925 resultados para citation


Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

[ES] La aparición de Google Scholar Metrics en abril de 2012 como nuevo sistema de evaluación bibliométrica de revistas científicas a partir del recuento de las citas bibliográficas que estas han recibido en Google Scholar, abre nuevas posibilidades para la medición del impacto de las revistas de humanidades. El objetivo de este trabajo es comprobar el alcance de este producto, a partir del análisis de la cobertura que muestra de las revistas españolas de Historia. Las búsquedas bibliográficas se efectuaron entre el 5 y 6 de diciembre de 2012. Se han identificado 69 revistas, cifra que representa tan solo un 24% de las revistas españolas de Historia. Los valores del índice h alcanzados por las revistas son minúsculos lo que hace que el ranking carezca de poder discriminatorio. Se propone un cambio en el diseño de Google Scholar Metrics para adaptarse a los patrones de producción y citación de la Historia, en particular, y las Humanidades, en general.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

[ES] El objetivo del presente estudio fue realizar un estudio bibliométrico de la producción científica sobre el portero de fútbol. Para ello se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica n la base de datos Social Science Citation Index y Science Citation Index de la Web of Science, a través de los topic “soccer” y “goalkeapeer”, obteniendo un total de 231 artículos.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

[EN] The journal impact factor is not comparable among fields of science because of systematic differences in publication and citation behaviour across disciplines. In this work, a source normalization of the journal impact factor is proposed. We use the aggregate impact factor of the citing journals as a measure of the citation potential in the journal topic, and we employ this citation potential in the normalization of the journal impact factor. An empirical application in a set of 224 journals from four different fields shows that our normalization, using the citation potential in the journal topic, reduces the between-group variance with respect to the within-group variance in a higher proportion than the rest of indicators analysed.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

[EN]This paper proposes an alternative bibliometric indicator for evaluating scholarly journals based on the percentage of highly cited articles in a journal. It compares such an index with the impact factor and the h-index by using different time windows and levels of citation that can determine when a document can be considered as highly cited compared to others of the same year and discipline. The main outcome of this comparison suggests that the best index for obtaining data distributions that are comparable between scientific fields is by taking the 20% citation percentile over a three-year time frame for considering citations.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Nel corso degli ultimi anni si è assistito ad un ampio dibattito sull’uso della valutazione della ricerca nelle università e nelle strutture di ricerca. Nell’ambito di tale dibattito, nella presente tesi, vengono analizzate le più importanti metodologie per la valutazione della ricerca presenti a livello internazionale, i principali strumenti qualitativi di valutazione della ricerca (in particolare la peer review), gli strumenti quantitativi, quali la bibliometria, e le caratteristiche dei più importanti archivi bibliografici citazionali (es. Scopus, Web of Science), approfondendo i principali indicatori citazionali utilizzati nelle scienze umane e sociali (es. Indice H). Inoltre la tesi affronta il tema dell’impatto socio-economico della ricerca e le principali criticità di questo innovativo strumento, attraverso uno studio di caso realizzato nel Regno Unito. Una successiva analisi empirica riguarda le principali liste di riviste realizzate a livello internazionale e nazionale, nel settore scientifico di Storia e Filosofia della scienza. I risultati degli studi mostrano che le liste internazionali di riviste possono rappresentare, un punto di partenza a cui devono necessariamente essere affiancati altri strumenti di valutazione (peer review, analisi citazionali, etc); mentre le liste nazionali rischiano, invece, di essere uno strumento poco utile ed in alcuni casi inadeguato al fine di una corretta valutazione della ricerca, a causa della scarsa internazionalizzazione dei repertori e dei giudizi generalmente troppo elevati attribuiti alle riviste. Un ulteriore risultato raggiunto nella presente tesi riguarda la valutazione della ricerca nelle diverse discipline scientifiche: nelle Scienze umane e sociali risulta esserci uno scarso grado di presenza di pubblicazioni scientifiche nei principali archivi bibliografici e citazionali internazionali. Questa situazione limita fortemente l’attendibilità delle analisi statistiche basate su indici e indicatori quantitativi, per valutare la produttività scientifica di un ricercatore, oppure di una istituzione di ricerca.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

This thesis provides a thoroughly theoretical background in network theory and shows novel applications to real problems and data. In the first chapter a general introduction to network ensembles is given, and the relations with “standard” equilibrium statistical mechanics are described. Moreover, an entropy measure is considered to analyze statistical properties of the integrated PPI-signalling-mRNA expression networks in different cases. In the second chapter multilayer networks are introduced to evaluate and quantify the correlations between real interdependent networks. Multiplex networks describing citation-collaboration interactions and patterns in colorectal cancer are presented. The last chapter is completely dedicated to control theory and its relation with network theory. We characterise how the structural controllability of a network is affected by the fraction of low in-degree and low out-degree nodes. Finally, we present a novel approach to the controllability of multiplex networks

