Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Somewhat belatedly may I wish all of our readers a Happy New Year and a successful 2005! The IWJ has made significant progress in its first year and this for the most part due to you our readers, our 6 Strategic Partners and our Editorial Executives and Advisory Board. The IWJ has established itself as the only, really International Journal specifically focused on wounds and their treatment. Through our Strategic Partners we reached far and wide, targeting the significant wound care meetings, including the WUWHS, SAWC, Wounds UK to name a few. One role of our Strategic Partners is to help us obtain global coverage. If you have obtained this copy of the IWJ at a conference or from a colleague and wish further copies ask one of our Strategic Partner companies how this may be possible. Most of their staff should be familiar with the IWJ. If your company contact is not familiar with the IWJ, introduce it to them, and thank them for their company's efforts to help establish this important International educational and informational resource. So now it's onward and upward and on to 2005 and our second volume. You have heard from our Editor-in-Chief about some exciting developments for 2005. Please allow me the opportunity to further explain their significance to the IWJ. We have increased our page count, in a bid to publish additional contributions. We therefore encourage you the reader to submit your research findings through submissions@ internationalwoundjournal.com. The additional production costs have been covered by our Strategic Partners preventing us from having to increase our subscription rate or to include additional advertising. Therefore all of our additional pages are available to increase the publication of new papers in this area. Our language offerings are being increased to include additional languages throughout the year, beginning with Swedish in this edition. Swedish is a language understood by most Scandinavian countries thereby increasing our exposure to an International readership. If you feel a particular language is important for us to increase our reach then why not write to us. We will be happy to consider your request but cannot promise to include all languages suggested. In 2005 we want to hear more from our readers. Tell us what you think of our Journal. Share your thoughts, we are happy to hear from you and in particular how we can improve things. The sustainability of the IWJ requires your participation. We can only expand with the clinical and research input from our readers. So if you like what you see and long to have International exposure for your work then send it to us! Our Strategic Partners and other advertisers have made the commitment now it's your turn. The Editor-in-Chief and I are proud of what we have achieved in 2004. We did not do this alone, but with the help of many significant individuals for whom we give thanks. We do however know that we can do better and in 2005 we intend to! Prof. Zulifiqarali Abbas, Tanzania Prof. Bishara Atiyeh, Lebanon Dr Adrian Barbul, USA Suzie Calne, UK Dr Robertto Cassino, Italy Dr Celalettin Çelebi, Turkey Dr George Cherry, UK Dr Mike Clark, UK Dr Diane Cooper, USA Dr Ian Darby, Australia Dr Jeff Davidson, USA Dr Sebastian Debus, Germany Dr William Ennis, USA Dr Vincent Falanga, USA Dr Mieke Flour, Belgium Evonne Fowler, USA Prof. Peter Franks, UK Prof. Xiabong Fu, China Prof. Finn Gottrup, Denmark David Gray, UK Dr Satsue Hagisawa, Japan Dr Eva-Lisa Heinrichs, UK Dr Dirk Hollander, Germany Dr Pamela Houghton, Canada Prof. Kent Jönsson, Zimbabwe Dr David Keast, Canada Dr Kazuo Kishi, Japan Dr Diane Krasner, USA Dr Stephan Landis, Arab Emirates Prof. David Leaper, UK Dr Luis Fernando Lira, Mexico Dr Courtney Lyder, USA Dr Mario Marazzi, Italy Dr Sylvie Meaume, France Dr Joe McCulloch, USA Yvette Moulin, Canada Dr Manoj Pandey, India Nancy Parslow, Canada Prof. Hugo Partsch, Austria Prof. Hermelinda Pedrosa, Brazil Dr Elaine Pina, Portugal Dr Elia Ricci, Italy Dr Ricardo Roa, Chile Dr George Rodeheaver, USA Dr Jose Contreras Ruiz, Mexico Prof. Vijay Shukla, India Dr Mark Tang, Singapore Cath Vowden, UK Dr Peter Vowden, UK
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 | 0,000 | 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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».