1,721,052 research outputs found
cDNA clones of myeloperoxidase (MPO) and eosinophil peroxidase (EPO) from human blood mononuclear cells differentiated into granulocyte precursors in liquid cultures
No full textSplicing of constitutive upstream introns is essential for the recognition of intra-exonic suboptimal splice sites in the thrombopoietin gene
No full text
A neutralizing monoclonal antibody previously mapped exclusively on human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gp41 recognizes an epitope in p17 sharing the core sequence IEEE.
No full textDIFFERENT EFFICIENCY OF INITIATION OF TRANSLATION BY 5’UTR OF HEPATITIS C VIRUS TYPES AND OF NATURALLY OCCURRING VARIANTS
No full textDOT- BLOT ASSAY WITH 5'UTR GENOTYPE-SPECIFIC OLIGONUCLEOTIDE PROBES ALLOWS IDENTIFICATION OF DISTINCT GENOTYPES OF HCV
No full text
TRANSLATIONAL ACTIVITY OF THE 5’UTR OF HCV : DIFFERENCES BETWEEN GENOTYPES, NATURALLY OCCURRING VARIANTS AND ARTIFICIAL MUTANTS
No full text
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe 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
- …
