MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1983085590 · doi:10.1152/ajpregu.00015.2004

2003 was a good year for the <i>American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology</i>

2004· editorial· en· W1983085590 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pontus B. Persson

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology · 2004
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueNutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésScope (computer science)Variety (cybernetics)DownloadLibrary sciencePolitical sciencePhysiologyBiologyWorld Wide WebComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

EDITORIALS2003 was a good year for the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologyPontus B. PerssonPontus B. PerssonPublished Online:01 Apr 2004https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00015.2004MoreSectionsPDF (59 KB)Download PDF ToolsExport citationAdd to favoritesGet permissionsTrack citations The beginning of new life in spring often causes reflection on the year that passed and prompts optimism for the year to come. Determined to keep the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology a leader in its field, we are encouraged by last year's outcome. The team of editors and I have been overseeing the progress of the journal for two and a half years, and we are confident that this journal is becoming increasingly valuable to the scientific community committed to regulatory, integrative, and comparative physiology.The international mixture of our editorial team is generally reflected in the variety of regions that supply the bulk of our manuscripts (Fig. 1). The United States supplies the largest portion of manuscripts, but we also have a healthy flow coming from Canada, Europe, Asia, and the South Pacific, as well as the Middle East and South America. We have a broad scope of regional sources for manuscripts submitted to the journal and further encourage international scholars interested in submitting their works to us. Fig. 1.Breakdown of the number of submitted manuscripts by regions.Download figureDownload PowerPoint An overview of rapidly developing fields was provided by 16 Invited Reviews that appeared in 2003. More than a dozen Invited Reviews are currently in production to help our readers keep up with this year's trends. In addition to the Invited Reviews, we are launching an increasing amount of Special Calls for Papers. With the topics for which we are currently soliciting papers, we hope to encourage the advance of a wide range of important studies. For details, please refer to our journal homepage at http://ajpregu.physiology.org/.Currently, we have an acceptance rate for 2003 manuscripts of 42%, which is adjusted to 38% when only the original articles are taken into account. A regional breakdown of the acceptance rate (Fig. 2) shows that, as with the submission rate, North America accounts for the greater portion of accepted articles, with Europe, Asia, and the South Pacific holding their ground proportional to submission rates. Fig. 2.Percentage of published original articles by region.Download figureDownload PowerPoint Although we recognize the equivocal scientific value of the impact factor, we are nonetheless encouraged by our recent upward trend. In the past year and a half, we have seen it rise by over 30% to the 2002 impact factor of 3.16. Moreover, our calculations for 2003 indicate yet another marked increase. More importantly, the reviewing times for manuscripts have become very rapid. The time an author must wait for a first decision on a submitted manuscript is on average only 28 days. Barely a week is required before an accepted manuscript is published and citable as an Article in Press. The prompt publication process provides our authors the benefit of rapid dissemination of their research and results.Because the people most responsible for the progress and reputation of the journal are all those scientists who contribute their best and most innovative studies, we would like to single out the five contributors who, in terms of citations in the past year, were most popular (Table 1). Their articles mirror the broad field of research published in the American Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative Physiology. Table 1. The 5 most referenced articles in 2003 Article Short Title Type Country Volume: Page Nagaya et al. Ghrelin administration in humans OA Japan 280: R1483 Morrison et al. Differential control of sympathetic outflow Rev USA 281: R683 Brown et al. TGF in A1-deficient mice OA Sweden 281: R1362 Antunes et al. Orexins/hypocretins excite rat sympathetic preganglionic neurons in vivo and in vitro OA USA 281: R1801 Schnackenberg et al. Physiological and pathophysiological roles of oxygen radicals in the renal microvasculature Rev USA 282: R335 OA, original article; Rev, review. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank all the contributors, referees, editors, and editorial staff who work to make this a truly leading journal in its field.FOOTNOTESApril 2004, Volume 286This article has no references to display. Download PDF Back to Top Next FiguresReferencesRelatedInformation Cited ByGlobal metabolic profiling of hemorrhagic shock and resuscitation12 January 2021 | Biomedical Chromatography, Vol. 35, No. 4Arginine vasopressin infusion is sufficient to model clinical features of preeclampsia in mice4 October 2018 | JCI Insight, Vol. 3, No. 19 More from this issue > Volume 286Issue 4April 2004Pages R607-R607 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 2004 the American Physiological Societyhttps://doi.org/10.1152/ajpregu.00015.2004PubMed15003940History Published online 1 April 2004 Published in print 1 April 2004 Metrics

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,536
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0050,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,012
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,286
Écart entre enseignants0,273 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations3
Publié2004
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueAmerican Journal of Physiology-Regulatory, Integrative and Comparative PhysiologyMême sujetNutrition, Genetics, and DiseaseTravaux en français237 207