1,721,017 research outputs found
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
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
“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
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
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We 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
We 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
Optimal dose and safety of intravenous favipiravir in hospitalized patients with SARS-COV-2: a phase I, open-label, dose-escalating, randomized controlled study
Background: AGILE is a phase Ib/IIa platform for rapidly evaluating candidate therapeutics for the treatment of COVID-19. In this trial (NCT04746183), we evaluated the safety and optimal dose of a novel intravenous (IV) formulation of favipiravir (FVP) in hospitalized participants with SARS-CoV-2.Materials and methods: CST-6 was a dose-escalating, open-label, randomized, controlled Bayesian adaptive phase Ib trial carried out at the NIHR Liverpool Clinical Research Facility. Participants (hospitalized adults with PCR-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection within 14 days of onset of symptomatic COVID-19) were randomized 2:1 in groups of six participants (n = 4 FVP, n = 2 SoC) to 600, 1200, 1800 and 2400 mg doses of IV FVP twice daily for 7 days or standard of care (SoC). Throughout the study period, clinical data, safety evaluations, virology and pharmacokinetics were collected at predefined timepoints. FVP was quantified using validated LC-MS methods with FVP concentrations expressed as ng/mL. The primary outcome was safety, with toxicity considered to be unacceptable if the probability of 30% or greater dose-limiting toxicity related to FVP over controls was 25% or greater, as calculated by the Bayesian model. Secondary outcomes included clinical progression scores, pharmacokinetic parameters and virological endpoints.Results: of 30 participants screened, 24 were enrolled between 10 September 2022 and 1 November 2023 [10/24 female; median age was 74 years (range 52–93)]. FVP was well tolerated at all doses, despite a high background rate of adverse events reflecting the frailty and comorbidity of participants. As in previous studies of FVP, transient hyperuricaemia was observed in patients in the treatment cohorts. This was asymptomatic in all cases and resolved on completion of treatment. There were no serious adverse events or severe (≥grade 3) adverse events that were deemed possibly or probably related to FVP by an independent, blinded assessor. The probability of greater than 30% excess toxicity over controls at 2400 mg, as estimated by the Bayesian model, was 2.7%. PK exposures increased proportionally to dose, although there was notable variability between participants within each cohort. Significant FVP accumulation in plasma occurred; for cohorts 1–4 respectively (600/1200/1800/2400 mg BD), median day 1 clast (6–12 h post-infusion) was 500 (below LLQ)/4242/5109/23 573 ng/mL, and median day 3 clast was 1335/38 730/47 000/125 468 ng/mL.Conclusions: in this phase Ib multiple ascending dose study of a novel IV formulation of FVP, we administered higher sustained doses than previously used, up to 2400 mg twice daily. Despite the frail and comorbid nature of the population admitted to hospital with COVID-19, IV FVP was safe and well tolerated at this dose. Plasma PK studies demonstrated accumulation at days 3 and 5, in contrast to previous studies that employed loading doses. Significant PK variability was noted between individuals. Although well tolerated, based on PK data, we report and recent FVP EC90 data, and we do not recommend FVP for later stage clinical trial evaluation as a treatment for COVID-19. FVP remains a potentially important candidate as a treatment for emerging viral threats including pandemic influenza
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
