Institution
University of Düsseldorf
Education•Düsseldorf, Germany•
About: University of Düsseldorf is a education organization based out in Düsseldorf, Germany. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Transplantation. The organization has 25225 authors who have published 49155 publications receiving 1946434 citations.
Topics: Population, Transplantation, Diabetes mellitus, Gene, Type 2 diabetes
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: G*Power 3 provides improved effect size calculators and graphic options, supports both distribution-based and design-based input modes, and offers all types of power analyses in which users might be interested.
Abstract: G*Power (Erdfelder, Faul, & Buchner, 1996) was designed as a general stand-alone power analysis program for statistical tests commonly used in social and behavioral research. G*Power 3 is a major extension of, and improvement over, the previous versions. It runs on widely used computer platforms (i.e., Windows XP, Windows Vista, and Mac OS X 10.4) and covers many different statistical tests of thet, F, and χ2 test families. In addition, it includes power analyses forz tests and some exact tests. G*Power 3 provides improved effect size calculators and graphic options, supports both distribution-based and design-based input modes, and offers all types of power analyses in which users might be interested. Like its predecessors, G*Power 3 is free.
40,195 citations
TL;DR: In the new version, procedures to analyze the power of tests based on single-sample tetrachoric correlations, comparisons of dependent correlations, bivariate linear regression, multiple linear regression based on the random predictor model, logistic regression, and Poisson regression are added.
Abstract: G*Power is a free power analysis program for a variety of statistical tests. We present extensions and improvements of the version introduced by Faul, Erdfelder, Lang, and Buchner (2007) in the domain of correlation and regression analyses. In the new version, we have added procedures to analyze the power of tests based on (1) single-sample tetrachoric correlations, (2) comparisons of dependent correlations, (3) bivariate linear regression, (4) multiple linear regression based on the random predictor model, (5) logistic regression, and (6) Poisson regression. We describe these new features and provide a brief introduction to their scope and handling.
20,778 citations
Harvard University1, University of California, San Francisco2, University of Düsseldorf3, Heidelberg University4, Aix-Marseille University5, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research6, International Agency for Research on Cancer7, German Cancer Research Center8, University of Zurich9, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital10
TL;DR: The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System is both a conceptual and practical advance over its 2007 predecessor and is hoped that it will facilitate clinical, experimental and epidemiological studies that will lead to improvements in the lives of patients with brain tumors.
Abstract: The 2016 World Health Organization Classification of Tumors of the Central Nervous System is both a conceptual and practical advance over its 2007 predecessor. For the first time, the WHO classification of CNS tumors uses molecular parameters in addition to histology to define many tumor entities, thus formulating a concept for how CNS tumor diagnoses should be structured in the molecular era. As such, the 2016 CNS WHO presents major restructuring of the diffuse gliomas, medulloblastomas and other embryonal tumors, and incorporates new entities that are defined by both histology and molecular features, including glioblastoma, IDH-wildtype and glioblastoma, IDH-mutant; diffuse midline glioma, H3 K27M-mutant; RELA fusion-positive ependymoma; medulloblastoma, WNT-activated and medulloblastoma, SHH-activated; and embryonal tumour with multilayered rosettes, C19MC-altered. The 2016 edition has added newly recognized neoplasms, and has deleted some entities, variants and patterns that no longer have diagnostic and/or biological relevance. Other notable changes include the addition of brain invasion as a criterion for atypical meningioma and the introduction of a soft tissue-type grading system for the now combined entity of solitary fibrous tumor / hemangiopericytoma-a departure from the manner by which other CNS tumors are graded. Overall, it is hoped that the 2016 CNS WHO will facilitate clinical, experimental and epidemiological studies that will lead to improvements in the lives of patients with brain tumors.
11,197 citations
University of Barcelona1, University of Pisa2, University of Duisburg-Essen3, Auckland City Hospital4, University of São Paulo5, European University6, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai7, Goethe University Frankfurt8, University of Bologna9, Hannover Medical School10, University of Mainz11, Aix-Marseille University12, Université catholique de Louvain13, University of Düsseldorf14, Bayer15, Bayer Corporation16
TL;DR: In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, median survival and the time to radiologic progression were nearly 3 months longer for patients treated with sorafenib than for those given placebo.
