1,720,984 research outputs found

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    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

    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 link
    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

    Full text link
    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

    Author Index

    No full text
    Nao informado

    Fulvestrant in the treatment of luminal metastatic breast cancer: The balance of effectiveness and safety

    No full text
    The review presents the results of studies of fulvestrant in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Hormone therapy is an effective method of treating hormone-positive metastatic breast cancer even in the presence of visceral metastases in the absence of a visceral crisis and without detected resistance to endocrine therapy. During the COVID-19 pandemic, hormone therapy is safer for patients with hormone-positive MBC than chemotherapy, since it does not lead to immunosup-pression. Fulvestrant is a “pure antiestrogen”, it has a greater affinity for estrogen receptors than tamoxifen. Fulvestrant is both a competitive antagonist and a selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), this mechanism of action provides complete blocking of the estrogen signaling pathway. In the phase III CONFIRM study, the optimal dose of fulvestrate was determined to be 500 mg once every 28 days, with a loading dose of 500 mg on day 15 of the first month of thera-py. In the FALCON phase III study (n = 462), which included postmenopausal MBC patients who had not previously received any endocrine therapy, fulvestrant 500 mg was compared with the aromatase inhibitor anastrozole. Significant improvement in PFS was achieved with fulvestrant therapy compared to anastrozole: 16.6 months in the fulvestrant group versus 13.8 months with anastrozole [OR = 0.797; 95% CI 0.637–0.999; p = 0.0486]. A subgroup analysis showed that patients without visceral metastases can benefit most from taking fulvestrant. In all studies fulvestrant 500 mg has demonstrated a good toxicity profile, so it is being studied as a component of combined endocrine therapy. In the PALOMA-3 study the combination of fulvestrant with palbociclib (CDK4/6 inhibitor) demonstrated a median PFS 9.5 months, compared with monotherapy with fulvestrant – 4.6 months (HR = 0.46, p < 0.0001). In the MONALEESA-3 study, the median PFS in patients receiving ribociclib with fulvestrant was significantly higher compared to those taking placebo with fulvestrant: 20.5 months and 12.8 months, respectively (HR = 0.593; 95% CI: 0.480–0.732; p < 0.001). In the MONARCH-2 study the combination of fulvestrant and abemaciclib was studied in the second line of therapy, the median PFS was 16.4 months in the group of fulvestrant and abemaciclib, and 9.3 months in the group of fulvestrant and placebo (HR = 0.553; 95% CI 0.449-0.681; p < 0.0001). Fulvestrant has a satisfactory toxicity profile, does not require supporting therapy, and is included in the clinical recommendations for monotherapy and combination therapy. © 2020, Remedium Group Ltd. All rights reserved

    Accelerated Dose Escalation with Three Injections of an Aluminum Hydroxide-Adsorbed Allergoid Preparation of Six Grasses Is Safe for Patients with Moderate to Severe Allergic Rhinitis

    Full text link
    Only few data on safety during high-dose, accelerated escalation schedules during subcutaneous allergen immunotherapy (AIT) are available. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and tolerability of an accelerated dose escalation schedule of AIT in adult patients with moderate to severe seasonal rhinoconjunctivitis in a multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II trial. The dose escalation scheme for patients in Group I (1 strength) included 3 injections with 1 strength, B (10,000 TU/mL), whereas the dose escalation scheme for Group II (standard) included 7 injections with 2 strengths, A (1,000 TU/mL) and B (10,000 TU/mL), of an aluminum hydroxide-adsorbed allergoid grass pollen preparation. Overall, 72 of 87 randomized patients (83.7%) reported at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE; 82.2 [Group I] vs. 85.4% [Group II]); 58.8% of all reported TEAEs were assessed as being related to AIT (60.0 vs. 48.8%). The most frequently reported AIT-related TEAEs were swelling (46.7 vs. 34.1%), erythema (28.9 vs. 36.6%), and pruritus (31.1 vs. 17.1%) at the site of the injection. Systemic allergic reactions occurred in 5 (5.8%) patients overall, with more being reported in the 1-strength group (4 [8.9%] vs. 1 [2.4%]). All systemic allergic reactions were classified as World Allergy Organization (WAO) Grade 1 or Grade 2 reactions. Accelerated high-dose escalation with an aluminum hydroxide-adsorbed grass pollen allergoid can be initiated with a safety and tolerability profile comparable to the standard dose escalation schedule in patients with allergic rhinitis with or without asthma

    koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist

    No full text
    We 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
    corecore