<i>International Wound Journal</i> completes it first 3 years
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
We have almost arrived in 2007, and the IWJ has now been in existence for 3 years. Subscriptions have grown steadily since 2004, and we look forward to continued growth in the coming years, so spread the word, encourage your colleagues. As the IWJ moves forward, we continue to receive the benefits of our strategic partnering initiative where our partners provide us with the resources to continue our development plans and advise on our strategic direction to ensure we deliver a first-class international journal. This year, 2006, was a big year for the Journal: obtaining Medline listing really put us on the map, validating the efforts of all associated with the journal in the eyes of our scientific and clinical peers. Since this success, there has been a significant increase in the number and quality of papers submitted to the journal, again a sign of acceptance and value. Believe that 2007 will see the continued development of the journal by increasing readership, increased contributions, both clinical and scientific, increased awareness and increased acceptance that the IWJ is premier journal for authors and readers in this in area. Not submitted a paper – well give it a try! Expose your scientific or clinical findings to an International audience. This final edition of 2006 continues to show our commitment to publish the best quality papers of clinical relevance. The inclusion of laboratory studies on the effect of dressings and topical treatments is unquestionably an important first step in increasing our understanding of how such treatments may work in clinical practice. The international perspectives from Japan and Australia of aspects of the management of pressure ulcers ensure we learn from initiatives around the world. The comprehensive review of the use of silver in wounds provides readers with an improved ability to make decisions on how to consider using this popular but often misunderstood agent. The inclusion of an international consensus document on the use of negative-pressure therapy in the management of complex sternal wounds will help clinicians faced with this complication of cardiac surgery that can cause significant mortality if not managed appropriately. We intend to make 2007 a year of interesting publications and discussion topics in the run up to the 3rd Meeting of the World Union of Wound Healing Societies in Toronto, 4–8 June 2008. This meeting will be focused on evidence-based practice, bringing together the current evidence regarding many hot topics in wound care. As 2007 progresses, you will see information regarding this important conference here in the IWJ. The IWJ is one of the partnering publications helping to both promote the conference and bring a synopsis of the full conference in a bumper conference issue in June of 2008. In this edition of the IWJ, we have a guest editorial from two of the conference chairs. This was previously published in Advances in Wound Care in the United States, and we thank them for allowing us to republish this, bringing it to audience worldwide.
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 | 0,003 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,011 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,094 | 0,129 |
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 ».