Institution
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Education•Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States•
About: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is a education organization based out in Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 81393 authors who have published 185327 publications receiving 9948508 citations. The organization is also known as: University of North Carolina & North Carolina.
Topics: Population, Poison control, Health care, Cancer, Medicine
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
01 Jan 2003
TL;DR: The life histories and future trajectories of individuals and groups were largely neglected by early sociological research as discussed by the authors, and the life course perspective is perhaps the pre-eminent theoretical orientation in the study of lives.
Abstract: Today, the life course perspective is perhaps the pre-eminent theoretical orientation in the study of lives, but this has not always been the case. The life histories and future trajectories of individuals and groups were largely neglected by early sociological research. In the pioneering study, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America (1918-1920), W. I. Thomas (with Florian Znaniecki) first made use of such histories and trajectories and argued strongly that they be investigated more fully by sociologists. By the mid-1920s, Thomas was emphasizing the vital need for a “longitudinal approach to life history” using life record data (Volkart, 1951, p. 593). He advocated that studies investigate “many types of individuals with regard to their experiences and various past periods of life in different situations” and follow “groups of individuals into the future, getting a continuous record of experiences as they occur.” Though this advice went unheeded for decades, Thomas’s early recommendations anticipated study of the life course and longitudinal research that has become such a central part of modern sociology and other disciplines.
2,401 citations
••
Florey Institute of Neuroscience and Mental Health1, University of Calgary2, NorthShore University HealthSystem3, University of Michigan4, Boston University5, University of Missouri–Kansas City6, University of Maryland, Baltimore7, University of Washington8, Oslo University Hospital9, University of Zurich10, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill11, Harvard University12, University of Toronto13, University at Buffalo14, University of Melbourne15, University of California, San Francisco16, Medical College of Wisconsin17, Boston Children's Hospital18, Princeton University19, Vanderbilt University Medical Center20, Vanderbilt University21, Toronto Western Hospital22
TL;DR: This document is developed for physicians and healthcare providers who are involved in athlete care, whether at a recreational, elite or professional level, and provides an overview of issues that may be of importance to healthcare providers involved in the management of SRC.
Abstract: The 2017 Concussion in Sport Group (CISG) consensus statement is designed to build on the principles outlined in the previous statements1–4 and to develop further conceptual understanding of sport-related concussion (SRC) using an expert consensus-based approach. This document is developed for physicians and healthcare providers who are involved in athlete care, whether at a recreational, elite or professional level. While agreement exists on the principal messages conveyed by this document, the authors acknowledge that the science of SRC is evolving and therefore individual management and return-to-play decisions remain in the realm of clinical judgement.
This consensus document reflects the current state of knowledge and will need to be modified as new knowledge develops. It provides an overview of issues that may be of importance to healthcare providers involved in the management of SRC. This paper should be read in conjunction with the systematic reviews and methodology paper that accompany it. First and foremost, this document is intended to guide clinical practice; however, the authors feel that it can also help form the agenda for future research relevant to SRC by identifying knowledge gaps.
A series of specific clinical questions were developed as part of the consensus process for the Berlin 2016 meeting. Each consensus question was the subject of a specific formal systematic review, which is published concurrently with this summary statement. Readers are directed to these background papers in conjunction with this summary statement as they provide the context for the issues and include the scope of published research, search strategy and citations reviewed for each question. This 2017 consensus statement also summarises each topic and recommendations in the context of all five CISG meetings (that is, 2001, 2004, 2008, 2012 as well as 2016). Approximately 60 000 published articles were screened by the expert panels for the Berlin …
2,388 citations
••
TL;DR: Stochasticity in gene expression can provide the flexibility needed by cells to adapt to fluctuating environments or respond to sudden stresses, and a mechanism by which population heterogeneity can be established during cellular differentiation and development.
Abstract: Genetically identical cells exposed to the same environmental conditions can show significant variation in molecular content and marked differences in phenotypic characteristics. This variability is linked to stochasticity in gene expression, which is generally viewed as having detrimental effects on cellular function with potential implications for disease. However, stochasticity in gene expression can also be advantageous. It can provide the flexibility needed by cells to adapt to fluctuating environments or respond to sudden stresses, and a mechanism by which population heterogeneity can be established during cellular differentiation and development.
