1,720,976 research outputs found
Complications of Chronic Kidney Disease: Therapeutic Approaches and What Can Be Done to Halt Disease Progression?
No full text10.33591/sfp.48.5.u3The Singapore Family Physician48522-3
Real-World Experience of Using Etelcalcetide for Secondary Hyperparathyroidism in Community-Based Hemodialysis Centers in Singapore.
No full text10.7759/cureus.48186Cureus151
A Real-World Experience of Hyperkalemia Management Using Sodium Zirconium Cyclosilicate in Chronic Hemodialysis: A Multicenter Clinical Audit.
No full text10.7759/cureus.45058Cureus15
Sociodemographic and Health-Related Determinants for Activity Participation Among Patients Receiving Haemodialysis in Community-Based Centres in Singapore.
No full text10.33591/sfp.49.8.uo1The Singapore family physician49870-80Singapor
Outcomes and mortality of chronic haemodialysis patients in community-based dialysis centres in Singapore during the COVID-19 pandemic
No full text10.4103/singaporemedj.smj-2023-036Singapore Medical Journa
Effectiveness of vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 and the need for alternative preventative approaches in immunocompromised individuals: a narrative review of systematic reviews
No full text10.1080/14760584.2023.2191716Expert Review of Vaccines221341-36
Sucroferric oxyhydroxide use in patients on haemodialysis – real-world experience from an Asian cohort
No full text10.1177/2010105823120470Proceedings of Singapore HealthcareSingapor
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
- …
