Institution
Temple University
Education•Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States•
About: Temple University is a education organization based out in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 32154 authors who have published 64375 publications receiving 2219828 citations.
Topics: Population, Poison control, Anxiety, Health care, Receptor
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
•
TL;DR: In this paper, the first meta-generalized gradient approximation (GGA) that is fully constrained, obeying all 17 known exact constraints that a meta-GGA can, was proposed.
Abstract: The ground-state energy, electron density, and related properties of ordinary matter can be computed efficiently when the exchange-correlation energy as a functional of the density is approximated semilocally. We propose the first meta-GGA (meta-generalized gradient approximation) that is fully constrained, obeying all 17 known exact constraints that a meta-GGA can. It is also exact or nearly exact for a set of appropriate norms, including rare-gas atoms and nonbonded interactions. This SCAN (strongly constrained and appropriately normed) meta-GGA achieves remarkable accuracy for systems where the exact exchange-correlation hole is localized near its electron, and especially for lattice constants and weak interactions.
920 citations
••
Cleveland Clinic1, MedStar Washington Hospital Center2, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston3, University of Pennsylvania4, Harvard University5, McMaster University6, McGill University7, University of Padua8, European Institute of Oncology9, University of Chicago10, Oslo University Hospital11, Temple University12, University of Liège13, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center14, Menzies Research Institute15, Mayo Clinic16
TL;DR: The non-invasive evaluation of LVEF has gained importance, and notwithstanding the limitations of the techniques used for its calculation, has emerged as the most widely used strategy for monitoring the changes in cardiac function, both during and after the administration of potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatment.
Abstract: ### A. Definition, classification, and mechanisms of toxicity
Cardiac dysfunction resulting from exposure to cancer therapeutics was first recognized in the 1960s, with the widespread introduction of anthracyclines into the oncological therapeutic armamentarium.1 Heart failure (HF) associated with anthracyclines was then recognized as an important side effect. As a result, physicians learned to limit their doses to avoid cardiac dysfunction.2 Several strategies have been used over the past decades to detect it. Two of them evolved over time to be very useful: endomyocardial biopsies and monitoring of left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) by cardiac imaging. Examination of endomyocardial biopsies proved to be the most sensitive and specific parameter for the identification of anthracycline-induced LV dysfunction and became the gold standard in the 1970s. However, the interest in endomyocardial biopsy has diminished over time because of the reduction in the cumulative dosages used to treat malignancies, the invasive nature of the procedure, and the remarkable progress made in non-invasive cardiac imaging. The non-invasive evaluation of LVEF has gained importance, and notwithstanding the limitations of the techniques used for its calculation, has emerged as the most widely used strategy for monitoring the changes in cardiac function, both during and after the administration of potentially cardiotoxic cancer treatment.3–5
The timing of LV dysfunction can vary among agents. In the case of anthracyclines, the damage occurs immediately after the exposure;6 for others, the time frame between drug administration and detectable cardiac dysfunction appears to be more variable. Nevertheless, the heart has significant cardiac reserve, and the expression of damage in the form of alterations in systolic or diastolic parameters may not be overt until a substantial amount of cardiac reserve has been exhausted. Thus, cardiac damage may not become apparent until years or even decades after receiving the cardiotoxic treatment. This is particularly applicable to …
920 citations
01 Jan 1990
912 citations
••
TL;DR: This paper proposes a robust visual tracking method by casting tracking as a sparse approximation problem in a particle filter framework and extends the method for simultaneous tracking and recognition by introducing a static template set which stores target images from different classes.
Abstract: In this paper, we propose a robust visual tracking method by casting tracking as a sparse approximation problem in a particle filter framework. In this framework, occlusion, noise, and other challenging issues are addressed seamlessly through a set of trivial templates. Specifically, to find the tracking target in a new frame, each target candidate is sparsely represented in the space spanned by target templates and trivial templates. The sparsity is achieved by solving an l1-regularized least-squares problem. Then, the candidate with the smallest projection error is taken as the tracking target. After that, tracking is continued using a Bayesian state inference framework. Two strategies are used to further improve the tracking performance. First, target templates are dynamically updated to capture appearance changes. Second, nonnegativity constraints are enforced to filter out clutter which negatively resembles tracking targets. We test the proposed approach on numerous sequences involving different types of challenges, including occlusion and variations in illumination, scale, and pose. The proposed approach demonstrates excellent performance in comparison with previously proposed trackers. We also extend the method for simultaneous tracking and recognition by introducing a static template set which stores target images from different classes. The recognition result at each frame is propagated to produce the final result for the whole video. The approach is validated on a vehicle tracking and classification task using outdoor infrared video sequences.