2,381 citations
••
University of California, San Diego1, University of Montana2, Stanford University3, Scripps Institution of Oceanography4, National Autonomous University of Mexico5, Salk Institute for Biological Studies6, San Diego State University7, Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences8, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory9, Harvard University10, University of Rennes11, University of Minnesota12, University of Lorraine13, Technical University of Denmark14, J. Craig Venter Institute15, University of California, Los Angeles16, University of Washington17, ETH Zurich18, University of Illinois at Chicago19, National Sun Yat-sen University20, Academia Sinica21, University of Münster22, Victoria University of Wellington23, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill24, Indiana University25, Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute26, University of São Paulo27, Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul28, University of Notre Dame29, University of California, Santa Cruz30, Oregon State University31, University of California, Berkeley32, Florida International University33, University of Hawaii at Manoa34, University of Geneva35, Institut de Chimie des Substances Naturelles36, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory37, National Institutes of Health38, Chinese Academy of Sciences39
TL;DR: In GNPS, crowdsourced curation of freely available community-wide reference MS libraries will underpin improved annotations and data-driven social-networking should facilitate identification of spectra and foster collaborations.
Abstract: The potential of the diverse chemistries present in natural products (NP) for biotechnology and medicine remains untapped because NP databases are not searchable with raw data and the NP community has no way to share data other than in published papers. Although mass spectrometry (MS) techniques are well-suited to high-throughput characterization of NP, there is a pressing need for an infrastructure to enable sharing and curation of data. We present Global Natural Products Social Molecular Networking (GNPS; http://gnps.ucsd.edu), an open-access knowledge base for community-wide organization and sharing of raw, processed or identified tandem mass (MS/MS) spectrometry data. In GNPS, crowdsourced curation of freely available community-wide reference MS libraries will underpin improved annotations. Data-driven social-networking should facilitate identification of spectra and foster collaborations. We also introduce the concept of 'living data' through continuous reanalysis of deposited data.
2,365 citations
••
TL;DR: It is demonstrated that all three mouse Tet proteins (Tet1, Tet2 and Tet3) can also catalyse a similar reaction, uncover the enzymatic activity of the Tet proteins, and demonstrate a role for Tet1 in ES cell maintenance and inner cell mass cell specification.
Abstract: DNA methylation is one of the best-characterized epigenetic modifications. Although the enzymes that catalyse DNA methylation have been characterized, enzymes responsible for demethylation have been elusive. A recent study indicates that the human TET1 protein could catalyse the conversion of 5-methylcytosine (5mC) of DNA to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine (5hmC), raising the possibility that DNA demethylation may be a Tet1-mediated process. Here we extend this study by demonstrating that all three mouse Tet proteins (Tet1, Tet2 and Tet3) can also catalyse a similar reaction. Tet1 has an important role in mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell maintenance through maintaining the expression of Nanog in ES cells. Downregulation of Nanog via Tet1 knockdown correlates with methylation of the Nanog promoter, supporting a role for Tet1 in regulating DNA methylation status. Furthermore, knockdown of Tet1 in pre-implantation embryos results in a bias towards trophectoderm differentiation. Thus, our studies not only uncover the enzymatic activity of the Tet proteins, but also demonstrate a role for Tet1 in ES cell maintenance and inner cell mass cell specification.
2,364 citations
Authors
Showing all 82249 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Walter C. Willett | 334 | 2399 | 413322 |
Salim Yusuf | 231 | 1439 | 252912 |
David J. Hunter | 213 | 1836 | 207050 |
Irving L. Weissman | 201 | 1141 | 172504 |
Eric J. Topol | 193 | 1373 | 151025 |
Dennis W. Dickson | 191 | 1243 | 148488 |
Scott M. Grundy | 187 | 841 | 231821 |
Peidong Yang | 183 | 562 | 144351 |
Patrick O. Brown | 183 | 755 | 200985 |
Eric Boerwinkle | 183 | 1321 | 170971 |
Alan C. Evans | 183 | 866 | 134642 |
Anil K. Jain | 183 | 1016 | 192151 |
Terrie E. Moffitt | 182 | 594 | 150609 |
Aaron R. Folsom | 181 | 1118 | 134044 |
Valentin Fuster | 179 | 1462 | 185164 |