that some existing process frameworks can provide a good starting‐point to capturing knowledge abou...
229 citations
Authors
Showing all 554 results
| Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Christopher J. O'Donnell | 159 | 869 | 126278 |
| Hugh P. Possingham | 129 | 847 | 59759 |
| Mark D. Griffiths | 124 | 1238 | 61335 |
| Ram C. Dalal | 55 | 276 | 11952 |
| Colin J. Limpus | 49 | 198 | 7991 |
| Angus R. Simpson | 45 | 308 | 9205 |
| Ian M. Mackay | 42 | 125 | 9717 |
| Adrian D. Werner | 41 | 161 | 5709 |
| Geoff Eaglesham | 40 | 70 | 5657 |
| Martin F. Lambert | 38 | 311 | 5755 |
| Gulam Khandaker | 37 | 221 | 5145 |
| Jennifer R. Ovenden | 36 | 141 | 4900 |
| Elizabeth C. Ward | 35 | 293 | 4460 |
| Richard K. F. Unsworth | 35 | 113 | 3633 |
| Andrew F. van den Hurk | 35 | 105 | 5342 |