Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I am pleased to bring you this third issue of Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses and to record that the journal is now receiving a steady stream of quality original articles. Because we have received a number of enquiries from authors and potential authors regarding indexing by Medline and ISI, I would like to set out our policy in this regard. We view Medline, the leading global electronic database for biomedical journals, as an essential tool for boosting the readership and reputation of the journal in the scientific and medical community and we aim to apply for selection to be indexed in Medline at the earliest opportunity. The selection process is dependent on scope and coverage, quality of content, editorial work and production, readership audience, article type and geographical coverage.1 Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses is already beginning to demonstrate its proficiency in these areas, with its content ranging from review articles to original research to viewpoints and with its high level of article downloads. Capua and Alexander’s review article on avian influenza2 and Wood and Robertson’s review article on pandemic influenza vaccine preparation3 both appeared in the journal’s first issue and have each been downloaded well over 1000 times to date. With the continuation of high levels of readership and high-quality articles appearing in the journal, we are confident that Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses will be ready for selection review by Medline by the end of its first volume. This will include both prospective and retrospective issues of the journal. We also recognize that having an ‘impact factor’ is important to authors and readers alike. Thomson Scientific looks for similar criteria as Medline when selecting journals to include in their ISI Web of Science citation database of academic journals, but with more emphasis on the timeliness of publication. The process consists of evaluation of this and many other criteria such as adherence to editorial conventions, bibliographic information, citation history, the journal’s content and geographical diversity; if the journal fails to meet this criteria it will not be evaluated for another 2 years. Because of the strict policies in place,4 we do not intend to submit Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses to Thomson Scientific for evaluation until the end of 2008 when the journal has completed its second volume. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses has the mechanisms in place to achieve the editorial standards required by both groups. The journal is operating an effective electronic editorial office, Manuscript Central, with a strong editorial board seeing the papers through the peer review process. It also offers authors the chance to track their manuscript from submission to publication via the Author Services website and the opportunity to publish their article Open Access through the OnlineOpen option available. In addition, accepted articles are published OnlineEarly when possible to maximize exposure of the article prior to print publication. Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses was given a strong presence at the recent Options for the Control of Influenza VI Conference, held from 17 to 23 June in Toronto, Canada. The response to the new journal was overwhelming with 259 people signing up for electronic table of contents alerts and just under 900 sample copies of the journal being taken by delegates. The journal also held its first editorial board meeting at the Options conference, the first opportunity for some of the leading people in the field to discuss the operation and strategic direction of the journal.
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 | 0,004 | 0,031 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,007 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,009 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,158 | 0,110 |
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 ».