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

Objective To analyse the available evidence on cardiovascular safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Design Network meta-analysis. Data sources Bibliographic databases, conference proceedings, study registers, the Food and Drug Administration website, reference lists of relevant articles, and reports citing relevant articles through the Science Citation Index (last update July 2009). Manufacturers of celecoxib and lumiracoxib provided additional data. Study selection All large scale randomised controlled trials comparing any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug with other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or placebo. Two investigators independently assessed eligibility. Data extraction The primary outcome was myocardial infarction. Secondary outcomes included stroke, death from cardiovascular disease, and death from any cause. Two investigators independently extracted data. Data synthesis 31 trials in 116 429 patients with more than 115 000 patient years of follow-up were included. Patients were allocated to naproxen, ibuprofen, diclofenac, celecoxib, etoricoxib, rofecoxib, lumiracoxib, or placebo. Compared with placebo, rofecoxib was associated with the highest risk of myocardial infarction (rate ratio 2.12, 95% credibility interval 1.26 to 3.56), followed by lumiracoxib (2.00, 0.71 to 6.21). Ibuprofen was associated with the highest risk of stroke (3.36, 1.00 to 11.6), followed by diclofenac (2.86, 1.09 to 8.36). Etoricoxib (4.07, 1.23 to 15.7) and diclofenac (3.98, 1.48 to 12.7) were associated with the highest risk of cardiovascular death. Conclusions Although uncertainty remains, little evidence exists to suggest that any of the investigated drugs are safe in cardiovascular terms. Naproxen seemed least harmful. Cardiovascular risk needs to be taken into account when prescribing any non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging criteria for the early diagnosis of multiple sclerosis in patients with suspected disease. DESIGN: Systematic review. DATA SOURCES: 12 electronic databases, citation searches, and reference lists of included studies. Review methods Studies on accuracy of diagnosis that compared magnetic resonance imaging, or diagnostic criteria incorporating such imaging, to a reference standard for the diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. RESULTS: 29 studies (18 cohort studies, 11 other designs) were included. On average, studies of other designs (mainly diagnostic case-control studies) produced higher estimated diagnostic odds ratios than did cohort studies. Among 15 studies of higher methodological quality (cohort design, clinical follow-up as reference standard), those with longer follow-up produced higher estimates of specificity and lower estimates of sensitivity. Only two such studies followed patients for more than 10 years. Even in the presence of many lesions (> 10 or > 8), magnetic resonance imaging could not accurately rule multiple sclerosis in (likelihood ratio of a positive test result 3.0 and 2.0, respectively). Similarly, the absence of lesions was of limited utility in ruling out a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis (likelihood ratio of a negative test result 0.1 and 0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Many evaluations of the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for the early detection of multiple sclerosis have produced inflated estimates of test performance owing to methodological weaknesses. Use of magnetic resonance imaging to confirm multiple sclerosis on the basis of a single attack of neurological dysfunction may lead to over-diagnosis and over-treatment.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: The inclusion of grey literature (i.e. literature that has not been formally published) in systematic reviews may help to overcome some of the problems of publication bias, which can arise due to the selective availability of data. OBJECTIVES: To review systematically research studies, which have investigated the impact of grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Methodology Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2005), MEDLINE (1966 to 20 May 2005), the Science Citation Index (June 2005) and contacted researchers who may have carried out relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: A study was considered eligible for this review if it compared the effect of the inclusion and exclusion of grey literature on the results of a cohort of meta-analyses of randomized trials. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted from each report independently by two reviewers. The main outcome measure was an estimate of the impact of trials from the grey literature on the pooled effect estimates of the meta-analyses. Information was also collected on the area of health care, the number of meta-analyses, the number of trials, the number of trial participants, the year of publication of the trials, the language and country of publication of the trials, the number and type of grey and published literature, and methodological quality. MAIN RESULTS: Five studies met the inclusion criteria. All five studies showed that published trials showed an overall greater treatment effect than grey trials. This difference was statistically significant in one of the five studies. Data could be combined for three of the five studies. This showed that, on average, published trials showed a 9% greater treatment effect than grey trials (ratio of odds ratios for grey versus published trials 1.09; 95% CI 1.03-1.16). Overall there were more published trials included in the meta-analyses than grey trials (median 224 (IQR 108-365) versus 45(IQR 40-102)). Published trials had more participants on average. The most common types of grey literature were abstracts (55%) and unpublished data (30%). There is limited evidence to show whether grey trials are of poorer methodological quality than published trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review shows that published trials tend to be larger and show an overall greater treatment effect than grey trials. This has important implications for reviewers who need to ensure they identify grey trials, in order to minimise the risk of introducing bias into their review.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of intraarticular high-molecular hylan with standard preparations of hyaluronic acids in osteoarthritis of the knee. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing hylan with a hyaluronic acid in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Trials were identified by systematic searches of Central, Medline, EMBase, Cinahl, the Food and Drug Administration, and Science Citation Index supplemented by hand searches of conference proceedings and reference lists (last update November 2006). Literature screening and data extraction were performed in duplicate. Effect sizes were calculated from differences in means of pain-related outcomes between treatment and control groups at the end of the trial, divided by the pooled standard deviation. Trials were combined using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Thirteen trials with a pooled total of 2,085 patients contributed to the meta-analysis. The pooled effect size was -0.27 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] -0.55, 0.01), favoring hylan, but between-trial heterogeneity was high (I(2) = 88%). Trials with blinded patients, adequate concealment of allocation, and an intent-to-treat analysis had pooled effect sizes near null. The meta-analyses on safety revealed an increased risk associated with hylan for any local adverse events (relative risk [RR] 1.91; 95% CI 1.04, 3.49; I(2) = 28%) and for flares (RR 2.04; 95% CI 1.18, 3.53; I(2) = 0%). CONCLUSION: Given the likely lack of a superior effectiveness of hylan over hyaluronic acids and the increased risk of local adverse events associated with hylan, we discourage the use of intraarticular hylan in patients with knee osteoarthritis in clinical research or practice.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

