1,720,955 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
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
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
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
Guías de práctica clínica para el tratamiento de la enfermedad por Covid-19 en Brasil: revisión sistemática
Get PDFIntroduction: Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) is an infectious disease affecting the respiratory tract, which emerged in China and spread rapidly throughout the world. Objective: To evaluate the methodological quality and transparency of Brazilian clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of coronavirus disease (Covid-19). Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted in 2020 on Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse and Guidelines International Network databases, in addition to online searches on the Brazilian Ministry of Health, Brazilian Medical Association, Federal Council of Medicine, Federal Council of Nursing and Federal Council of Physical Therapy websites. The methodological quality and transparency of the guidelines were assessed using the second version of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument developed by four authors. Results: 33 guidelines were found of which 14 were included in the analysis. There was only one guideline that scored above 60% in all domains. Among the six domains, higher scores were found in the following three domains: scope and objective, stakeholder involvement and clarity of presentation. Discussion: Despite methodological weakness found, the authors were keen to provide clear and concise recommendations through key information and therapeutic options to facilitate decision making. Conclusions: Brazilian clinical practice guidelines were found to be of poor methodological quality, from which only one guideline was recommended and classified as to be of high methodological quality and transparency.
How to cite this article: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.2025 Introdução: A Coronavirus Disease-2019 é uma doença infectocontagiosa que afeta o sistema respiratório, que surgiu na China e logo se espalhou pelo mundo. Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade metodológica e transparência das Diretrizes de Prática Clínica brasileiras para o tratamento da Coronavirus Disease-2019. Materiais e Métodos: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática realizada em 2020 nas fontes de dados: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus e Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, National Guideline Clearinghouse e Guidelines International Network, e sites do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, Sociedades Médicas Brasileiras, Conselhos de Medicina, Conselho Federal de Enfermagem e Conselho Federal de Fisioterapia. A avaliação da qualidade metodológica e da transparência das diretrizes ocorreu por meio do instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation, versão II, realizada por quatro autores. Resultados: Foram encontradas 33 diretrizes, das quais foram incluídas 14 para análise. Somente uma diretriz apresentou pontuações acima de 60% em todos os domínios. Entre os seis domínios, três apresentaram maiores pontuações: Escopo e finalidade, Envolvimento das partes interessadas e Clareza da apresentação. Discussão: Apesar da fragilidade metodológica, os autores se preocuparam em apresentar as recomendações de forma clara e concisa, através de informações-chave e opções terapêuticas que facilitam a tomada de decisão. Conclusão: As diretrizes brasileiras apresentaram baixa qualidade metodológica, em que somente uma diretriz foi recomendada e classificada com alta qualidade e transparência metodológica.
Como citar este artigo: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.2025 Introducción: La enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19) es una patología infecciosa que afecta al sistema respiratorio, la cual se originó en China y se extendió rápidamente por todo el mundo. Objetivo: Evaluar la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas para el tratamiento de la enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19). Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática en 2020 en las bases de datos Medline (vía PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse y Guidelines International Network, además de consultas en los sitios web del Ministerio de Salud de Brasil, Asociación Médicas Brasileña, Consejo Federal de Medicina, Consejo Federal de Enfermería y Consejo Federal de Fisioterapia. La evaluación de la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías se realizó con el instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE), segunda versión realizada por cuatro autores. Resultados: Se encontraron 33 guías, de las que se incluyeron 14 en el análisis. Hubo una sola guía que obtuvo una puntuación superior al 60% en todos los dominios. Entre los seis dominios, se presentaron puntuaciones más altas en los siguientes tres dominios: alcance y objetivo, participación de las partes interesadas y claridad de la presentación. Discusión: A pesar de la fragilidad metodológica, los autores se interesaron por presentar las recomendaciones de forma clara y concisa a través de información clave y opciones terapéuticas que faciliten la toma de decisiones. Conclusión: Las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas mostraron tener una baja calidad metodológica, de las que solamente una guía fue recomendada y clasificada como de alta calidad y transparencia metodológica.
