1,720,954 research outputs found
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
Ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease: robotic intracorporeal compared to laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis
No full textLaparoscopy is the first-line approach in ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease. Emerging data has shown better short-term outcomes with robotic right colectomy for cancer when compared to laparoscopic approach. However, robotic ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease has only shown faster return to bowel function. We aimed to evaluate short-term outcomes of ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease between robotic intracorporeal anastomosis (RICA) and laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis (LECA). Patients undergoing minimally invasive ileocolic resections for Crohn's disease were retrospectively identified using a prospectively maintained database between 2014 and 2021 in two referral centers. Among the 239 patients, 70 (29%) underwent RICA while 169 (71%) LECA. Both groups were similar according to baseline and preoperative characteristics. RICA was associated with more intraoperative adhesiolysis and longer operative time [RICA: 238 ± 79 min vs. LECA: 143 ± 52 min; p < 0.001]. 30-day postoperative complications were not different between the two groups [RICA: 17/70(24%) vs. LECA: 54/169(32%); p = 0.238]. Surgical site infections [RICA: 0/70 vs. LECA: 16/169(10%); p = 0.004], intra-abdominal septic complications [RICA: 0/70 vs. LECA: 14/169(8%); p = 0.012], and Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications [RICA: 1/70(1%) vs. LECA: 15/169(9%); p = 0.044] were less frequent in RICA. Return to bowel function [RICA: 2.1 ± 1.1 vs. LECA: 2.6 ± 1.2 days; p = 0.002] and length of stay [RICA: 3.4 ± 2.2 vs. LECA: 4.2 ± 2.5 days; p = 0.015] were shorter after RICA, with similar readmission rates. RICA demonstrated better short-term postoperative outcomes than LECA, with reduced Clavien-Dindo ≥ III complications, surgical site infections, intra-abdominal septic complications, shorter length of stay, and faster return to bowel function, despite the longer operative time
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
Evaluating the Impact of Robotic IPAA
No full textObjective: To compare robotic-assisted proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (R-IPAA) outcomes and laparoscopic proctectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (L-IPAA) within a specialized robotic surgery center, using matching techniques to minimize potential confounding factors. Summary background data: Minimally invasive approaches, particularly laparoscopy, have improved outcomes for IBD and FAP patients undergoing IPAA. Robotic-assisted surgery offers potential technical advantages, but its definitive superiority over laparoscopy in this context remains under debate. Methods: This retrospective, STROBE-compliant study analyzed 234 consecutive IPAA patients (117 robotic, 117 laparoscopic). Data encompassed patient demographics, intraoperative details, and postoperative outcomes. We employed various matching techniques to address potential bias. Primary endpoints focused on 30-day complications, readmissions, and reoperations, with secondary endpoints including hospital stay, blood loss, and stoma closure rates. Results: R-IPAA demonstrated a lower conversion rate to open surgery (P=0.02), a shorter hospital stay (P=0.04), and reduced blood loss (P=0.0003) compared to L-IPAA. While overall 30-day morbidity rates were similar (P=0.4), matched analyses suggested a trend towards fewer reoperations and 3-month IPAA-associated complications after diverting loop ileostomy closure in the robotic group. However, these differences did not reach statistical significance. Conclusions: In a high-volume robotic surgery center, R-IPAA reduced the risk of conversion to open surgery while reducing intraoperative blood loss and providing shorter length of stay with equivalent perioperative outcomes. Promising trends to reduce 30-day reoperations and surgical complications following DLI closure were observed after a matching analysis
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
- …
