117,497 research outputs found
J. Liggins letter to Christopher Bethell-Codrington
No full textNinth page of letter from J. Liggins to Christopher Bethell-Codrington, relating a conversation with a Frances Scotland, a woman on one of Bethell-Codrington's Barbuda estates, who is believed to be 115 years old
Prenatal Corticosteroids for Reducing Morbidity and mortality after Preterm Birth
No full textAnnotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam. First published by the Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL, 2005.©The Trustee of the Wellcome Trust, London, 2005.All volumes are freely available online at: www.history.qmul.ac.uk/research/modbiomed/wellcome_witnesses/Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.Annotated and edited transcript of a Witness Seminar held on 15 June 2004. Introduction by Barbara Stocking, Oxfam.In 1959 the New Zealand obstetrician Graham (Mont) Liggins began investigating mechanisms that triggered premature labour. Supported by the Wellcome Trust, he examined the effects of hormones on labour in sheep, and demonstrated coincidentally that in utero corticosteroids accelerated fetal lung maturation. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of prenatal corticosteroids in humans by Liggins and pediatrician Ross Howie, showed a reduction of respiratory distress syndrome in preterm babies. This Witness Seminar, chaired by the late Dr Edmund Hey, discussed the influence of Liggins' and Howie's 1972 paper announcing these results, and subsequent work by Avery and Kotas on induction of pulmonary surfactant in lambs. Other subjects included Crowley's 1981 systematic review of four RCTs; the low uptake of corticosteroids in practice until the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists issued usage guidelines in 1992; trials to determine optimum drug, dose and number of courses; potential adverse effects; and cost-benefit analysis. Participants included the late Dr Mel Avery, Sir Iain Chalmers, Dr Patricia Crowley, the late Professor Harold Gamsu, Professor Jane Harding, Professor Richard Lilford, Professor Miranda Mugford, Professor Ann Oakley, Professor Dafydd Walters and Mr John Williams. Appendices from Liggins and Howie; Liggins' Wellcome Trust grant; and the protocol of the 1975 UK trial of betamethasone, complete the volume. Reynolds L A, Tansey E M. (eds) (2005) Prenatal corticosteroids for reducing morbidity and mortality after preterm birth, Wellcome Witnesses to Twentieth Century Medicine, volume 25. London: The Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL.The Wellcome Trust Centre for the History of Medicine at UCL is funded by the Wellcome Trust, which is a registered charity, no. 210183
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
No full textThe 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
Square Dancing with the Stars to Enhance Dynamic Hirschman Linkages?
No full textIn this Presidential Address, the author takes the reader on a reconnaissance of his life and time as a regional scientist. He points out scenery he found scintillating along the way, hoping that some may pick up the banner and chew on a few of the ideas for a while. He suggests a revisit to Albert O. Hirschman’s notion of key sectors and more empirical analysis related to Marcus Berliant’s and Masahisa Fujita’s notion of knowledge creation and transfer.Presidential Address, San Antonio, Texas, March 29, 2014 (53rd Meetings of the Southern Regional Science Association
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
No full textWe 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
Letter from unknown writer to Jesse L. Boyce
No full textLetter to Jesse L. Boyce from unknown author (possibly Jack) about the investigation into the powder magazine located in the Grand Canyon. Some personal news is included in the letter such as the writer's marriage to the daughter of C.A. Taylor, former Supervisor of Cochise County
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
No full textWe 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
Sarah L. Blum Author Visit - Warrior Nurse: PTSD and Healing
No full textHear Sarah L. Blum, author of Women Under Fire: Abuse in the Military, discuss her newest book, Warrior Nurse: PTSD and Healing followed by a Q&A and book signing.
Sarah L. Blum is a decorated Vietnam veteran who served as an operating room nurse during the intense fighting of 1967. In recognition of her service, she was awarded the Army Commendation Medal.
Sponsored by CWU Veterans Center and CWU Libraries.https://digitalcommons.cwu.edu/libraryevents/1252/thumbnail.jp
From bedside to bench: Comroe and dripps revisited
No full textTwenty-five years ago a paper published in Science by Julius Comroe and Robert Dripps purported to demonstrate that 41 per cent of all articles judged to be essential for later clinical advances were not clinically oriented at the time of the study and 62 per cent of key articles were the result of basic research.
Since that analysis, support for basic research has increased in the G7 countries. In the UK, Research Council expenditure on basic research has increased from a low of £444 million (or 42 per cent of total civil R&D) in 1991/92 to £769 million (or 61 per cent of total civil R&D) in 1998/99. Although it would be difficult to argue that Comroe and Dripps were directly responsible for a strategic shift (or drift) in the type of science supported by research funders, their arguments are often cited (albeit at times implicitly) in support of the increased funding for basic biomedical research.
In 1987 Richard Smith wrote a critical paper reassessing Comroe and Dripps. His main argument was that the original study was in itself ‘unscientific’ and that it should be “followed by bigger and better studies”. This study is, in part, an answer to that challenge.
Given the increased support for basic research, and the apparent importance based on the work of Comroe and Dripps, we felt it was important to investigate Smith’s comments by replicating Comroe and Dripps’s study and at the same time try to improve upon the methodology. The current project had two objectives:
1. To see if the original Comroe and Dripps’s methodology was ‘replicable’.
2. To validate the key findings of Comroe and Dripps.
By looking at neonatal intensive care (NIC), we concluded that Comroe and Dripps’ study – as reported – is not repeatable, reliable or valid, and thus is an insufficient evidence base for increased expenditure on basic biomedical research. We did, however, develop an alternative methodology which used bibliographic databases and bibliometric techniques to describe the research underpinning five of the most important clinical advances in NIC, as identified through a Delphi survey.
Using the revised bibliometric protocol, we demonstrated that after a time-lag of about 17 years, between 2 and 21 per cent of research underpinning the clinical advances could be described as basic. This observation is at odds with Comroe and Dripps’s finding that 62 per cent of key research articles judged to be essential for latter clinical advance were the result of basic research.
In reaching this conclusion we are acutely aware of the significant limitations to the revised methodology and, therefore, we caution against the over-interpretation of our results. However, we would argue that there needs to be a greater understanding of how basic research supports healthcare and hope this report will inform part of this wider debate.R&D Directorate of the NHS Executive London; Wellcome Trus
Lillian L. Lambert, Author, Speaker, and Entrepreneur
No full textLillian L. Lambert, Author, Speaker, and Entrepreneu
- …