911 citations
••
Kaiser Permanente1, University of Iowa2, Veterans Health Administration3, Stanford University4, University of California, San Francisco5, Oregon Health & Science University6, Columbia University7, University of Pennsylvania8, University of Georgia9, Virginia Tech10, Nationwide Children's Hospital11, Virginia Commonwealth University12, Temple University13, University of Alabama at Birmingham14, University of California, Los Angeles15, Boston University16, Northwestern University17, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai18, University of Hawaii19
TL;DR: The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the net benefit of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men aged 55 to 69 years is small for some men.
Abstract: Importance In the United States, the lifetime risk of being diagnosed with prostate cancer is approximately 11%, and the lifetime risk of dying of prostate cancer is 2.5%. The median age of death from prostate cancer is 80 years. Many men with prostate cancer never experience symptoms and, without screening, would never know they have the disease. African American men and men with a family history of prostate cancer have an increased risk of prostate cancer compared with other men. Objective To update the 2012 US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on prostate-specific antigen (PSA)–based screening for prostate cancer. Evidence Review The USPSTF reviewed the evidence on the benefits and harms of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer and subsequent treatment of screen-detected prostate cancer. The USPSTF also commissioned a review of existing decision analysis models and the overdiagnosis rate of PSA-based screening. The reviews also examined the benefits and harms of PSA-based screening in patient subpopulations at higher risk of prostate cancer, including older men, African American men, and men with a family history of prostate cancer. Findings Adequate evidence from randomized clinical trials shows that PSA-based screening programs in men aged 55 to 69 years may prevent approximately 1.3 deaths from prostate cancer over approximately 13 years per 1000 men screened. Screening programs may also prevent approximately 3 cases of metastatic prostate cancer per 1000 men screened. Potential harms of screening include frequent false-positive results and psychological harms. Harms of prostate cancer treatment include erectile dysfunction, urinary incontinence, and bowel symptoms. About 1 in 5 men who undergo radical prostatectomy develop long-term urinary incontinence, and 2 in 3 men will experience long-term erectile dysfunction. Adequate evidence shows that the harms of screening in men older than 70 years are at least moderate and greater than in younger men because of increased risk of false-positive results, diagnostic harms from biopsies, and harms from treatment. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the net benefit of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men aged 55 to 69 years is small for some men. How each man weighs specific benefits and harms will determine whether the overall net benefit is small. The USPSTF concludes with moderate certainty that the potential benefits of PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men 70 years and older do not outweigh the expected harms. Conclusions and Recommendation For men aged 55 to 69 years, the decision to undergo periodic PSA-based screening for prostate cancer should be an individual one and should include discussion of the potential benefits and harms of screening with their clinician. Screening offers a small potential benefit of reducing the chance of death from prostate cancer in some men. However, many men will experience potential harms of screening, including false-positive results that require additional testing and possible prostate biopsy; overdiagnosis and overtreatment; and treatment complications, such as incontinence and erectile dysfunction. In determining whether this service is appropriate in individual cases, patients and clinicians should consider the balance of benefits and harms on the basis of family history, race/ethnicity, comorbid medical conditions, patient values about the benefits and harms of screening and treatment-specific outcomes, and other health needs. Clinicians should not screen men who do not express a preference for screening. (C recommendation) The USPSTF recommends against PSA-based screening for prostate cancer in men 70 years and older. (D recommendation)
902 citations
Authors
Showing all 32360 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Robert J. Lefkowitz | 214 | 860 | 147995 |
Rakesh K. Jain | 200 | 1467 | 177727 |
Virginia M.-Y. Lee | 194 | 993 | 148820 |
Yury Gogotsi | 171 | 956 | 144520 |
Timothy A. Springer | 167 | 669 | 122421 |
Ralph A. DeFronzo | 160 | 759 | 132993 |
James J. Collins | 151 | 669 | 89476 |
Robert J. Glynn | 146 | 748 | 88387 |
Edward G. Lakatta | 146 | 858 | 88637 |
Steven Williams | 144 | 1375 | 86712 |
Peter Buchholz | 143 | 1181 | 92101 |
David Goldstein | 141 | 1301 | 101955 |
Scott D. Solomon | 137 | 1145 | 103041 |
Donald B. Rubin | 132 | 515 | 262632 |
Jeffery D. Molkentin | 131 | 482 | 61594 |