1,721,213 research outputs found
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
Risks of second non-breast primaries following breast cancer in women: a systematic review and meta-analysis
No full textBackground: Second primary cancer incidence is rising among breast cancer survivors. We examined the risks of non-breast second primaries, in combination and at specific cancer sites, through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science, seeking studies published by March 2022. We included studies that reported standardized incidence ratios (SIRs), with associated standard errors, assessing the combined risk of second non-breast primaries following breast cancer. We performed meta-analyses of combined second primary risks, stratifying by age, follow-up duration, and geographic region. We also assessed second primary risks at several specific sites, stratifying by age. The inverse variance method with DerSimonian–Laird estimators was used in all meta-analyses, assuming a random-effects model. Associated biases and study quality were evaluated using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. Results: One prospective and twenty-seven retrospective cohort studies were identified. SIRs for second non-breast primaries combined ranged from 0.84 to 1.84. The summary SIR estimate was 1.24 (95% CI 1.14–1.36, I
2: 99%). This varied by age: the estimate was 1.59 (95% CI 1.36–1.85) when breast cancer was diagnosed before age 50, which was significantly higher than in women first diagnosed at 50 or over (SIR: 1.13, 95% CI 1.01–1.36, p for difference: < 0.001). SPC risks were also significantly higher when based on Asian, rather than European, registries (Asia—SIR: 1.47, 95% CI 1.29–1.67. Europe—SIR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.04–1.28). There were significantly increased risks of second thyroid (SIR: 1.89, 95% CI 1.49–2.38), corpus uteri (SIR: 1.84, 95% CI 1.53–2.23), ovary (SIR: 1.53, 95% CI 1.35–1.73), kidney (SIR: 1.43, 95% CI 1.17–1.73), oesophagus (SIR: 1.39, 95% CI 1.26–1.55), skin (melanoma) (SIR: 1.34, 95% CI 1.18–1.52), blood (leukaemia) (SIR: 1.30, 95% CI 1.17–1.45), lung (SIR: 1.25, 95% CI 1.03–1.51), stomach (SIR: 1.23, 95% CI 1.12–1.36) and bladder (SIR: 1.15, 95% CI 1.05–1.26) primaries. Conclusions: Breast cancer survivors are at significantly increased risk of second primaries at many sites. Risks are higher for those diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 and in Asian breast cancer survivors compared to European breast cancer survivors. This study is limited by a lack of data on potentially confounding variables. The conclusions may inform clinical management decisions following breast cancer, although specific clinical recommendations lie outside the scope of this review.
</p
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
A comparison of methods currently used in clinical practice to estimate familial breast cancer risks
No full textBackground: With the identification of genes predisposing to hereditary breast cancer, the accurate and consistent estimation of a woman's risk of developing breast cancer based on her family history is of paramount importance if national service guidelines are to be developed. Patients and methods: The residual lifetime risk of developing breast cancer was estimated for 200 women attending a breast cancer genetic assessment clinic by three different methods currently in use in the UK. Risks were computed on the basis of the Cancer and Steroid Hormone (CASH) study data and were classified as 'low/moderate' (< 20%) or 'high' (>20%). These risk categories are representative of those currently used to allocate surveillance and genetic testing. Risks were then compared to estimates derived by other methods used in current clinical practice, including those of Houlston and Murday. Results: The CASH data-based method ascribed 27% to the high risk category, as compared to 53% for the combined Houlston and Murday methods. A method based on the number of affected relatives alone ascribed only 14% to the high risk category. Overall, 108 (54%) women were placed in the same risk category by all three methods. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that there is a significant degree of variability between methods currently used to estimate breast cancer risk which has serious implications for individual patient management, service provision and multicentre studies evaluating the benefits of genetic testing for breast cancer susceptibility.</p
Risk of developing a second primary cancer in male breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Full text linkBACKGROUND: With increasing survival after cancer diagnoses, second primary cancers (SPCs) are becoming more prevalent. We investigated the incidence and site of non-breast SPC risks following male breast cancer (BC). METHODS: PubMed, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for studies reporting standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for SPCs published by March 2022. Meta-analyses used the generic inverse-variance method, assuming a random-effects model. We evaluated SIRs for overall SPCs, site-specific risks, by age at BC onset, time since BC onset and geographic region. We assessed study quality using routine techniques. RESULTS: Eight population-based retrospective cohort studies were identified. SIRs ranged from 1.05 to 2.17. The summary SIR estimate was 1.27 (95% CI: 1.03-1.56, I2: 86%), and there were increased colorectal (SIR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.03-1.61), pancreatic (SIR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.05-2.55) and thyroid (SIR: 5.58, 95% CI: 1.04-30.05) SPC risks. When an outlying study was excluded, the summary SIR for men diagnosed with BC before age 50 was 1.50 (95% CI: 1.21-1.85), significantly higher than men diagnosed at older ages (SIR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.98-1.33). CONCLUSIONS: Male BC survivors are at elevated risks of developing second primary colorectal, pancreatic and thyroid cancers. The estimates may assist their clinical management and guide decisions on genetic testing
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
- …
