1,720,966 research outputs found
Exploring the diagnosis of cluster headache : a multi-method study
Get PDFBackground: Cluster headache (CH) is a severe primary headache affecting 1/1000 people of the general population. The diagnostic delay, misdiagnosis and mismanagement of CH are well evidenced in the literature. The aim of this doctoral research is to understand the under- recognition by exploring the diagnosis of CH.Methods: Multi-method study comprised of four main parts:(1) A systematic literature review on the delays in diagnosis and misdiagnosis of CH;(2) A literature review on the pathophysiology of CH;(3) A prospective observational study of a novel screening tool with images depicting headache pain that could differentiate between CH and migraine. Images depicting headache pain were assessed on healthy participants to test if they depict a range of pain severities. The screening tool was tested and refined in a pilot study and subsequently assessed in a larger-scale study. The total screening tool score (which ranged between 3-32) was used as predictor of CH.(4) A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews that explored the perceptions on the CH diagnosis among three key stakeholder groups: participants with CH, GPs and neurologists. Results:(1) The systematic literature review brought together the existing evidence on diagnostic delays, numerous misdiagnosis, consultation of multiple clinicians and mismanagement of CH. (2) The literature review on the pathophysiology of CH summarised the research on the biomedical aspects of CH and informed on the imaging, peptide and genetic studies in CH. (3) Six images depicting headache pain tested on 150 healthy participants showed a range of severities from mild to excruciating. The screening tool was piloted on 100 patients with migraine and 16 patients with CH. The refined screening tool was assessed on 81 patients with CH and 215 patients with migraine. Patients with CH had a higher mean test score compared to patients with migraine (28.4 versus 19.5). At a cut-off score of >25 out of 32, the screening tool for CH had a sensitivity of 86.4% and a specificity of 92.0%.(4) The qualitative data set that included 26 patients with CH, eight GPs and eight neurologists identified prolonged diagnostic journey of CH with significant impact on social life and mental health. Both patient and clinician’s factors are involved in the diagnostic delay.Conclusions: This multi-method study identified challenges around the timely diagnosis of CH and multiple factors involved in the under-recognition of CH. The screening tool could be a useful instrument to aid the diagnosis of CH. Validation in other medical settings including primary care is required
Exploring the diagnosis of cluster headache : a multi-method study
No full textBackground: Cluster headache (CH) is a severe primary headache affecting 1/1000 people of the general population. The diagnostic delay, misdiagnosis and mismanagement of CH are well evidenced in the literature. The aim of this doctoral research is to understand the under- recognition by exploring the diagnosis of CH.Methods: Multi-method study comprised of four main parts:(1) A systematic literature review on the delays in diagnosis and misdiagnosis of CH;(2) A literature review on the pathophysiology of CH;(3) A prospective observational study of a novel screening tool with images depicting headache pain that could differentiate between CH and migraine. Images depicting headache pain were assessed on healthy participants to test if they depict a range of pain severities. The screening tool was tested and refined in a pilot study and subsequently assessed in a larger-scale study. The total screening tool score (which ranged between 3-32) was used as predictor of CH.(4) A qualitative study with semi-structured interviews that explored the perceptions on the CH diagnosis among three key stakeholder groups: participants with CH, GPs and neurologists. Results:(1) The systematic literature review brought together the existing evidence on diagnostic delays, numerous misdiagnosis, consultation of multiple clinicians and mismanagement of CH. (2) The literature review on the pathophysiology of CH summarised the research on the biomedical aspects of CH and informed on the imaging, peptide and genetic studies in CH. (3) Six images depicting headache pain tested on 150 healthy participants showed a range of severities from mild to excruciating. The screening tool was piloted on 100 patients with migraine and 16 patients with CH. The refined screening tool was assessed on 81 patients with CH and 215 patients with migraine. Patients with CH had a higher mean test score compared to patients with migraine (28.4 versus 19.5). At a cut-off score of >25 out of 32, the screening tool for CH had a sensitivity of 86.4% and a specificity of 92.0%.(4) The qualitative data set that included 26 patients with CH, eight GPs and eight neurologists identified prolonged diagnostic journey of CH with significant impact on social life and mental health. Both patient and clinician’s factors are involved in the diagnostic delay.Conclusions: This multi-method study identified challenges around the timely diagnosis of CH and multiple factors involved in the under-recognition of CH. The screening tool could be a useful instrument to aid the diagnosis of CH. Validation in other medical settings including primary care is required
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
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“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
Get PDFWe 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
Get PDFWe 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
- …
