MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2014197758 · doi:10.1186/1916-0216-42-1

<i>Journal of Otolaryngology Head &amp; Neck Surgery</i> – An ‘Open’ Letter to Our Authors and Readers

2013· article· en· W2014197758 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Hadi Seikaly, Erin D. Wright

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueHealthcare Systems and Technology
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésHead and neck surgeryOtorhinolaryngologyMedicineGeneral surgeryHead (geology)Head and neckSurgeryGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The Journal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery is at a significant threshold. As a mature, respected, and long-lived entity it has grown from the scientific publication of a small national society (Canadian Journal of Otolaryngology, 1971) to a major international journal (Journal of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, 2008). The process of development has resulted in the evolution of the Journal from paper based manuscript management to an online submission system, and we are now advancing to a completely digital, open access format effective January 2013. The reasons for the change are several. Open access publishing has advantages that include universal, free, and immediate access to the published content in standard repositories (e.g. PubMed). The single biggest advantage of open access publishing, as it pertains to the Journal, is the potential to increase the impact factor by virtue of higher downloads and citations [1,2]. Finally, open access publishing is in full compliance with the true intent of major funding bodies such as the CIHR, NIH, Wellcome Trust, and Howard Hughes Medical Institute [3-7], which require open access to funded research within 12 months of publication, and grants from these entities can be used to cover the costs of open access publication. Open access publishing of scientific material has been commonplace in the basic sciences for some time and we are certain that medical sciences will shortly follow suit. We are the first PubMed indexed and Thomson-Reuters tracked (i.e. with an Impact Factor) journal in the field of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery to enter into this publishing model and are poised to reap the rewards of the advantages noted above by being an early adopter. We have chosen to publish with BioMed Central, a pioneer in open access publishing, based on their experience with this model of publishing, substantive logistical support, stringent peer review process, as well as their commitment to a sustainable model from scientific, financial, and environmental perspectives. As such, BioMed Central has committed to permanent accessibility of its content both past and present and has taken measures to ensure that this remains the case in perpetuity. In brief, the open access publishing model transfers the cost of publishing from the subscribers (societies, libraries, clinicians) to the researchers and funders and essentially makes publishing the final step in the research process, providing free and immediate access to published content. In so doing, the restricted access of the traditional subscription-based model is circumvented. This free and immediate access is permitted by the Article Processing Charge (APC), payable one time only as a flat fee, with no additional charges for colour figures, videos, or large amounts of data. In addition to the potential for research grants to cover the costs of APCs, many institutions have memberships in BioMed Central (http://www.biomedcentral.com/inst/), which will offset a portion of, or the entire cost of the APC. In the case of our Journal certain articles may, at the discretion of the editors, have the APC covered by the Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery. As we proceed with the implementation of this new model we anticipate encountering some initial confusion, and possibly resistance, to this new model, particularly as it pertains to the costs of publishing. Fortunately, most of our authors are affiliated with institutions (mainly Universities) that have full or supporter memberships in BioMed Central and are thus eligible for the aforementioned reductions or waiver of the APC. In addition, in order to assist authors from developing and less economically privileged countries, BioMed Central operates a waiver program [8], which can be accessed or requested at the time of article submission. There are several advantages that we anticipate realizing as a result of the transition to open access publishing. It is our hope that basic science and clinical research that is funded by national granting agencies will see this as a superior vehicle for dissemination of their research products, thus increasing the content of this peer review funded scholarship in our Journal. In addition, as a result of the increased accessibility and visibility, we fully anticipate an increase in our impact factor in the years to come. In terms of content, process, and policy at the Journal we do not anticipate substantive changes. Our Editorship (Drs. Seikaly and Wright) and Managing Editor (Ms. Stacey Leavitt-Wright) as well as our Associate Editors (http://www.journalotohns.com) remain unchanged from previously. With some slight changes related to different site structure our authors and reviewers will find the peer review logistics to be quite similar. Our peer review process will remain stringent but fair and as constructive as possible. The one change that authors and readers may note is related to one of the advantages of online only open access publishing and that is a faster, more streamlined review and, most importantly publishing process with almost immediate publication of accepted material (once formatting and typesetting has been completed). To conclude, the Editors and Editorial Board are enthusiastic about our new publishing model and the potential advantages that it affords. Changes and transitions are, of course, times to explore new opportunities and we are contemplating new areas of focus and process once we have successfully solidified the new publishing model. As always we remain indebted to our Society, authors Associate Editors and peer reviewers, without whose hard work, dedication, attention to detail, we could not have reached this point nor contemplated a robust and successful future. We look forward to continuing these strong relationships and to working with our new Publisher.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,994
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,077

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,031
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,004
Communication savante0,0060,007
Science ouverte0,0030,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0210,020
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0230,023

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 Opus0,045
Tête enseignante GPT0,291
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · 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; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

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

En bref

Citations22
Publié2013
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck SurgeryMême sujetHealthcare Systems and TechnologyTravaux en français237 207