Como citar este artículo: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.2025  
Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática
No full textIntroducción: La enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19) es una patología infecciosa que afecta al sistema respiratorio, la cual se originó en China y se extendió rápidamente por todo el mundo. Objetivo: Evaluar la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas para el tratamiento de la enfermedad por coronavirus (Covid-19). Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una revisión sistemática en 2020 en las bases de datos Medline (vía PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse y Guidelines International Network, además de consultas en los sitios web del Ministerio de Salud de Brasil, Asociación Médicas Brasileña, Consejo Federal de Medicina, Consejo Federal de Enfermería y Consejo Federal de Fisioterapia. La evaluación de la calidad metodológica y la transparencia de las guías se realizó con el instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE), segunda versión realizada por cuatro autores. Resultados: Se encontraron 33 guías, de las que se incluyeron 14 en el análisis. Hubo una sola guía que obtuvo una puntuación superior al 60% en todos los dominios. Entre los seis dominios, se presentaron puntuaciones más altas en los siguientes tres dominios: alcance y objetivo, participación de las partes interesadas y claridad de la presentación. Discusión: A pesar de la fragilidad metodológica, los autores se interesaron por presentar las recomendaciones de forma clara y concisa a través de información clave y opciones terapéuticas que faciliten la toma de decisiones. Conclusión: Las guías de práctica clínica brasileñas mostraron tener una baja calidad metodológica, de las que solamente una guía fue recomendada y clasificada como de alta calidad y transparencia metodológica.
Como citar este artículo: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.2025Introduction: Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) is an infectious disease affecting the respiratory tract, which emerged in China and spread rapidly throughout the world. Objective: To evaluate the methodological quality and transparency of Brazilian clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of coronavirus disease (Covid-19). Materials and Methods: A systematic review was conducted in 2020 on Medline (via PubMed), Embase, Scopus, LILACS, National Guideline Clearinghouse and Guidelines International Network databases, in addition to online searches on the Brazilian Ministry of Health, Brazilian Medical Association, Federal Council of Medicine, Federal Council of Nursing and Federal Council of Physical Therapy websites. The methodological quality and transparency of the guidelines were assessed using the second version of the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument developed by four authors. Results: 33 guidelines were found of which 14 were included in the analysis. There was only one guideline that scored above 60% in all domains. Among the six domains, higher scores were found in the following three domains: scope and objective, stakeholder involvement and clarity of presentation. Discussion: Despite methodological weakness found, the authors were keen to provide clear and concise recommendations through key information and therapeutic options to facilitate decision making. Conclusions: Brazilian clinical practice guidelines were found to be of poor methodological quality, from which only one guideline was recommended and classified as to be of high methodological quality and transparency.
How to cite this article: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.2025 Introdução: A Coronavirus Disease-2019 é uma doença infectocontagiosa que afeta o sistema respiratório, que surgiu na China e logo se espalhou pelo mundo. Objetivo: Avaliar a qualidade metodológica e transparência das Diretrizes de Prática Clínica brasileiras para o tratamento da Coronavirus Disease-2019. Materiais e Métodos: Trata-se de uma revisão sistemática realizada em 2020 nas fontes de dados: MEDLINE (via PubMed), EMBASE, Scopus e Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saúde, National Guideline Clearinghouse e Guidelines International Network, e sites do Ministério da Saúde do Brasil, Sociedades Médicas Brasileiras, Conselhos de Medicina, Conselho Federal de Enfermagem e Conselho Federal de Fisioterapia. A avaliação da qualidade metodológica e da transparência das diretrizes ocorreu por meio do instrumento Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation, versão II, realizada por quatro autores. Resultados: Foram encontradas 33 diretrizes, das quais foram incluídas 14 para análise. Somente uma diretriz apresentou pontuações acima de 60% em todos os domínios. Entre os seis domínios, três apresentaram maiores pontuações: Escopo e finalidade, Envolvimento das partes interessadas e Clareza da apresentação. Discussão: Apesar da fragilidade metodológica, os autores se preocuparam em apresentar as recomendações de forma clara e concisa, através de informações-chave e opções terapêuticas que facilitam a tomada de decisão. Conclusão: As diretrizes brasileiras apresentaram baixa qualidade metodológica, em que somente uma diretriz foi recomendada e classificada com alta qualidade e transparência metodológica.
Como citar este artigo: Lanes, Taís Carpes; Ribeiro, Mariane Albuquerque Lima; Oliveira, Daianny Seoni de; Junior, Marcos Gabriel do Nascimento; Garcia, Filipe Reis; Melo, Jéssyca Maria França de Oliveira; Tiguman, Gustavo Magno Baldin. Diretrizes de prática clínica para o tratamento da Covid-19 no Brasil: uma revisão sistemática. Revista Cuidarte. 2021;12(2):e2025 http://dx.doi.org/10.15649/cuidarte.202
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
