Notice bibliographique
Résumé
THE 2004-05 YEAR was the eighth full year that the Journal of Allied Health has been under the direction of Thomas Jefferson University and the 34th year that it has been the premier scholarly publication serving all of the allied health professions. In looking back, the year was another very productive one for the journal. Sixty-eight manuscripts were submitted, which is the highest total in the past 3 years. As of October, 31 manuscripts were out for review and 33 were awaiting publication. Although this is a relatively large backlog, it is probably not much different than that of other major journals. However, because many of the manuscripts contain somewhat timesensitive data, we are making another change to help reduce this backlog. As you know, during the past year, the features Potential Patterns, Allied Abstracts, and Book Reviews have been published in the online supplement. Beginning with the first issue of the new volume, we will now include Research Notes in the e-supplement. This should help alleviate the backlog, as a large number of Research Notes are ready in queue to be published. During the past year, we appointed 37 new peer-reviewers, which brings the total to 117. This talented group of individuals come from universities, professional associations, and the clinical community. They also represent many of the health professions served by the Journal, including nursing and chiropractic. A special thanks is in order to this group, as well as to the Editorial Board, for the outstanding work they do reviewing manuscripts. This year, we intensified our efforts to increase collaboration with our allied health colleagues in Europe. Dr. Laurie Sherwen continues to work with COHEHRE to generate special articles on health and policy issues in the European community. We also continue to receive a great many manuscripts from other countries as well, most notably Australia and Canada. Also, I am pleased to announce that we have appointed a second new Editorial Board member to fill one of the vacant slots. Dr. Gregory Frazer, Dean of the John G. Ranges Sr. School of Health Sciences at Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, has agreed to serve. He joins Dr. KeIi Mu, from Creighton University, as the newest members of the Board. At this year's annual meeting, we presented the J. Warren Perry Distinguished Author Award, for the best paper published during the past year, to Dr. Chad Cook from Duke University, along with his coauthors Lois Stickley, Kevin Ramey, and Valerie J. Knotts from Texas Tech University, for their article Variables Associated with Occupational and Physical Therapy Stroke Rehabilitation Utilization and Outcomes. The article was published in the Spring 2005 issue. Finally, on a more personal note, congratulations are in order for Jessica Marino, Assistant to the Editor, who was married just prior to the ASAHP meeting in October. Jessica and her new husband traveled to the Greek Islands and Paris on their honeymoon. We couldn't quite get her to postpone this trip so that she could spend time in Houston at the meeting. One potential solution to the pressures of cost containment and shortages of health professionals is to use multiskilled health care technicians. Although there exist educational programs designed to prepare multiskilled health professions, the approaches vary considerably. Drs. Sherill and Keels-Williams describe a project designed to standardize the training of these professionals. The Multiskilled Competence Development Project is a collaborative venture among the South Carolina State University, the South Carolina Technical College system, and Clemson University. They outline the steps taken to develop the list of competencies and present a competency grid that can guide development of a competency-based curriculum. Educating students to participate in interdisciplinary practice continues to be an important goal of many educational programs. …
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 | 0,060 | 0,159 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,010 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,012 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,063 | 0,025 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,014 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,012 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,026 | 0,022 |
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 ».