1,721,634 research outputs found
Twenty-five years with the biopsychosocial model of low back pain-is it time to celebrate?:A report from the twelfth international forum for primary care research on low back pain
No full textStudy Design: An integrated review of current knowledge about the biopsychosocial model of back pain for understanding etiology, prognosis, and interventions, as presented at the plenary sessions of the XII International Forum on LBP Research in Primary Care (Denmark; October 17–19, 2012). Objective: To evaluate the utility of the model in reference to rising rates of back pain-related disability, by identifying (a) the most promising avenues for future research in biological, psychological, and social approaches, (b) promising combinations of all 3 approaches, and (c) obstacles to effective implementation of biopsychosocial-based research and clinical practice. Summary of Background Data: The biopsychosocial model of back pain has become a dominant model in the conceptualization of the etiology and prognosis of back pain, and has led to the development and testing of many interventions. Despite this back pain remains a leading source of disability worldwide. Methods: The review is a synthesis based on the plenary sessions and discussions at the XII International Forum on LBP Research in Primary Care. The presentations included evidence-based reviews of the current state of knowledge in each of the 3 areas (biological, psychological, and social), identification of obstacles to effective implementation and missed opportunities, and identification of the most promising paths for future research. Results: Although there is good evidence for the role of biological, psychological, and social factors in the etiology and prognosis of back pain, synthesis of the 3 in research and clinical practice has been suboptimal. Conclusion: The utility of the biopsychosocial framework cannot be fully assessed until we truly adopt and apply it in research and clinical practice
Translation and psychometric properties of the Hebrew version of Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP)
No full textBackground: Low back pain (LBP) is a widespread cause of disability worldwide. Self-management is a significant factor impacting an individual's ability to cope with LBP. The Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) assesses the ability of people with LBP to self-manage their illness. Objective: This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the PEI-BP into Hebrew and evaluate the reliability, validity, and responsiveness. Design: Cross-sectional study with a nested prospective sub‐sample. Methods: The PEI-BP was translated and culturally adapted into Hebrew using recommended guidelines. We included 188 LBP patients. The psychometric properties of the PEI-BP were evaluated according to the COSMIN methodology. For construct validity, the Ronald Morris disability questionnaire, the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire, the Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity, the 12-item Short‐Form Health Survey mental health, and the Numerical pain rating scale were included. To assess reliability, a sub-sample of participants (n = 50) completed the PEI-BP again after one week and after six weeks (n = 50) to evaluate responsiveness. Results: The PEI-BP demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.821) and test-retest reliability (ICC = 0.77). For construct validity, four out of the five hypothesized correlations were confirmed. Responsiveness showed a Receiver Operating Characteristic curve area of 0.81 (95% CI 0.67–0.93); the minimal detectable change was 14.5. A potential significant ceiling but no floor effects were observed (17.5% and 6.4%, respectively). Conclusions: The translation and validation of the PEI-BP suggest that it is a feasible, reliable, valid, and responsive instrument for evaluating 'patient enablement' with LBP in the Hebrew-speaking population.</p
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
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
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
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
