1,720,995 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
Treatment strategies for neuroischaemic diabetic foot ulcers
No full textAuthor(s) Pre or Post Print Version Only. No PD
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
New horizons in the understanding of the causes and management of diabetic foot disease: report from the 2017 Diabetes UK Annual Professional Conference Symposium.
Full text linkAuthor(s) pre print version onlyDiabetes-related foot disease remains a common problem. For wounds, classic teaching recommends the treatment of any infection, offloading the wound and ensuring a good blood supply, as well as ensuring that the other modifiable risk factors are addressed and optimized. There remain, however, several questions about these and other aspects of the care of diabetes-related foot disease. Some of these questions are addressed in the present report; in particular, the impact of newer technologies in the identification of any organisms present in a wound, as well as the use of novel approaches to treat infections. The use of new remote sensing technology to identify people at risk of developing foot ulceration is also considered, in an attempt to allow early intervention and prevention of foot ulcers. The psychological impact of foot disease is often overlooked, but with an increasing number of publications on the subject, the cause-and-effect role that psychology plays in foot disease, such as ulcers and Charcot neuroarthropathy, is considered. Finally, because of heterogeneity in diabetic foot studies, comparing results is difficult. A recently published document focusing on ensuring a standardized way of reporting foot disease trials is discussed
Classification of diabetic foot ulcers.
Full text linkAuthor(s) Pre Print OnlyIt is known that the relative importance of factors involved in the development of diabetic foot problems can vary in both their presence and severity between patients and lesions. This may be one of the reasons why outcomes seem to vary centre to centre and why some treatments may seem more effective in some people than others. There is a need therefore to classify and describe lesions of the foot in patients with diabetes in a manner that is agreed across all communities but is simple to use in clinical practice. No single system is currently in widespread use, although a number have been published. Not all are well validated outside the system from which they were derived, and it has not always been made clear the clinical purposes to which such classifications should be put to use, whether that be for research, clinical description in routine clinical care or audit. Here the currently published classification systems, their validation in clinical practice, whether they were designed for research, audit or clinical care, and the strengths and weaknesses of each are explored.Open Access Presentation
Management of adults with diabetes on the haemodialysis unit: summary of guidance from the Joint British Diabetes Societies and the Renal Association
No full textAuthor(s) Pre Print Version Only. 12 Month Embargo on Post. No PDFDiabetic nephropathy remains the principal cause of end-stage renal failure in the UK and its prevalence is set to increase. People with diabetes and end-stage renal failure on maintenance haemodialysis are highly vulnerable, with complex comorbidities, and are at high risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes, the leading cause of mortality in this population. The management of people with diabetes receiving maintenance haemodialysis is shared between diabetes and renal specialist teams and the primary care team, with input from additional healthcare professionals providing foot care, dietary support and other aspects of multidisciplinary care. In this setting, one specialty may assume that key aspects of care are being provided elsewhere, which can lead to important components of care being overlooked. People with diabetes and end-stage renal failure require improved delivery of care to overcome organizational difficulties and barriers to communication between healthcare teams. No comprehensive guidance on the management of this population has previously been produced. These national guidelines, the first in this area, bring together in one document the disparate needs of people with diabetes on maintenance haemodialysis. The guidelines are based on the best available evidence, or on expert opinion where there is no clear evidence to inform practice. We aim to provide clear advice to clinicians caring for this vulnerable population and to encourage and improve education for clinicians and people with diabetes to promote empowerment and self-management
- …
