Notice bibliographique
Résumé
t is with great pride that I am writing this message for the inaugural issue of our Journal, the Canadian Urological Association Journal (CUAJ).As you may know, Canadian urologists, whether they practice in an academic or community setting, are very active in scientific research.On top of regular attendance at our meetings, members of our association also make notable contributions at several international meetings.Therefore, it makes sense that an association like ours has a vehicle to disseminate the scientific works of its members and foreign colleagues.This wish came partially true during the past fourteen years thanks to a partnership with entrepreneurs who owned the Canadian Journal of Urology.Owing to a fruitful collaboration between these owners and several members of our association, the CJU was built up and became indexed in 2001.However as years went by, this partnership became questionable because the leaders of our association wished to modernize the journal and make it more able to respond to our members' needs whereas the owners preferred to collect benefits rather than reinvest in educational services.We were in an unhealthy situation where the volunteer scientific work of our members was only being used to increase the commercial value of a company that not only kept the profits, but also represented a direct competition to obtain funds from the pharmaceutical industry and distributors of medical supplies.Over the past few years, your executive has worked to modify our relationship with the CJU.Recent discussions regarding the creation of an Office of Education made the need to control our own journal even more pressing.In June 2005, an ad hoc committee was set up to negotiate a new partnership.After a process that lasted close to a year, we were not able to reach a mutual agreement in spite of generous offers on our part.In June 2006, the decision was made at the Annual General Meeting to severe all ties with the CJU and to control our own journal either by acquiring it or creating a new journal.The owners' behaviour made this latter option the only one possible.After a few legal hurdles, which we have overcome, and thanks to the infallible support of all the members of the executive and of our association, a new journal took shape.We chose an experienced editor, Dr. Laurence Klotz, with whom we shared our recommendations on the journal's direction.We assured him of our desire to give him editorial independence and freedom to set up his editorial board.We established an operating budget and set up the necessary infrastructure for the journal to function properly.As managing editor for CUAJ, we hired Ms. Josephine Sciortino, who until recently occupied this position at CMAJ, the leading medical publication in Canada.The tight collaboration between our executive, the staff at the CUA central
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,042 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,025 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,178 | 0,115 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».