1,721,022 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
Indicazioni per un approccio multidisciplinare alla gestione del carcinoma ovarico
A multidisciplinary approach in the mangement of ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer is one of the most lethalgynecologic malignancies mainly because of the advanced tumor stage at diagnosis. The outcome for women with
ovarian cancer is generally poor, with an overall 5-year survival rate <35%. Disease stage is the most important factor
affecting outcome. The woman's general health at the time of presentation is also important, because it affects the
choice of treatment options. The contribution of imaging techniques in patient management is gaining acceptance for
the staging of ovarian cancer, the selection of candidates suitable for cytoreductive surgery and the macroscopic
documentation of residual tumor after primary surgery. Recent reports have demonstrated that, besides utilizing
CA125 as a predictor of optimal cytoreduction and response to treatment, diagnostic accuracy may be improved
utilizing a new biomarker, the human epidydimis protein 4, whose expression closely relates to the presence of
epithelial ovarian cancer in women. Despite the relatively poor overall survival rate for ovarian cancer, there was a
two-fold increase in survival over the last 30 years, which has coincided with the advent of effective chemotherapy,
and, particularly, the introduction of platinum-based agents, as well as changes in surgical practice. More recently,
there has been a significant shift towards greater specialization in the delivery of care, resulting from the
implementation of the cancer service guidance improving outcomes in gynecologic cancer
HE4 in the differential diagnosis of ovarian masses
Ovarian masses, a common finding among pre- and post-menopausal women, can be benign or malignant. Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecologic malignancy among women living in industrialized countries. According to the current guidelines, measurement of CA125 tumor marker remains the gold standard in the management of ovarian cancer. Recently, HE4 has been proposed as emerging biomarker in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses and in the early diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Discrimination of benign and malignant ovarian tumors is very important for correct patient referral to institutions specializing in care and management of ovarian cancer. Tumor markers CA125 and HE4 are currently incorporated into the Risk of Ovarian Malignancy Algorithm” (ROMA) with menopausal status for discerning malignant from benign pelvic masses. The availability of a good biomarker such as HE4, closely associated with the differential and early diagnosis of ovarian cancer, could reduce medical costs related to more expensive diagnostic procedures. Finally, it is important to note that HE4 identifies platinum non-responders thus enabling a switch to second line chemotherapy and improved survival
La proteina 4 dell’epididimo umano (HE4) come marcatore di recidiva di carcinoma dell’ovaio
Evaluation of a CLEIA automated assay system for the detection of a panel of tumor markers
Tumor markers are commonly used to detect a relapse of disease in oncologic patients during follow-up. It is important to evaluate new assay systems for a better and more precise assessment, as a standardized method is currently lacking. The aim of this study was to assess the concordance between an automated chemiluminescent enzyme immunoassay system (LUMIPULSEA (R) G1200) and our reference methods using seven tumor markers. Serum samples from 787 subjects representing a variety of diagnoses, including oncologic, were analyzed using LUMIPULSEA (R) G1200 and our reference methods. Serum values were measured for the following analytes: prostate-specific antigen (PSA), alpha-fetoprotein (AFP), carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA), cancer antigen 125 (CA125), carbohydrate antigen 15-3 (CA15-3), carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), and cytokeratin 19 fragment (CYFRA 21-1). For the determination of CEA, AFP, and PSA, an automatic analyzer based on chemiluminescence was applied as reference method. To assess CYFRA 21-1, CA125, CA19-9, and CA15-3, an immunoradiometric manual system was employed. Method comparison by Passing-Bablok analysis resulted in slopes ranging from 0.9728 to 1.9089 and correlation coefficients from 0.9977 to 0.9335. The precision of each assay was assessed by testing six serum samples. Each sample was analyzed for all tumor biomarkers in duplicate and in three different runs. The coefficients of variation were less than 6.3 and 6.2 % for within-run and between-run variation, respectively. Our data suggest an overall good interassay agreement for all markers. The comparison with our reference methods showed good precision and reliability, highlighting its usefulness in clinical laboratory's routine
- …
