1,721,013 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
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
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
Author Under Sail The Imagination of Jack London, 1893-1902
No full textIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Intro -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Dedication -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Spirit Truth -- 2. From Absorption to Theatricality and Back Again -- 3. "I Will Build a New Present" -- 4. Sons as Authors -- 5. Fathers as Publishers -- 6. The Daughter as Author -- 7. Lovers as Authors -- 8. At Sea with the Family -- 9. Yellow News, Yellow Stories -- 10. The Return Home -- Notes -- Bibliography -- Index -- About Jay WilliamsIn Author Under Sail, Jay Williams offers the first complete literary biography of Jack London as a professional writer engaged in the labor of writing. It examines the authorial imagination in London's work, the use of imagination in both his fiction and nonfiction, and the ways he defined imagination in the creative process in his business dealings with his publishers, editors, and agents. In this first volume of a two-volume biography, Williams traverses the years 1893 to 1902, from London's "Story of a Typhoon" to The People of the Abyss. The Jack London who emerges in the pages of Author Under Sail is a writer whose partnership with publishers, most notably his productive alliance with George Brett of Macmillan, was one of the most formative in American literary history. London pioneered many author models during the heyday of realism and naturalism, blurring the boundaries of these popular genres by focusing on absorption and theatricality and the representation of the seen and unseen. London created an impassioned, sincere, and extremely personal realism unlike that of other American writers of the time. Author Under Sail is a literary tour de force that reveals the full range of London as writer, creative citizen, and entrepreneur at the same time it sheds light on the maverick side of machine-age literature.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
New methods for the development of Core Outcome Sets : the example of depression
No full textDe nombreuses interventions visant à soigner la dépression sont disponibles à ce jour, comme les antidépresseurs, les psychothérapies, ou les techniques de neurostimulation. L’efficacité et la sécurité de ces différentes interventions sont évalués dans des essais cliniques contrôlés randomisés (ECR), par des critères de jugement. Cependant, l’hétérogénéité des critères de jugement mesurés au sein des ECR de la dépression empêche la comparaison et la combinaison de leurs résultats dans les méta-analyses. De plus, la pertinence de ces critères de jugement pour la pratique clinique est souvent limitée. Pour répondre à ces problèmes, un moyen envisagé est de développer un ensemble minimal de critères de jugement à rapporter dans tous les ECR de la dépression, c’est-à-dire un « Core Outcome Set » (COS). Dans ce travail, nous présentons de nouvelles méthodes pour développer les COS, impliquant davantage les patients. Améliorer qualitativement et quantitativement la participation des patients et de tous les acteurs des ECR vise à renforcer leur généralisabilité et leur crédibilité, et donc, potentiellement, leur utilisation dans les ECR. Concernant les critères d’efficacité des interventions, nous avons développé une méthode pour identifier les domaines à inclure dans le COS. Elle consiste à réaliser une étude internationale auprès de patients, de leurs proches, ainsi que de cliniciens en posant quelques questions ouvertes sur leurs attentes par rapport aux interventions thérapeutiques. La preuve de concept a été réalisée par l’étude PROCEED qui a inclus 1912 patients, 464 proches et 627 cliniciens et qui a identifié 80 domaines candidats, dont la plupart, comme la douleur mentale n’est jamais mesurée dans les ECR. Cette étude représente la première étape du développement d’un COS pour évaluer l’efficacité des interventions thérapeutiques de la dépression. Concernant la sécurité des interventions, nous avons définis quels évènements indésirables (EI) devrait inclure un COS de sécurité : 1) les EI graves (au sens de la FDA) inattendus qui surviennent dans les ECR, 2) les EI graves attendus, 3) une liste d’EI non-graves mais considérés comme délétères pour les patients. Nous proposons une méthode permettant d’identifier la liste des EI non-graves mais considérés comme délétères pour les patients en 1) identifiant les EI non graves d’une pathologie donnée par une revue systématique des ECR, 2) réalisant une étude de préférence auprès des patients et des cliniciens pour déterminer