Institution
University of Leeds
Education•Leeds, United Kingdom•
About: University of Leeds is a education organization based out in Leeds, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Context (language use). The organization has 43481 authors who have published 101856 publications receiving 3672065 citations. The organization is also known as: Leeds University.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
TL;DR: In this article, the authors review the literature linking ownership and location strategies to economic geography and theories of globalisation and explore new areas of research, and suggest that the differential pace of globalization across markets presents a number of challenges to policy makers in local, national and regional governments, and in international institutions.
Abstract: The intention of this paper is to review the literature linking ownership and location strategies to economic geography and theories of globalisation and to explore new areas of research. This paper examines globalisation in terms of conflicts between markets and economic management, and suggests that the differential pace of globalisation across markets presents a number of challenges to policy makers in local, national and regional governments, and in international institutions. In examining the changing location and ownership strategies of MNEs, it shows that the increasingly sophisticated decision making of managers in MNEs is slicing the activities of firms more finely and in finding optimum locations for each closely defined activity, they are deepening the international division of labour. Ownership strategies, too, are becoming increasingly complex, leading to a control matrix that runs from wholly owned units via FDI through market relationships such as subcontracting, including joint ventures as options on subsequent decisions in a dynamic pattern. The input of lessons from economic geography is thus becoming more important in understanding the key developments in international business. The consequences of the globalisation of production and consumption represent political challenges, and reaction against these changes has led to a questioning of the effects of global capitalism as well as to its moral basis. These four issues are closely intertwined and present a formidable research agenda to which the international business research community is uniquely fitted to respond.
761 citations
••
University of Leicester1, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences2, Centre national de la recherche scientifique3, Earth System Research Laboratory4, Norwegian Institute for Air Research5, United Kingdom Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs6, Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology7, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis8, Danish Meteorological Institute9, Paul Scherrer Institute10, ETH Zurich11, University of California, Irvine12, University of Leeds13, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki14, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne15, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory16, National Center for Atmospheric Research17, Stockholm University18, Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology19, Forschungszentrum Jülich20, University of Oslo21, Max Planck Society22, University of Helsinki23, Blaise Pascal University24, Joseph Fourier University25, University of York26, University of Toulouse27, University of Urbino28, University of Manchester29, National University of Ireland, Galway30, University of Edinburgh31, Heidelberg University32, University of East Anglia33, Weizmann Institute of Science34, Norwegian Meteorological Institute35, Chalmers University of Technology36, Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands37, University of Stuttgart38, VU University Amsterdam39
TL;DR: A review of the state of scientific understanding in relation to global and regional air quality is outlined in this article, in terms of emissions, processing and transport of trace gases and aerosols.
760 citations
••
University of Manchester1, Imperial College London2, Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust3, Ford Motor Company4, Harvard University5, King's College London6, University Medical Center Groningen7, University of Cambridge8, University of Oxford9, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust10, University of Leeds11, University of Michigan12, European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer13, Institute of Cancer Research14, University College London15, United States Military Academy16, VU University Amsterdam17, University of Wisconsin-Madison18, Maastricht University19, Institut Gustave Roussy20, Robarts Research Institute21, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center22, Newcastle University23, University of Leicester24, Mount Vernon Hospital25, Hofstra University26, Johns Hopkins University27, University of Birmingham28, University of Antwerp29, Duke University30, Brighton and Sussex Medical School31, University of Sheffield32, University of Texas at Austin33
TL;DR: Experts assembled to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness.
Abstract: Imaging biomarkers (IBs) are integral to the routine management of patients with cancer. IBs used daily in oncology include clinical TNM stage, objective response and left ventricular ejection fraction. Other CT, MRI, PET and ultrasonography biomarkers are used extensively in cancer research and drug development. New IBs need to be established either as useful tools for testing research hypotheses in clinical trials and research studies, or as clinical decision-making tools for use in healthcare, by crossing 'translational gaps' through validation and qualification. Important differences exist between IBs and biospecimen-derived biomarkers and, therefore, the development of IBs requires a tailored 'roadmap'. Recognizing this need, Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) assembled experts to review, debate and summarize the challenges of IB validation and qualification. This consensus group has produced 14 key recommendations for accelerating the clinical translation of IBs, which highlight the role of parallel (rather than sequential) tracks of technical (assay) validation, biological/clinical validation and assessment of cost-effectiveness; the need for IB standardization and accreditation systems; the need to continually revisit IB precision; an alternative framework for biological/clinical validation of IBs; and the essential requirements for multicentre studies to qualify IBs for clinical use.
758 citations
••
TL;DR: The ability of LPH to deglycosylate dietary (iso)flavonoid glycosides suggests a possible role for this enzyme in the metabolism of these biologically active compounds.
758 citations
••
TL;DR: A scheme based on the zinc binding site has been extended to classify zinc metalloproteases into distinct families, defined by the HEXXH motif and a glutamic acid as the third zinc ligand.
754 citations
Authors
Showing all 44104 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Walter C. Willett | 334 | 2399 | 413322 |
David J. Hunter | 213 | 1836 | 207050 |
Edward Giovannucci | 206 | 1671 | 179875 |
Richard Peto | 183 | 683 | 231434 |
Paul G. Richardson | 183 | 1533 | 155912 |
Chris Sander | 178 | 713 | 233287 |
Kenneth C. Anderson | 178 | 1138 | 126072 |
David R. Williams | 178 | 2034 | 138789 |
Andrew Zisserman | 167 | 808 | 261717 |
Michael John Owen | 160 | 1110 | 135795 |
Jens J. Holst | 160 | 1536 | 107858 |
Paul Emery | 158 | 1314 | 121293 |
David Cameron | 154 | 1586 | 126067 |
J. Fraser Stoddart | 147 | 1239 | 96083 |
Debbie A Lawlor | 147 | 1114 | 101123 |