Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Welcome to the first edition of the International Wound Journal for 2005. This year is important for the Journal following on from our launch successes of 2004. As seen from our year end review in the last edition we have published a significant number of papers covering many diverse clinical and geographical areas. This clearly shows the multidisciplinary and international nature of this Journal. The IWJ intends to be the pre-eminent international resource for clinically relevant aspects of work in this area. Perspectives from every corner of the globe help our wound healing fraternity learn from each other, gaining knowledge by sharing their experiences will enhance our ability to care for our patients. In our first edition of 2005, we provide articles covering such topics as quality of life in lymphodema, a review of diabetic foot care, and an approach to pressure ulcers caused by spascity, and two interesting product based papers. Firstly, one on Tielle presents a very different clinical approach particular to Germany and the second focuses on a comparison between active and inactive products. I am sure that you would appreciate the challenges for our Editorial board in the review of these papers. We would therefore be pleased to hear your comments regarding these approaches. These articles are from colleagues from around the world. Additionally we have included clinical cases which provide details of unusual clinical situations and novel approaches in their care. After the success of the WUWHS in Paris in 2004, this year individual society meetings will be taking place in many parts of the world. All of these meetings provide opportunities for new findings to be disseminated to an international audience through this Journal. In 2005, we have increased our editorial pages, in a bid to publish additional contributions. We therefore encourage you the reader to submit your research findings through [email protected]. We recognise language is a key communication tool and in 2005 you will see the translation of abstracts in additional languages to increase access to the Journal. Provide your comments, experience and advice on wound care to a global audience. In the last edition we carried a human interest story that took place at the world union meeting. The letter was included to inform all of us who were present at the WUWHS meeting of the happy outcome. Initiatives undertaken by the WUWHS continue. Some of us were fortunate to attend a focus meeting on re-imbursement in wound care, again in Paris in January 2005. Not surprisingly we were unable to find a simple solution to this problem but we were able to recognise many of the key issues involved in this topic. Luc Teot is developing a number of working groups to address these issues and hopefully progress will be made over forthcoming months. Also at this meeting discussions regarding the organisation of the next WUWHS meeting in Toronto in 2008 took place. A bit premature you may think but as it is only 3·5 years away much work has already been done by Professor Gary Sibbald, his colleagues in Canada and the guidance of the WUWHS board. A bigger and better 3rd WUWHS meeting is the desired aim and I am confident they will succeed. •Editor-in-ChiefProf. Keith Harding •EditorDr Douglas Queen •StatisticianProf. Patricia Price •Editorial ExecutivesProf. David Armstrong Dr Paul Banwell Dr Kyoichi Matsuzaki Prof. Christine Moffatt Heather Orsted Prof. Marco Romanelli Prof. Hiromi Sanada Prof. Gregory Schultz Prof. Gary Sibbald Prof. Mike Stacey Geoff Sussman Dr Luc Téot •Editorial OfficeInternational Wound JournalPO Box 2394 Cardiff CF23 9WQ UK •Editorial AssistantSue Harding •Production EditorJennifer Dick
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
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.
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».