scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

RMIT University

EducationMelbourne, Victoria, Australia
About: RMIT University is a education organization based out in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 40468 authors who have published 82923 publications receiving 1729499 citations. The organization is also known as: Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology & Melbourne Technical College.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This work reviews the historical development of Transition metal dichalcogenides, methods for preparing atomically thin layers, their electronic and optical properties, and prospects for future advances in electronics and optoelectronics.
Abstract: Single-layer metal dichalcogenides are two-dimensional semiconductors that present strong potential for electronic and sensing applications complementary to that of graphene.

13,348 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Gregory A. Roth1, Gregory A. Roth2, Degu Abate3, Kalkidan Hassen Abate4  +1025 moreInstitutions (333)
TL;DR: Non-communicable diseases comprised the greatest fraction of deaths, contributing to 73·4% (95% uncertainty interval [UI] 72·5–74·1) of total deaths in 2017, while communicable, maternal, neonatal, and nutritional causes accounted for 18·6% (17·9–19·6), and injuries 8·0% (7·7–8·2).

5,211 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.
Abstract: Saturation has attained widespread acceptance as a methodological principle in qualitative research. It is commonly taken to indicate that, on the basis of the data that have been collected or analysed hitherto, further data collection and/or analysis are unnecessary. However, there appears to be uncertainty as to how saturation should be conceptualized, and inconsistencies in its use. In this paper, we look to clarify the nature, purposes and uses of saturation, and in doing so add to theoretical debate on the role of saturation across different methodologies. We identify four distinct approaches to saturation, which differ in terms of the extent to which an inductive or a deductive logic is adopted, and the relative emphasis on data collection, data analysis, and theorizing. We explore the purposes saturation might serve in relation to these different approaches, and the implications for how and when saturation will be sought. In examining these issues, we highlight the uncertain logic underlying saturation—as essentially a predictive statement about the unobserved based on the observed, a judgement that, we argue, results in equivocation, and may in part explain the confusion surrounding its use. We conclude that saturation should be operationalized in a way that is consistent with the research question(s), and the theoretical position and analytic framework adopted, but also that there should be some limit to its scope, so as not to risk saturation losing its coherence and potency if its conceptualization and uses are stretched too widely.

4,750 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS) as mentioned in this paper was organized in conjunction with the MICCAI 2012 and 2013 conferences, and twenty state-of-the-art tumor segmentation algorithms were applied to a set of 65 multi-contrast MR scans of low and high grade glioma patients.
Abstract: In this paper we report the set-up and results of the Multimodal Brain Tumor Image Segmentation Benchmark (BRATS) organized in conjunction with the MICCAI 2012 and 2013 conferences Twenty state-of-the-art tumor segmentation algorithms were applied to a set of 65 multi-contrast MR scans of low- and high-grade glioma patients—manually annotated by up to four raters—and to 65 comparable scans generated using tumor image simulation software Quantitative evaluations revealed considerable disagreement between the human raters in segmenting various tumor sub-regions (Dice scores in the range 74%–85%), illustrating the difficulty of this task We found that different algorithms worked best for different sub-regions (reaching performance comparable to human inter-rater variability), but that no single algorithm ranked in the top for all sub-regions simultaneously Fusing several good algorithms using a hierarchical majority vote yielded segmentations that consistently ranked above all individual algorithms, indicating remaining opportunities for further methodological improvements The BRATS image data and manual annotations continue to be publicly available through an online evaluation system as an ongoing benchmarking resource

3,699 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article proposes the minimum reporting standards related to the chemical analysis aspects of metabolomics experiments including: sample preparation, experimental analysis, quality control, metabolite identification, and data pre-processing.
Abstract: There is a general consensus that supports the need for standardized reporting of metadata or information describing large-scale metabolomics and other functional genomics data sets. Reporting of standard metadata provides a biological and empirical context for the data, facilitates experimental replication, and enables the re-interrogation and comparison of data by others. Accordingly, the Metabolomics Standards Initiative is building a general consensus concerning the minimum reporting standards for metabolomics experiments of which the Chemical Analysis Working Group (CAWG) is a member of this community effort. This article proposes the minimum reporting standards related to the chemical analysis aspects of metabolomics experiments including: sample preparation, experimental analysis, quality control, metabolite identification, and data pre-processing. These minimum standards currently focus mostly upon mass spectrometry and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy due to the popularity of these techniques in metabolomics. However, additional input concerning other techniques is welcomed and can be provided via the CAWG on-line discussion forum at http://msi-workgroups.sourceforge.net/ or http://Msi-workgroups-feedback@lists.sourceforge.net. Further, community input related to this document can also be provided via this electronic forum.

3,301 citations


Authors

Showing all 40792 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
David Smith1292184100917
Christopher G. Maher12894073131
Neville Owen12770074166
Bin Wang126222674364
Jorge S. Reis-Filho12159056695
Christos Pantelis12072356374
Peter J. Anderson12096663635
Bo Wang119290584863
Rui L. Reis115160863223
David Gunnell11468879867
Ian T. Baldwin11364247302
Steven A. Hillyard11224454946
Jianjun Liu112104071032
Iain B. McInnes11165559238
Timothy D. Noakes11070139090
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Queensland
155.7K papers, 5.7M citations

94% related

University of Sydney
187.3K papers, 6.1M citations

93% related

University of New South Wales
153.6K papers, 4.8M citations

93% related

University of Hong Kong
99.1K papers, 3.2M citations

92% related

National University of Singapore
165.4K papers, 5.4M citations

92% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023116
2022580
20219,740
20208,364
20196,995
20186,006