Institution
University of Dundee
Education•Dundee, United Kingdom•
About: University of Dundee is a education organization based out in Dundee, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Protein kinase A. The organization has 19258 authors who have published 39640 publications receiving 1919433 citations. The organization is also known as: Universitas Dundensis & Dundee University.
Topics: Population, Protein kinase A, Phosphorylation, Kinase, Health care
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: The genetic make-up of a cancer cell may realize its invasive potential through a clonal evolution process driven by definable microenvironmental selective forces, and this mathematical model provides a theoretical/experimental framework to quantitatively characterize this selective pressure for invasion and test ways to eliminate it.
751 citations
••
TL;DR: Human PDK1 is homologous to the Drosophila protein kinase DSTPK61, which has been implicated in the regulation of sex differentiation, oogenesis and spermatogenesis and is likely to mediate the activation of PKB by insulin or growth factors.
751 citations
••
TL;DR: A subclass of the deterministic job-shop scheduling problem in which the objective is minimising makespan is sought, by providing an overview of the history, the techniques used and the researchers involved.
750 citations
••
TL;DR: Experiences of conducting focus group interviews demonstrated that smaller groups were more manageable and that groups made up of strangers required more moderator intervention, suggesting that focus groups as a data collecting strategy are a rich source of information.
Abstract: Background. Focus group interviews are a method for collecting qualitative data and have enjoyed a surge in popularity in health care research over the last 20 years. However, the literature on this method is ambiguous in relation to the size, constitution, purpose and execution of focus groups.
Aim. The aim of this article is to explore some of the methodological issues arising from using focus group interviews in order to stimulate debate about their efficacy.
Discussion. Methodological issues are discussed in the context of a study examining attitudes towards and beliefs about older adults in hospital settings among first-level registered nurses, nursing lecturers and student nurses. Focus group interviews were used to identify everyday language and constructs used by nurses, with the intention of incorporating the findings into an instrument to measure attitudes and beliefs quantitatively.
Conclusions. Experiences of conducting focus group interviews demonstrated that smaller groups were more manageable and that groups made up of strangers required more moderator intervention. However, as a data collecting strategy they are a rich source of information.
748 citations
••
Aarhus University1, Washington University in St. Louis2, University of the Witwatersrand3, University of Oxford4, Sapienza University of Rome5, Harvard University6, Karolinska Institutet7, Walton Centre8, Johns Hopkins University9, Imperial College London10, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust11, University of Dundee12, Heidelberg University13
TL;DR: A revised grading system of possible, probable, and definite neuropathic pain from 2008 is presented with an adjusted order, better reflecting clinical practice, improvements in the specifications, and a word of caution that even the “definite” level of neuropathicPain does not always indicate causality.
Abstract: The redefinition of neuropathic pain as "pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system," which was suggested by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) Special Interest Group on Neuropathic Pain (NeuPSIG) in 2008, has been widely accepted. In contrast, the proposed grading system of possible, probable, and definite neuropathic pain from 2008 has been used to a lesser extent. Here, we report a citation analysis of the original NeuPSIG grading paper of 2008, followed by an analysis of its use by an expert panel and recommendations for an improved grading system. As of February, 2015, 608 eligible articles in Scopus cited the paper, 414 of which cited the neuropathic pain definition. Of 220 clinical studies citing the paper, 56 had used the grading system. The percentage using the grading system increased from 5% in 2009 to 30% in 2014. Obstacles to a wider use of the grading system were identified, including (1) questions about the relative significance of confirmatory tests, (2) the role of screening tools, and (3) uncertainties about what is considered a neuroanatomically plausible pain distribution. Here, we present a revised grading system with an adjusted order, better reflecting clinical practice, improvements in the specifications, and a word of caution that even the "definite" level of neuropathic pain does not always indicate causality. In addition, we add a table illustrating the area of pain and sensory abnormalities in common neuropathic pain conditions and propose areas for further research.
745 citations
Authors
Showing all 19404 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Matthias Mann | 221 | 887 | 230213 |
Mark I. McCarthy | 200 | 1028 | 187898 |
Stefan Schreiber | 178 | 1233 | 138528 |
Kenneth C. Anderson | 178 | 1138 | 126072 |
Masayuki Yamamoto | 171 | 1576 | 123028 |
Salvador Moncada | 164 | 495 | 138030 |
Jorge E. Cortes | 163 | 2784 | 124154 |
Andrew P. McMahon | 162 | 415 | 90650 |
Philip Cohen | 154 | 555 | 110856 |
Dirk Inzé | 149 | 647 | 74468 |
Andrew T. Hattersley | 146 | 768 | 106949 |
Antonio Lanzavecchia | 145 | 408 | 100065 |
Kim Nasmyth | 142 | 294 | 59231 |
David Price | 138 | 1687 | 93535 |
Dario R. Alessi | 136 | 354 | 74753 |