Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This is my first editorial for the British Journal of Learning Disabilities. Being a journal editor for the first time is an exciting yet daunting experience. It has been made easier by the good wishes, advice and suggestions from colleagues. I have still got a lot to learn and at this early stage I particularly welcome ideas and suggestions for the future of the journal. My first task is to pay tribute to my predecessors in the role of editor. Dorothy Atkinson has been working as sole editor since the Summer of 2008 and before this was joint editor with Gordon Grant prior to his retirement. Jan Walmsley also served as joint editor and played a major part in the development of the journal. Now that I have had an insight into the role of editor I realise what hard work it is and that helps me to appreciate even more the contribution that previous editors have made. Among the changes that I have particularly valued in recent years has been the way in which the journal has become more accessible while retaining the high standards of scholarship. Clarity and accessibility and academic rigour should go hand in hand and I intend to develop this as a feature of the journal in the future. My special appreciation has to go to Dorothy who has been a great support in the handover period between her and my editorship. Thanks must also go to Sheena Rolph who has served as reviews editor for many years. Sheena has carried out the often thankless task of persuading people to write reviews with her usual charm and generosity. Her role is now being taken by Liz Tilley who I know will continue Sheena’s excellent work. As to the future, the circulation of the journal is both healthy and varied. In my view this reflects the fact that it has consistently published work from a wide range of disciplines. Learning disability services have a reputation for multidisciplinary work but this is not always reflected in academic publishing where there is a tendency to retain parallel single professional debates. I intend to continue the practice of encouraging publication from a wide range of professional and academic disciplinary backgrounds as well as from people with learning disabilities, families and carers. This journal should be a place where different worlds meet. I am fortunate in this respect as I hold a joint post between a University and a learning disability service. This engages me with people from a wide range of personal and professional backgrounds hopefully keeps me grounded in the need to help improve the opportunities for people with learning disabilities. Finally I’d like to repeat my offer to you to engage with me in discussion about the development of the journal. I’m open to new ideas, particularly at this early stage of my editorship, so please get in touch and let me have your views.
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 | 0,005 | 0,046 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| 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 ».