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

    Effectiveness of frequency-modulated electromagnetic neural stimulation in the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy

    No full text
    AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The largely unsatisfactory results reported for the pharmacological treatment of diabetic neuropathy has spurred the search for alternative therapies. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of frequency-modulated electromagnetic neural stimulation (FREMS) as a novel treatment for painful diabetic neuropathy. METHODS: Patients (n=31) with painful neuropathy associated with decreased nerve conduction velocity (25 V) were enrolled in a randomised, double-blind, crossover study designed to compare the effects of FREMS with those of placebo. Each patient received two series of ten treatments of either FREMS or placebo in random sequence, with each series lasting no more than 3 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the change in pain measured by a visual analogue scale (VAS). RESULTS: FREMS induced a significant reduction in daytime and night-time VAS pain score (all p<0.02). Furthermore, FREMS induced a significant increase in sensory tactile perception, as assessed by monofilament; a decrease in foot vibration perception threshold, as measured by a biothesiometer; and an increase in motor nerve conduction velocity (all p<0.01). No significant changes were observed after placebo. Comparison of measurements at the 4-month follow-up with those at baseline revealed that a significant benefit persisted for all measures that showed an improvement at the end of treatment, with an additional improvement in quality of life evaluated by the Short Form-36 questionnaire (all p<0.05). No significant side effects were recorded during the study. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: FREMS is a safe and effective therapy for neuropathic pain in patients with diabetes and is able to modify some parameters of peripheral nerve function
    corecore