BACKGROUND: Abstracts of presentations at scientific meetings are usually available only in conference proceedings. If subsequent full publication of abstract results is based on the magnitude or direction of study results, publication bias may result. Publication bias, in turn, creates problems for those conducting systematic reviews or relying on the published literature for evidence. OBJECTIVES: To determine the rate at which abstract results are subsequently published in full, and the time between meeting presentation and full publication. To assess the association between study characteristics and full publication. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Science Citation Index, reference lists, and author files. Date of most recent search: June 2003. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all reports that examined the subsequent full publication rate of biomedical results initially presented as abstracts or in summary form. Follow-up of abstracts had to be at least two years. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers extracted data. We calculated the weighted mean full publication rate and time to full publication. Dichotomous variables were analyzed using relative risk and random effects models. We assessed time to publication using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses. MAIN RESULTS: Combining data from 79 reports (29,729 abstracts) resulted in a weighted mean full publication rate of 44.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 43.9 to 45.1). Survival analyses resulted in an estimated publication rate at 9 years of 52.6% for all studies, 63.1% for randomized or controlled clinical trials, and 49.3% for other types of study designs.'Positive' results defined as any 'significant' result showed an association with full publication (RR = 1.30; CI 1.14 to 1.47), as did 'positive' results defined as a result favoring the experimental treatment (RR =1.17; CI 1.02 to 1.35), and 'positive' results emanating from randomized or controlled clinical trials (RR = 1.18, CI 1.07 to 1.30).Other factors associated with full publication include oral presentation (RR = 1.28; CI 1.09 to 1.49); acceptance for meeting presentation (RR = 1.78; CI 1.50 to 2.12); randomized trial study design (RR = 1.24; CI 1.14 to 1.36); and basic research (RR = 0.79; CI 0.70 to 0.89). Higher quality of abstracts describing randomized or controlled clinical trials was also associated with full publication (RR = 1.30, CI 1.00 to 1.71). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Only 63% of results from abstracts describing randomized or controlled clinical trials are published in full. 'Positive' results were more frequently published than not 'positive' results.

Relevância:

10.00% 10.00%

Publicador:

Resumo:

OBJECTIVE: Systematic assessment of the in vitro research on high potency effects. METHOD: Publications of experiments were collected through databases, experts, previous reviews, citation tracking. Inclusion criteria: stepwise agitated dilutions <10(-23); cells or molecules from human or animal. Experiments were assessed with the modified SAPEH score. RESULTS: From 75 publications, 67 experiments (1/3 of them replications) were evaluated. Nearly 3/4 of them found a high potency effect, and 2/3 of those 18 that scored 6 points or more and controlled contamination. Nearly 3/4 of all replications were positive. Design and experimental models of the reviewed experiments were inhomogenous, most were performed on basophiles. CONCLUSIONS: Even experiments with a high methodological standard could demonstrate an effect of high potencies. No positive result was stable enough to be reproduced by all investigators. A general adoption of succussed controls, randomization and blinding would strengthen the evidence of future experiments.