1,720,995 research outputs found
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
The European medicines agency review of entrectinib for the treatment of adult or paediatric patients with solid tumours who have a neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase gene fusions and adult patients with non-small-cell lung cancer harbouring ROS1 rearrangements
No full textEntrectinib is an inhibitor of the tyrosine kinases TRKA, TRKB, TRKC [all together known as neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinases (NTRKs)], ROS1 and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK). On 31 July 2020, a conditional marketing authorisation valid through the European Union (EU) was issued for entrectinib for the treatment of adult and paediatric patients 12 years of age and older with NTRK fusion-positive solid tumours that are locally advanced, metastatic or where surgical resection is likely to result in severe morbidity, and who have not received a prior NTRK inhibitor and have no satisfactory therapy; and also for adult patients with ROS1-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) not previously treated with ROS1 inhibitors. The submission was based on three open-label, multicentre, phase I studies (ALKA, STARTRK-1 and STARTRK-NG) and one phase II study (STARTRK-2). In patients with NTRK-positive solid tumours, the objective response rate (ORR) was 63.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 51.5% to 74.4%] and the median duration of response (DOR) was 12.9 months (95% CI 9.3-not estimable). In patients with ROS1-positive NSCLC, the ORR was 67.1% (95% CI 59.25% to 74.27%) and the median DOR was 15.7 months (95% CI 13.9-28.6 months). The most frequent adverse events were dysgeusia, fatigue, dizziness, constipation, diarrhoea, nausea, increased weight, paraesthesia, increased creatinine, myalgia, peripheral oedema, vomiting, arthralgia, anaemia and increased AST. The aim of this manuscript is to summarise the scientific review of the application leading to regulatory approval of entrectinib in the EU
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
Revocation of the conditional marketing authorisation of a cancer medicine: the olaratumab experience
No full textNo abstract available
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
Clinical Trials for COVID-19: Can we Better Use the Short Window of Opportunity?
No full textThe scientific community has risen to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) challenge, coming up with an impressive list of candidate drugs and vaccines targeting an array of pharmacological and immunological mechanisms. Yet, generating clinical evidence of efficacy and safety of these candidate treatments may be frustrated by the absence of comprehensive trial coordination mechanisms. Many small stand-alone trials and observational studies of single-agent interventions are currently running or in planning; many of these will likely not deliver robust results that could support regulatory and patient-level treatment decisions. In this paper, we discuss actions that all stakeholders in the clinical trial ecosystem need to take to ensure that the window of opportunity during this pandemic will not shut, both for patients in need of treatment and for researchers to conduct decision-relevant clinical trials
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
- …
