1,720,970 research outputs found
Pregnancy-Related Lumbopelvic Pain and its Relationship with Postural Control in Multigravid Pregnant Women
No full textBackground and Aims: Pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain (PLPP) affects 50-90% of pregnant women, substantially impairing their quality of life. The underlying mechanisms of PLPP remain largely unknown. Altered postural control has gained interest as a potential risk factor for PLPP. This study aims to determine the relationship between postural control and PLPP in the third trimester of pregnancy, while also exploring the differences in postural control between pregnant and non-pregnant women, and across different stages of pregnancy. Methods: A total of 68 women were included: 17 multigravid women in the first trimester of pregnancy (age 32.1±2.3yr, BMI 23.7±3.5), 25 multigravid women in the third trimester of pregnancy (age 32±2.6yr, BMI 28.4±4.2), and 26 non-pregnant women (age 29.7±3.7yr, BMI 22.2±1.8). Postural control was assessed in upright standing on a force plate under various postural conditions (with/without vision, feet together/20 cm apart, and/or stable/unstable support surface). Center of pressure (COP) variables were measured: mean COP sway anterior-posterior (AP), mean COP velocity AP, and COP 95% confidence ellipse area (CEA). In the third trimester, PLPP intensity was evaluated with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) to categorize into a no-PLPP subgroup (NPRS=0, N=9) and a PLPP subgroup (NPRS>0, N=16). Linear mixed models or Kruskal-Wallis tests, at nominal significance level 0.05, were used to compare COP variables between the no-PLPP and PLPP subgroups, between pregnant women (first or third trimester) and non-pregnant women, and between trimesters (uncorrected for BMI). Results: No significant differences in COP variables were found between the subgroups with and without PLPP (p>0.05). Pregnant women in the third trimester had significantly greater mean COP sway AP and COP 95% CEA compared to non-pregnant women when standing with feet together (p0.05). There were no significant differences in any COP variable between pregnant women in the first trimester and non-pregnant women, nor between trimesters (p>0.05). Conclusion: Pregnant women in the third trimester demonstrate larger postural sway compared to non-pregnant women, likely due to the biomechanical adaptations associated with advanced pregnancy. However, no direct relationship between these alterations in postural control and PLPP is identified
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Pregnancy-Related Lumbopelvic Pain and its Relationship with Postural Control in Multigravid Pregnant Women
No full textBackground and Aims: Pregnancy-related lumbopelvic pain (PLPP) affects 50-90% of pregnant women, substantially impairing their quality of life. The underlying mechanisms of PLPP remain largely unknown. Altered postural control has gained interest as a potential risk factor for PLPP. This study aims to determine the relationship between postural control and PLPP in the third trimester of pregnancy, while also exploring the differences in postural control between pregnant and non-pregnant women, and across different stages of pregnancy. Methods: A total of 68 women were included: 17 multigravid women in the first trimester of pregnancy (age 32.1±2.3yr, BMI 23.7±3.5), 25 multigravid women in the third trimester of pregnancy (age 32±2.6yr, BMI 28.4±4.2), and 26 non-pregnant women (age 29.7±3.7yr, BMI 22.2±1.8). Postural control was assessed in upright standing on a force plate under various postural conditions (with/without vision, feet together/20 cm apart, and/or stable/unstable support surface). Center of pressure (COP) variables were measured: mean COP sway anterior-posterior (AP), mean COP velocity AP, and COP 95% confidence ellipse area (CEA). In the third trimester, PLPP intensity was evaluated with the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) to categorize into a no-PLPP subgroup (NPRS=0, N=9) and a PLPP subgroup (NPRS>0, N=16). Linear mixed models or Kruskal-Wallis tests, at nominal significance level 0.05, were used to compare COP variables between the no-PLPP and PLPP subgroups, between pregnant women (first or third trimester) and non-pregnant women, and between trimesters (uncorrected for BMI). Results: No significant differences in COP variables were found between the subgroups with and without PLPP (p>0.05). Pregnant women in the third trimester had significantly greater mean COP sway AP and COP 95% CEA compared to non-pregnant women when standing with feet together (p0.05). There were no significant differences in any COP variable between pregnant women in the first trimester and non-pregnant women, nor between trimesters (p>0.05). Conclusion: Pregnant women in the third trimester demonstrate larger postural sway compared to non-pregnant women, likely due to the biomechanical adaptations associated with advanced pregnancy. However, no direct relationship between these alterations in postural control and PLPP is identified
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Full text linkWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
