MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4403048586 · doi:10.1093/jcag/gwae037

A Year in Review: JCAG’s Inaugural Editorial Fellowship

2024· editorial· en· W4403048586 sur OpenAlexaff
Jeffery M. Venner

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology · 2024
Typeeditorial
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiqueAcademic Publishing and Open Access
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Manitoba
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLibrary scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

This past year I had the privilege of joining the Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (JCAG) as its inaugural Editorial Fellow. The position was developed with the goal of providing an interested trainee of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology (CAG) experience in the peer-review and publishing process, as well as exposure to the inner workings of Canada’s premiere gastroenterology journal. Given my career goal of becoming a clinician-scientist, I was excited and honoured to be awarded this position. The experience was invaluable. Like most medical residents, gastroenterology trainees have varying degrees of research experience. However, the opportunity to learn about the scientific publishing industry is certainly unique. Through attendance at monthly meetings with the JCAG’s publisher (Oxford University Press), I was able to gain an understanding of the editorial and publishing side of research from both an administrative and academic perspective. I was exposed to many challenges that all academic journals undoubtedly face, for example: the process of being listed by various indexing services and applying for an impact factor, budgeting and financial restraints, advertising, and partaking in a revamp of the JCAG’s website and print design. I experienced the never-ending challenge that most academic journals encounter with attracting and rewarding editors and manuscript peer reviewers, who all volunteer their time and expertise. One of the most rewarding components of the JCAG Editorial Fellowship was the experience of reviewing manuscripts and taking on an Associate Editor position. I honed communication skills, including the process of giving thoughtful and constructive feedback. I also noted how individual reviewers each bring different experiences and strengths to the peer-review process. The peer-review process is a tool for strengthening research. It allows us to give back to the research community through the promotion of quality research—a process that undoubtedly has criticisms but is there to aid in the advancement of knowledge, support innovation, and ultimately benefit our patients. Through all of this, I gained insight into new and emerging research trends and identified unmet needs in today’s academic and clinical gastroenterology environment. Partaking in the review process allows one to see the latest research prior to publication, which can be very exciting. This sharpened my curiosity and tenacity, both vital skills in research. However, arguably most importantly, these experiences have the potential to positively influence patient care through my practice as a gastroenterologist. It was a privilege to receive attentive and insightful mentorship from the Editor-in-Chief (Dr Eric Benchimol) and Associate Editors (Dr Talat Bessissow and Dr Sanjay Murthy) of JCAG, who were not only invested in the success of the new position but also my personal success as well, an honour for any trainee. This position was designed with the aim of supporting and encouraging the development of budding academic gastroenterologists, and I feel strongly that the combination of mentorship and experience has done so and will continue to contribute to the education and career development of future JCAG Editorial Fellows. I am grateful for this opportunity, and I am excited to continue to work with the gastroenterology community in Canada and abroad. Supplementary material is available at Journal of the Canadian Association of Gastroenterology online. None declared. Conflicts of interest disclosure forms (ICMJE) have been collected for all co-authors and can be accessed as supplementary material here. There are no data associated with this editorial article.

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,021
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,095
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Éditorial · Signal consensuel: Éditorial
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,993
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,110

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0210,095
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0040,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0060,003
Bibliométrie0,0060,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,004
Communication savante0,0150,005
Science ouverte0,0040,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0230,020
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0160,012

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 Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,332
Écart entre enseignants0,313 · 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

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreÉditorial

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the Canadian Association of GastroenterologyMême sujetAcademic Publishing and Open AccessTravaux en français237 207