1,721,065 research outputs found

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The 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

    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

    Anatomic reinsertion of the distal biceps tendon rupture through a single anterior approach: extensile or mini-invasive approach? A retrospective study at mean 45-month follow-up

    No full text
    Purpose: To evaluate and compare clinical results and complication rate of a standard and mini-invasive reconstruction technique for distal biceps tendon rupture. Methods: Twenty-eight cases of biceps tendon rupture were evaluated at mean 45-month follow-up. A standard anterior approach was used in 19 cases, and a less invasive anterior approach was used in nine cases. Suture anchors were used for tendon reconstruction in all cases. Elbow range of motion (ROM), subjective strength recovery, time to return to work and sports activities, and complications were recorded. Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH) the Oxford Elbow Score (OES), and the Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) were obtained for all patients. Results: Mean ROM recovery was almost complete. Mean subjective strength recovery allowed full return to sports and work in 93 % of cases, within mean 3-month postoperative. Mean DASH, OES, and MEPS scores were good. The clinically relevant complications rate was 17.8 %, all associated with the standard extensile approach group (Group A). Asymptomatic heterotopic ossifications were detected in four cases (14.3 %), not affecting functional recovery. Conclusions: Clinical results and complications rate of anatomical reconstruction of the distal biceps tendon rupture were comparable to the literature. Comparison between Group A and B showed no significant differences in terms of ROM, and OES and MEPS scores. Strength recovery, time to return to sports and work, and DASH score showed a positive trend in Group B. The clinically relevant complications rate was 0 % in Group B and 26 % in Group A

    Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis

    Full text link
    We 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
    corecore