les EI non-graves mais considérés comme délétères. En prenant l’exemple des ECR des antidépresseurs, nous avons fait la preuve de concept de cette méthode au cours d’une étude impliquant 1631 patients et 282 cliniciens. Les participants ont classé les 30 EI non-graves les plus fréquemment rapportés dans les ECR évaluant les antidépresseurs. Ceux considérés comme les plus délétères étant l’insomnie, la dysfonction sexuelle, la prise de poids, l’anxiété, la fatigue et l’agitation. Ce travail de recherche a produit de nouvelles méthodes pour le développement des COS permettant une meilleure inclusion quantitative et qualitative de tous les acteurs importants des ECR, avec au premier plan, les patients. Par ailleurs, nous avons conceptualisé et proposé des méthodes pour la sélection de critères de jugement de sécurité, alors que jusqu’ici, les efforts des initiatives de recherche sur les COS s’étaient concentrés sur les critères d’efficacité. Concernant plus précisément le champ de l’évaluation des thérapeutiques de la dépression, ce travail a permis d’identifier des domaines d’efficacité et de sécurité importants pour les patients et les cliniciens alors qu’aucune recherche n’avait été dédiée à ce sujet. Alors que la recherche sur les COS s’est focalisée sur leur développement, il apparaît de plus en plus évident que la priorité doit être d’augmenter leur utilisation dans les ECR, au risque sinon de contribuer au gâchis de la recherche plutôt que de le résorber.Many treatments for depression are available such as antidepressants, psychotherapy, or neurostimulation techniques. These different treatments are evaluated in randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) measuring their effectiveness and safety with outcomes. However, the heterogeneity of outcomes across RCTs prevents the comparison of their results and their combination in meta-analyses. Moreover, they may be of little relevance to clinical practice. One answer to this problem is the use of a Core Outcome Set (COS), which is the minimum set of outcomes to be measured across trials of a given disease. In this work, we present new methods for developing COS by involving large samples of all relevant stakeholders, including patients, to improve their generalizability and credibility, and thus, potentially, their use in RCTs. Regarding efficacy outcomes, we propose to identify relevant domains using an international online survey involving patients, informal caregivers, and clinicians. The survey relies on a few open-ended questions about the expectations regarding the treatment. The proof of concept was performed by the PROCEED study which included 1912 patients, 464 relatives and 627 clinicians and identified 80 domains most of which, such as mental pain, are never measured in RCTs. PROCEED embodies the first step of the development of a COS for depression. Regarding harm outcomes, we defined what kind of adverse events (AEs) should be included in a COS: 1) unexpected serious AEs (as defined by the FDA) that occur in RCTs - which is a legal requirement, 2) expected serious AEs, 3) a list of AEs that are not serious but still troublesome to patients. We propose a method to identify the list of non-serious troublesome AEs by 1) identifying the non-serious AEs of a given condition through a systematic review of RCTs, 2) conducting a preference study with patients and clinicians to determine which non-serious but troublesome ARs are considered important. Using the example of RCTs of antidepressants, we have made the proof-of-concept of this method with an online survey involving 1631 patients and 282 clinicians. Participants ranked the 30 most frequently reported non-serious AEs in antidepressant RCTs. Those considered most deleterious were insomnia, sexual dysfunction, weight gain, anxiety, fatigue, and agitation. This research work has produced new methods for the development of COS allowing for a better quantitative and qualitative involvement of all relevant stakeholders of RCTs, with patients in the foreground. In addition, we have conceptualized and proposed methods for the selection of harm outcomes, whereas until now, COS research initiatives have focused on efficacy outcomes. More specifically for depression, this work has identified important areas of efficacy and safety for patients and clinicians where no research had been dedicated to this topic. The further development of the COS for depression will help establish the proof of concept for the new methods we have proposed. While research on COS has focused on their development, it is becoming increasingly clear that the next challenge is to improve their uptake in RCTs, otherwise we risk contributing to research waste rather than reducing it
- …
