scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

Utrecht University

EducationUtrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands
About: Utrecht University is a education organization based out in Utrecht, Utrecht, Netherlands. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 58176 authors who have published 139351 publications receiving 6214282 citations. The organization is also known as: UU & Universiteit Utrecht.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors argue that certain characteristics of the public sector, such as ambiguous policy objectives, discretionary authority of street-level bureaucrats, simultaneous production and consumption of services, and the disjunction of costs and revenues, increase the risk of a performance paradox, either unintentionally or deliberately.
Abstract: Administrative reform has led to a strong increase in the use of performance assessment instruments in the public sector. However, this has also led to several unintended consequences, such as the performance paradox, tunnel vision, and “analysis paralysis.” These unintended consequences can reduce the quality of the knowledge about actual levels of performance or even negatively affect performance. Examples can be found in all policy sectors. The authors argue that certain characteristics of the public sector–such as ambiguous policy objectives, discretionary authority of street–level bureaucrats, simultaneous production and consumption of services, and the disjunction of costs and revenues–increase the risk of a performance paradox, either unintentionally or deliberately. Performance assessment should therefore take the special characteristics of the public sector into account and develop systems that can handle contested and multiple performance indicators, striking a balance in the degree of “measure ...

732 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is argued that the development of newMOEAs cannot converge onto a single new most efficient MOEA because the performance of MOEAs shows characteristics of multiobjective problems.
Abstract: Over the last decade, a variety of evolutionary algorithms (EAs) have been proposed for solving multiobjective optimization problems. Especially more recent multiobjective evolutionary algorithms (MOEAs) have been shown to be efficient and superior to earlier approaches. An important question however is whether we can expect such improvements to converge onto a specific efficient MOEA that behaves best on a large variety of problems. In this paper, we argue that the development of new MOEAs cannot converge onto a single new most efficient MOEA because the performance of MOEAs shows characteristics of multiobjective problems. While we point out the most important aspects for designing competent MOEAs in this paper, we also indicate the inherent multiobjective tradeoff in multiobjective optimization between proximity and diversity preservation. We discuss the impact of this tradeoff on the concepts and design of exploration and exploitation operators. We also present a general framework for competent MOEAs and show how current state-of-the-art MOEAs can be obtained by making choices within this framework. Furthermore, we show an example of how we can separate nondomination selection pressure from diversity preservation selection pressure and discuss the impact of changing the ratio between these components.

732 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is reported that cytokinins control the rate of meristematic cell differentiation and thus determine root-meristem size via a two-component receptor histidine kinase-transcription factor signaling pathway.

731 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The TRIPOD Statement aims to improve the transparency of the reporting of a prediction model study regardless of the study methods used and is recommended that authors include a completed checklist in their submission.

730 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
15 Oct 2005-Spine
TL;DR: A new proposed classification system for thoracolumbar (TL) spine injuries, including injury severity assessment, designed to assist in clinical management and to facilitate clinical decision-making as a practical alternative to cumbersome classification systems already in use is devised.
Abstract: Study design A new proposed classification system for thoracolumbar (TL) spine injuries, including injury severity assessment, designed to assist in clinical management. Objective To devise a practical, yet comprehensive, classification system for TL injuries that assists in clinical decision-making in terms of the need for operative versus nonoperative care and surgical treatment approach in unstable injury patterns. Summary of background data The most appropriate classification of traumatic TL spine injuries remains controversial. Systems currently in use can be cumbersome and difficult to apply. None of the published classification schemata is constructed to aid with decisions in clinical management. Methods Clinical spine trauma specialists from a variety of institutions around the world were canvassed with respect to information they deemed pivotal in the communication of TL spine trauma and the clinical decision-making process. Traditional injury patterns were reviewed and reconsidered in light of these essential characteristics. An initial validation process to determine the reliability and validity of an earlier version of this system was also undertaken. Results A new classification system called the Thoracolumbar Injury Classification and Severity Score (TLICS) was devised based on three injury characteristics: 1) morphology of injury determined by radiographic appearance, 2) integrity of the posterior ligamentous complex, and 3) neurologic status of the patient. A composite injury severity score was calculated from these characteristics stratifying patients into surgical and nonsurgical treatment groups. Finally, a methodology was developed to determine the optimum operative approach for surgical injury patterns. Conclusions Although there will always be limitations to any cataloging system, the TLICS reflects accepted features cited in the literature important in predicting spinal stability, future deformity, and progressive neurologic compromise. This classification system is intended to be easy to apply and to facilitate clinical decision-making as a practical alternative to cumbersome classification systems already in use. The TLICS may improve communication between spine trauma physicians and the education of residents and fellows. Further studies are underway to determine the reliability and validity of this tool.

730 citations


Authors

Showing all 58756 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Ronald C. Kessler2741332328983
Albert Hofman2672530321405
Douglas G. Altman2531001680344
Hans Clevers199793169673
Craig B. Thompson195557173172
Patrick W. Serruys1862427173210
Ruedi Aebersold182879141881
Dennis S. Charney179802122408
Kenneth S. Kendler1771327142251
Jean Louis Vincent1611667163721
Vilmundur Gudnason159837123802
Monique M.B. Breteler15954693762
Lex M. Bouter158767103034
Elio Riboli1581136110499
Roy F. Baumeister157650132987
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University College London
210.6K papers, 9.8M citations

94% related

University of Washington
305.5K papers, 17.7M citations

94% related

University of Minnesota
257.9K papers, 11.9M citations

94% related

University of British Columbia
209.6K papers, 9.2M citations

94% related

University of California, Davis
180K papers, 8M citations

94% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023429
20221,014
20218,992
20208,578
20197,862
20187,020