1,720,964 research outputs found
False positives in universal neonatal screening for permanent childhood hearing impairment
No full textHigh rates of false-positive neonatal screens for permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) associated with raised hearing thresholds lead to unnecessary assessments of the baby, which may worry parents. False-positive rates need to be reduced, especially in view of the UK government's announcement that national neonatal screening will be introduced. We report screening criteria that give a six-fold reduction in false-positive rates.We have reported a trial in the Wessex region of the UK, which showed that universal neonatal screening for early identification of permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) is highly effective.1 Universal neonatal screening increased the yield before 6 months of age of true cases of bilateral moderate or severe PCHI by 71 per 100?000; the equivalent to four of five cases expected in the target population for screening. We have not previously reported the false-positive rate, which is the rate of screening positive in babies not affected by the target condition.If a baby screens positive for hearing impairment (HI), follow-up tests are needed, including an estimation of hearing threshold and, if the threshold is raised, more tests and a medical assessment to find out whether or not the hearing loss is permanent. The cost of a postneonatal screening follow-up in one of the centres in the Wessex trial was £5540 per 1000 patients in the target population each year.2 This did not include the costs to the parents such as any increase in anxiety.We report the yield of true cases, positive predictive value, false-alarm rate, and raised hearing threshold rate in 158 babies who screened positive from 12?523 babies screened during the second half of the Wessex trial. We also report, in the same population, the effect of increasing the threshold for screening positive and compare these figures with data from Whipps Cross Hospital, London, UK,3 a study of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE)-based universal neonatal screening in the UK.We used a two-step neonatal screen.1 First we tested for TEOAE. In infants younger than 48 h, a pass on the first step was defined as unilateral detection of TEOAE although in older babies, bilateral detection was required. Babies failing the first step proceeded, on the same day, to the second step of automated auditory-brainstem-response (AABR) testing. A positive screen was defined as unilateral failure on AABR (table 1). In the amended protocol (table 1) a positive screen was redefined, in the subgroup of babies at low risk,1 as bilateral failure on AABR testing. The Whipps Cross hospital screen (table 1) used TEOAE testing as the first and second step before and after postnatal discharge from hospital, respectively, with bilateral failure on the second occasion constituting a positive screen.<br/
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
Controlled trial of universal neonatal screening for early identification of permanent childhood hearing impairment
No full textBackgroundCongenital permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) impairs communication skills and, possibly, mental health and employment prospects. Management within 1 year of birth can alleviate most of its adverse effects. Neonatal screening for this disorder is feasible but its benefit for all babies is disputed. We investigated whether neonatal screening of all babies born in hospital, in addition to the standard health visitor distraction test, would increase the rates of early referral, confirmation, and management.MethodsBetween 1993 and 1996, two teams of four part-time testers and equipment moved between two pairs of hospitals to achieve four periods with neonatal screening and four without neonatal screening, each of 4–6 months' duration. Babies did or did not undergo neonatal screening dependent on during which periods they were born. We used a transient evoked otoacoustic emissions test and, in babies who failed this test, an automated auditory brainstem response test on the same day. We referred babies with positive results for audiological assessment.Findings53?781 babies were included in the trial, and 25?609 were born during periods with neonatal screening. Neonatal screening achieved 87% coverage of births, with a false-alarm rate of 1·5%, and an overall yield of 90 cases of bilateral PCHI of 40 dB or more relative to hearing threshold level per 100?000 target population, equivalent to 80% of the expected prevalence of the disorder in the population. 71 more babies with moderate or severe PCHI per 100?000 target population were referred before age 6 months during periods with neonatal screening than during periods without. Early confirmation and management of PCHI were significantly increased. The rate of false-negative results from neonatal screening was significantly lower than that for the distraction test (4 vs 27% p=0·041).InterpretationNeonatal screening is effective in identification of congenital PCHI early and may be particularly useful for babies with moderate and severe PCHI for whom early management may have the most benefit.<br/
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
