Institution
University of York
Education•York, York, United Kingdom•
About: University of York is a education organization based out in York, York, United Kingdom. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Health care. The organization has 22089 authors who have published 56925 publications receiving 2458285 citations. The organization is also known as: York University & Ebor..
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
••
49,129 citations
••
TL;DR: CCP4mg is a project that aims to provide a general-purpose tool for structural biologists, providing tools for X-ray structure solution, structure comparison and analysis, and publication-quality graphics.
Abstract: CCP4mg is a project that aims to provide a general-purpose tool for structural biologists, providing tools for X-ray structure solution, structure comparison and analysis, and publication-quality graphics. The map-fitting tools are available as a stand-alone package, distributed as `Coot'.
27,505 citations
••
TL;DR: Coot is a molecular-graphics program designed to assist in the building of protein and other macromolecular models and the current state of development and available features are presented.
Abstract: Coot is a molecular-graphics application for model building and validation of biological macromolecules. The program displays electron-density maps and atomic models and allows model manipulations such as idealization, real-space refinement, manual rotation/translation, rigid-body fitting, ligand search, solvation, mutations, rotamers and Ramachandran idealization. Furthermore, tools are provided for model validation as well as interfaces to external programs for refinement, validation and graphics. The software is designed to be easy to learn for novice users, which is achieved by ensuring that tools for common tasks are `discoverable' through familiar user-interface elements (menus and toolbars) or by intuitive behaviour (mouse controls). Recent developments have focused on providing tools for expert users, with customisable key bindings, extensions and an extensive scripting interface. The software is under rapid development, but has already achieved very widespread use within the crystallographic community. The current state of the software is presented, with a description of the facilities available and of some of the underlying methods employed.
22,053 citations
••
TL;DR: A framework for conducting a scoping study is outlined based on recent experiences of reviewing the literature on services for carers for people with mental health problems and it is suggested that a wider debate is called for about the role of the scoped study in relation to other types of literature reviews.
Abstract: This paper focuses on scoping studies, an approach to reviewing the literature which to date has received little attention in the research methods literature. We distinguish between different types of scoping studies and indicate where these stand in relation to full systematic reviews. We outline a framework for conducting a scoping study based on our recent experiences of reviewing the literature on services for carers for people with mental health problems. Where appropriate, our approach to scoping the field is contrasted with the procedures followed in systematic reviews. We emphasize how including a consultation exercise in this sort of study may enhance the results, making them more useful to policy makers, practitioners and service users. Finally, we consider the advantages and limitations of the approach and suggest that a wider debate is called for about the role of the scoping study in relation to other types of literature reviews.
16,728 citations
••
Monash University1, University of Amsterdam2, University of Paris3, Bond University4, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio5, University of Ottawa6, American University of Beirut7, Oregon Health & Science University8, University of York9, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute10, University of Southern Denmark11, Johns Hopkins University12, Brigham and Women's Hospital13, Indiana University14, University of Bristol15, University College London16, University of Toronto17
TL;DR: The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement as discussed by the authors was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found.
Abstract: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to facilitate implementation. In this article, we present the PRISMA 2020 27-item checklist, an expanded checklist that details reporting recommendations for each item, the PRISMA 2020 abstract checklist, and the revised flow diagrams for original and updated reviews.
16,613 citations
Authors
Showing all 22432 results
Name | H-index | Papers | Citations |
---|---|---|---|
Cyrus Cooper | 204 | 1869 | 206782 |
Eric R. Kandel | 184 | 603 | 113560 |
Ian J. Deary | 166 | 1795 | 114161 |
Elio Riboli | 158 | 1136 | 110499 |
Claude Bouchard | 153 | 1076 | 115307 |
Robert Plomin | 151 | 1104 | 88588 |
Kevin J. Gaston | 150 | 750 | 85635 |
John R. Hodges | 149 | 812 | 82709 |
Myrna M. Weissman | 149 | 772 | 108259 |
Jeffrey A. Lieberman | 145 | 706 | 85306 |
Howard L. Weiner | 144 | 1047 | 91424 |
Dan J. Stein | 142 | 1727 | 132718 |
Jedd D. Wolchok | 140 | 713 | 123336 |
Bernard Henrissat | 139 | 593 | 100002 |
Joseph E. LeDoux | 139 | 478 | 91500 |