1,721,145 research outputs found
sj-pdf-1-fao-10.1177_24730114231225454 – Supplemental material for Socioeconomic Status and Race Are Rarely Reported in Randomized Controlled Trials for Achilles Tendon Pathology in the Top 10 Orthopaedic Journals: A Systematic Review
No full textSupplemental material, sj-pdf-1-fao-10.1177_24730114231225454 for Socioeconomic Status and Race Are Rarely Reported in Randomized Controlled Trials for Achilles Tendon Pathology in the Top 10 Orthopaedic Journals: A Systematic Review by Grayson M. Talaski, Anthony N. Baumann, Natasha Salmen, Deven P. Curtis, Kempland C. Walley, Albert T. Anastasio and Cesar de Cesar Netto in Foot & Ankle Orthopaedics</p
Flexible Adult-Acquired Flatfoot Deformity: Comparison Between Weight Bearing and Non-weight Bearing Measurements Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
No full textInfluence of Investigator Experience on Reliability of Adult-Acquired Flatfoot Deformity Measurements Using Weight Bearing Computed Tomography
No full textEstudo histológico e biomecânico da tendinopatia induzida por injeções seriadas de colagenase: novo modelo experimental no tendão do calcâneo de coelho
No full text
Hindfoot Alignment of Adult-Acquired Flatfoot Deformity: A Comparison of Clinical Assessment and Weight Bearing Cone Beam CT Examinations
No full textGuest Editorial: Adult Acquired Flatfoot Deformity: The Pandora’s Box of Foot and Ankle Surgery
No full text
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
- …
