scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Institution

VU University Amsterdam

EducationAmsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands
About: VU University Amsterdam is a education organization based out in Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, Netherlands. It is known for research contribution in the topics: Population & Poison control. The organization has 33856 authors who have published 75643 publications receiving 3414264 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors found that bad is stronger than good, as a general principle across a broad range of psychological phenomena, such as bad emotions, bad parents, bad feedback, and bad information is processed more thoroughly than good.
Abstract: The greater power of bad events over good ones is found in everyday events, major life events (e.g., trauma), close relationship outcomes, social network patterns, interpersonal interactions, and learning processes. Bad emotions, bad parents, and bad feedback have more impact than good ones, and bad information is processed more thoroughly than good. The self is more motivated to avoid bad self-definitions than to pursue good ones. Bad impressions and bad stereotypes are quicker to form and more resistant to disconfirmation than good ones. Various explanations such as diagnosticity and salience help explain some findings, but the greater power of bad events is still found when such variables are controlled. Hardly any exceptions (indicating greater power of good) can be found. Taken together, these findings suggest that bad is stronger than good, as a general principle across a broad range of psychological phenomena.

5,340 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Klionsky1, Kotb Abdelmohsen2, Akihisa Abe3, Joynal Abedin4  +2519 moreInstitutions (695)
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macro-autophagy 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. For example, 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 versus those that measure flux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase 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. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. 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. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation, it is imperative to target by gene knockout or RNA interference more than one autophagy-related protein. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways implying that not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. 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 assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field.

5,187 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: New evidence and consensus now strengthen the role of these criteria in the multiple sclerosis diagnostic workup to demonstrate dissemination of lesions in time, to clarify the use of spinal cord lesions, and to simplify diagnosis of primary progressive disease.
Abstract: New diagnostic criteria for multiple sclerosis integrating magnetic resonance image assessment with clinical and other paraclinical methods were introduced in 2001. The "McDonald Criteria" have been extensively assessed and used since 2001. New evidence and consensus now strengthen the role of these criteria in the multiple sclerosis diagnostic workup to demonstrate dissemination of lesions in time, to clarify the use of spinal cord lesions, and to simplify diagnosis of primary progressive disease. The 2005 Revisions to the McDonald Diagnostic Criteria for MS should simplify and speed diagnosis, whereas maintaining adequate sensitivity and specificity.

4,862 citations

Book
01 Jan 1993
TL;DR: In this paper, a comprehensive and quantitative approach to the study of groundwater quality is presented in order to predict what the effect of present-day human activities will be on that scale.
Abstract: Groundwater geochemistry is an interdisciplinary science concerned with the chemistry in the subsurface environment. The chemical composition of groundwater is the combined result of the quality of water that enters the groundwater reservoir and reactions with minerals and organic matter of the aquifer matrix may modify the water quality. Apart from natural processes as controlling factors on the groundwater quality, in recent years the effect of pollution, such as nitrate from fertilizers and acid rain, also influences the groundwater chemistry. Due to the long residence time of groundwater in the invisible subsurface environment, the effect of pollution may first become apparent tens to hundreds of years afterwards. A proper understanding of the processes occurring in aquifers is required in order to predict what the effect of present day human activities will be on that scale. This book presents a comprehensive and quantitative approach to the study of groundwater quality. Practical examples of application are presented throughout the text.

4,767 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: There is little doubt that measurements of bioaccumulation and biomarker responses in fish from contaminated sites offer great promises for providing information that can contribute to environmental monitoring programs designed for various aspects of ERA.

4,397 citations


Authors

Showing all 34285 results

NameH-indexPapersCitations
Albert Hofman2672530321405
Raymond J. Dolan196919138540
Cornelia M. van Duijn1831030146009
Paul M. Thompson1832271146736
David A. Weitz1781038114182
Dorret I. Boomsma1761507136353
Brenda W.J.H. Penninx1701139119082
Kaj Blennow1601845116237
Vilmundur Gudnason159837123802
Lex M. Bouter158767103034
Wolfgang Wagner1562342123391
Frederik Barkhof1541449104982
Harry Campbell150897115457
Walter Paulus14980986252
James F. Wilson146677101883
Network Information
Related Institutions (5)
University College London
210.6K papers, 9.8M citations

95% related

University of British Columbia
209.6K papers, 9.2M citations

94% related

University of Toronto
294.9K papers, 13.5M citations

94% related

McGill University
162.5K papers, 6.9M citations

94% related

University of Washington
305.5K papers, 17.7M citations

94% related

Performance
Metrics
No. of papers from the Institution in previous years
YearPapers
2023289
2022643
20214,971
20204,640
20194,183
20183,506