Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This issue charts new territory for the Journal in a number of exciting ways. First, it is the beginning of the Journal's 26th year of publication. What better way to usher in a new quarter century than by increasing international participation in the Journal? Towards this end, I am delighted to formally announce our new affiliation with the European Society of Thoracic Imaging. I encourage you to read the announcement in this issue.1 Second, as we leave behind the silver anniversary cover of the past year and return to our traditional red cover, we are also moving forward with an updated design. Beginning with this issue, the cover now features a unique image or series of images from a current Journal article and a streamlined cover design. Third, we are introducing a new editorial feature entitled “Expert Opinion.” The goal of this feature is to tap into the expertise of leaders in the field regarding “hot topic” issues of interest to our readers. In this first installment, four experts (Lynne Hurwitz, John Mayo, Joe Schoepf, and Denis Tack) share their opinions regarding how to effectively manage radiation exposure related to cardiopulmonary imaging.2 I encourage you to read their insightful comments and practical recommendations about this timely topic. Fourth, in response to the recent early release of the preliminary results of the National Lung Screening Trial, this issue features two late-breaking editorials by two international leaders in the field of lung cancer screening. In these editorials, Claudia Henschke and Rob van Klaveren share their perspectives regarding the question “Is CT screening for lung cancer ready for prime time?”.3,4 The conversation about CT screening has only just begun. We look forward to continued engagement with our readers about this important and timely topic in the months ahead! Finally, this issue of the Journal covers new ground by featuring articles related to two nontraditional but timely topics: quality management and evidence-based medicine. I encourage you to read the outstanding features on these topics by Jeff Kanne5 and Janni Collins,6 as well as the evidence-based review of radiofrequency ablation of lung neoplasms by Jonathan Dodd and colleagues.7 As we usher in these new features, we continue to embrace the traditional elements of the Journal. In May 2011, we will publish a symposium devoted to lung cancer guest edited by Jane Ko and Barbara McComb, and in November 2011 we will feature a symposium on airway imaging guest edited by Philippe Grenier. As always, we will also be publishing an array of original articles, case reports and pictorial essays. I enthusiastically look forward to an exciting year ahead for the Journal. Thanks to the collaborative efforts of our outstanding contributors, reviewers, editors, and publication team, we are off to a great start!
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) | 0,000 | 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 ».