186,983 research outputs found
Randomised, placebo-controlled, trial comparing low dose versus standard dose Lenograstim (L) following myeloablative chemotherapy (HDT) and peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue [PBPCR) for lymphoma
No full textTumor lysis syndrome, case report and review of the literature:(Letters to the editor)
No full textComment by G Masera & M Jankovic, Dept of Ped, UoMilan, Monza, Italy, in response to Lorigan et al's paper
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
Low-dose lenograstim is as effective as standard dose in shortening neutrophil engraftment time following myeloablative chemotherapy and peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue
No full textGranulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used following myeloablative chemotherapy (high-dose therapy; HDT) and peripheral blood progenitor cell rescue (PBPCR) to reduce neutrophil engraftment time. The dose and duration required to gain maximum clinical and economic benefit has not been fully investigated. This double blind placebo-controlled randomised trial was performed to determine whether short course low-dose or standard-dose Lenograstim (L) would influence recovery of haematopoiesis following HDT and PBPCR. Sixty-one patients were randomised between May 1999 and November 2004, to receive standard-dose lenograstim (263 mu g/d), low-dose lenograstim (105 mu g/d) or placebo injections. These commenced on day +5 following PBPCR and continued until neutrophil engraftment [absolute neutrophil count (ANC)] >= 0.5 x 10(9)/l. Patients received standard supportive care until haemopoietic recovery. Both standard- and low-dose lenograstim resulted in a significantly shorter median time to neutrophil recovery (ANC >= 0.1 x 10(9)/l:10.0 vs. 11.0 d, P = 0.025; ANC >= 0.5 x 10(9)/l:11.0 vs. 14.0 d, P = 0.0002) compared with placebo. There was no significant difference in blood product support, antibiotic usage, documented infection, overall survival or relapse-free survival between the groups. Short course low-dose lenograstim is as effective as standard-dose in reducing neutrophil engraftment time following HDT and PBPCR
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
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
Dr. Edward P. Wimberly, ITC, July 2011
No full textThis video is a conversation with Dr. Edward P. Wimberly. Dr. Wimberly talks about his book, "No Shame in Wesley's Gospel: A Twenty-First Century Pastoral Gospel". Brad Ost, AUC Woodruff Library, is the interviewer
Author Rights and Scholarly Publishing
Full text linkOriginally posted at
http://blog.library.gsu.edu/2014/10/24/author-rights-and-scholarly-publishing/</p
- …
