MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2145541707 · doi:10.1046/j.1442-2026.2000.00145.x

<i>Emergency Medicine</i> in the new millennium: ‘Quo vadis’?

2000· article· en· W2145541707 sur OpenAlex
Anthony Brown

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueEmergency Medicine · 2000
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueEmergency and Acute Care Studies
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésStatus quoEditorial boardPublic relationsMedicinePolitical scienceWork (physics)Library scienceEngineeringLaw

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

2000 has been challenging, exciting and rewarding to be at the helm of this Journal, now in its 12th year of publication. Although purists may still be awaiting 1 January 2001, I consider that Emergency Medicine has already made a seamless entrance into the new millennium with the development of important initiatives, including the formation of a Journal Executive. This includes an Editor-in-Chief, Editor and Assistant Editors for Australia and New Zealand, who now drive forward the day-to-day policy, planning and strategic issues to enhance the Journal. An expanded International Editorial Board with representatives from Hong Kong, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Canada and the USA reflect the growing global importance of emergency medicine, and assures a cross-cultural balance within the Journal’s structure. Close liaison with them and the Australasian members of the Editorial Board has consolidated a strength of purpose, and I thank everyone for their support over the year. This year has also seen an expansion of the cohort of Section Editors, who now coordinate the peer review process in no less than 15 different areas, from original research, clinical management consensus, review articles and technology to ethics, toxicology, paediatric emergencies, and education and training. Other areas covered include professional issues and perspectives that will allow the Journal to showcase pithy, practical experience-based articles and the more personal, private, sometimes difficult experiences that arise at work or at home, that inevitably impact on our delivery of emergency care or our perceived role in this process. The broadening of the scope and aims and deliberate international thrust of the Journal has seen a significant increase in Australasian and overseas papers, both commissioned and unsolicited. Importantly, there has been a 50% increase in the number of original research papers published, strengthening the overall scientific content of Emergency Medicine. The average time from receipt of an article to final acceptance has dropped to 7 weeks, which is encouraging for those authors still awaiting their names in print. This really is a tribute to the excellence of the refereeing/review process, which continues to be unblinded to both authors’ names and referees’ identity. There is ongoing debate about the purpose and efficacy of peer review and whether it protects the reader from inferior papers and unreliable research or acts to preserve the authors’ integrity! What is not disputed is that the best reviews combine a critical eye with a positive, creative attitude aimed at improving manuscripts and educating fellow researchers by explicitly discussing the originality, importance, design and interpretation of a study, in detail and with references from within and outside the manuscript.1 This idealistic, often apparently thankless, task is time-consuming, but does not go unheeded. Therefore, I also extend my sincere thanks to the Section Editors and referees for their hard work, energy and enthusiasm, that is integral to the ever-improving quality of the Journal (see list of referees on page 367). Emergency Medicine is now enjoying the fruits of its strong relationship with our publisher Blackwell Science Asia. This has blossomed into a creative nexus, that is focused on maximizing the Journal’s potential by pursuing inclusion in abstracting and indexing services, such as the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Science Citation Index, among others. This will allow an essential systematic and objective means of determining the relative importance of papers in Emergency Medicine, by monitoring the impact factor rating, particularly as changes and new imperatives are introduced into the Journal. In addition, Blackwell Science, as a leader in the development of on-line publishing, makes Emergency Medicine available electronically worldwide in a user-friendly format through Blackwell Science Synergy. This gives access to abstracts, full-text articles either as HTML files or reprints as PDF files, ‘hot-link’ cross-referencing to other Blackwell Science journals, electronic linkage of references to Medline™ abstracts, key word searches and authors’ publication history searches. Blackwell Science is also among 17 major publishing organizations developing an electronic reference-linking service among thousands of journals across millions of articles, christened Crossref in December 1999. I am indebted to the professionalism, high quality and vision shown by Blackwell Science Asia staff, and thank you all. It is quite clear that rapid changes in the electronic provision of information and communication services offer exciting prosects in the knowledge that Colleges, libraries, hospitals, surgeries and private homes alike may now be linked by common communications systems. This will empower some and expose others, by making public medical data, down to and including intricate medical nuances, hitherto known only to a privileged few. Clinicians and researchers alike must be able to comfortably access this plethora of information, dictating that information technology skills are now added to their repertoire of essential clinical skills.2 Finally, I am fortunate to have the indispensable and unfailing support from the Production Manager Jennifer Freeman and Production Assistant Gabrielle Whiting, who remain the backbone of Emergency Medicine, and are a joy to work with. I believe the product of everyone’s hard work is something to look forward to. Each new issue that arrives aims to educate, inform, enlighten and perhaps entertain you in your busy schedules. Whether clinician, researcher, administrator, educator, student or expert, not only in the Asia–Pacific region, but in Europe and North America, the Journal should join us all together in our common bond as practitioners of emergency medicine.

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.

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), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,472
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,1850,001

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 Opus0,033
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · 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