Abstract: Background No effective systemic therapy exists for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. A preliminary study suggested that sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, the platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and Raf may be effective in hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods In this multicenter, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 602 patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic treatment to receive either sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) or placebo. Primary outcomes were overall survival and the time to symptomatic progression. Secondary outcomes included the time to radiologic progression and safety. Results At the second planned interim analysis, 321 deaths had occurred, and the study was stopped. Median overall survival was 10.7 months in the sorafenib group and 7.9 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the sorafenib group, 0.69; 95% confidence interval, 0.55 to 0.87; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the median time to symptomatic progression (4.1 months vs. 4.9 months, respectively, P=0.77). The median time to radiologic progression was 5.5 months in the sorafenib group and 2.8 months in the placebo group (P<0.001). Seven patients in the sorafenib group (2%) and two patients in the placebo group (1%) had a partial response; no patients had a complete response. Diarrhea, weight loss, hand-foot skin reaction, and hypophosphatemia were more frequent in the sorafenib group. Conclusions In patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, median survival and the time to radiologic progression were nearly 3 months longer for patients treated with sorafenib than for those given placebo.
10,074 citations
Northern Arizona University1, National Institutes of Health2, University of Minnesota3, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution4, University of California, Davis5, Massachusetts Institute of Technology6, University of Copenhagen7, University of Trento8, Chinese Academy of Sciences9, University of California, San Francisco10, University of Pennsylvania11, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory12, North Carolina State University13, University of California, San Diego14, Institute for Systems Biology15, Dalhousie University16, University of British Columbia17, Statens Serum Institut18, Anschutz Medical Campus19, University of Washington20, Michigan State University21, Stanford University22, Harvard University23, Broad Institute24, Australian National University25, University of Düsseldorf26, University of New South Wales27, Sookmyung Women's University28, San Diego State University29, Howard Hughes Medical Institute30, Max Planck Society31, Cornell University32, Colorado State University33, Google34, Syracuse University35, Webster University36, United States Department of Agriculture37, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences38, Colorado School of Mines39, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration40, University of Southern Mississippi41, University of California, Merced42, Wageningen University and Research Centre43, University of Arizona44, Environment Agency45, University of Florida46, Merck & Co.47
TL;DR: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and R.K.P. and partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 and U54MD012388.
Abstract: QIIME 2 development was primarily funded by NSF Awards 1565100 to J.G.C. and 1565057 to R.K. Partial support was also provided by the following: grants NIH U54CA143925 (J.G.C. and T.P.) and U54MD012388 (J.G.C. and T.P.); grants from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (J.G.C. and R.K.); ERCSTG project MetaPG (N.S.); the Strategic Priority Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences QYZDB-SSW-SMC021 (Y.B.); the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council APP1085372 (G.A.H., J.G.C., Von Bing Yap and R.K.); the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) to D.L.G.; and the State of Arizona Technology and Research Initiative Fund (TRIF), administered by the Arizona Board of Regents, through Northern Arizona University. All NCI coauthors were supported by the Intramural Research Program of the National Cancer Institute. S.M.G. and C. Diener were supported by the Washington Research Foundation Distinguished Investigator Award.
8,821 citations
Authors
Showing all 25575 results
| Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| Henry R. Bourne | 92 | 226 | 34957 |
| George Coupland | 92 | 225 | 32441 |
| Bin Tean Teh | 92 | 471 | 33359 |
| Michael Wagner | 92 | 834 | 33308 |
| Peter Horton | 91 | 278 | 23545 |
| Klaas E. Stephan | 91 | 309 | 33765 |
| William Martin | 90 | 348 | 34353 |
| Peter Falkai | 90 | 857 | 30986 |
| Paul Schulze-Lefert | 90 | 222 | 30412 |
| Jürgen C. Becker | 90 | 637 | 28741 |
| Thomas D. Sharkey | 89 | 262 | 29969 |
| Katrin Amunts | 89 | 438 | 35069 |
| Axel Benner | 89 | 451 | 31882 |
| Francesco Salamini | 89 | 317 | 26433 |
| Wolfgang Stremmel | 88 | 718 | 31821 |