scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

University of Groningen

EducationGroningen, Groningen, Netherlands
About: University of Groningen is a education organization based out in Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 36346 authors who have published 69116 publications receiving 2940370 citations. The organization is also known as: Rijksuniversiteit Groningen & RUG.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An improved and extended version of the coarse grained lipid model is presented, coined the MARTINI force field, based on the reproduction of partitioning free energies between polar and apolar phases of a large number of chemical compounds to reproduce the free energies of these chemical building blocks.
Abstract: We present an improved and extended version of our coarse grained lipid model. The new version, coined the MARTINI force field, is parametrized in a systematic way, based on the reproduction of partitioning free energies between polar and apolar phases of a large number of chemical compounds. To reproduce the free energies of these chemical building blocks, the number of possible interaction levels of the coarse-grained sites has increased compared to those of the previous model. Application of the new model to lipid bilayers shows an improved behavior in terms of the stress profile across the bilayer and the tendency to form pores. An extension of the force field now also allows the simulation of planar (ring) compounds, including sterols. Application to a bilayer/cholesterol system at various concentrations shows the typical cholesterol condensation effect similar to that observed in all atom representations.

4,580 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Theo Vos1, Ryan M Barber1, Brad Bell1, Amelia Bertozzi-Villa1  +686 moreInstitutions (287)
TL;DR: In the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013 (GBD 2013) as mentioned in this paper, the authors estimated the quantities for acute and chronic diseases and injuries for 188 countries between 1990 and 2013.

4,510 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: These guidelines are presented for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes.
Abstract: In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. A key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process vs. those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process); thus, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation needs to be differentiated from stimuli that result in increased autophagic activity, defined as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (in most higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the field understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

4,316 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The content of these European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Guidelines has been published for personal and educational use only and no commercial use is authorized.
Abstract: Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'eGFR category', '95 mL/min' (page 15). The cell should be coloured green instead of yellow. It should also read "60 mg"instead of "60 mg (use with caution in 'supranormal' renal function)."In the above-indicated cell, a footnote has also been added to state: "Edoxaban should be used in patients with high creatinine clearance only after a careful evaluation of the individual thromboembolic and bleeding risk."Supplementary Table 9, column 'Edoxaban', row 'Dose reduction in selected patients' (page 16). The cell should read "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily if any of the following: creatinine clearance 15-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant use of dronedarone, erythromycin, ciclosporine or ketokonazole"instead of "Edoxaban 60 mg reduced to 30 mg once daily, and edoxaban 30 mg reduced to 15mg once daily, if any of the following: creatinine clearance of 30-50 mL/min, body weight <60 kg, concomitant us of verapamil or quinidine or dronedarone."

4,285 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: 2012 Revised International Chapel Hill Consensus Conference Nomenclature of Vasculitides J. Watts; Arthritis & Rheumatism
Abstract: 2012 Revised International Chapel Hill Consensus Conference Nomenclature of Vasculitides J. Jennette;R. Falk;P. Bacon;N. Basu;M. Cid;F. Ferrario;L. Flores-Suarez;W. Gross;L. Guillevin;E. Hagen;G. Hoffman;D. Jayne;C. Kallenberg;P. Lamprecht;C. Langford;R. Luqmani;A. Mahr;E. Matteson;P. Merkel;S. Ozen;C. Pusey;N. Rasmussen;A. Rees;D. Scott;U. Specks;J. Stone;K. Takahashi;R. Watts; Arthritis & Rheumatism

4,249 citations


Authors

Showing all 36692 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Ronald C. Kessler2741332328983
Nicholas J. Wareham2121657204896
André G. Uitterlinden1991229156747
Lei Jiang1702244135205
Brenda W.J.H. Penninx1701139119082
Richard H. Friend1691182140032
Panos Deloukas162410154018
Jerome I. Rotter1561071116296
Christopher M. Dobson1501008105475
Dirk Inzé14964774468
Scott T. Weiss147102574742
Dieter Lutz13967167414
Wilmar B. Schaufeli13751395718
Cisca Wijmenga13666886572
Arnold B. Bakker135506103778
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University of Amsterdam
140.8K papers, 5.9M citations

98% related

Utrecht University
139.3K papers, 6.2M citations

97% related

University of Manchester
168K papers, 6.4M citations

94% related

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
176.5K papers, 6.2M citations

94% related

University College London
210.6K papers, 9.8M citations

94% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023166
2022543
20214,487
20203,990
20193,283
20182,836