Notice bibliographique
Résumé
In the past year, Transplant Infectious Disease continued to grow and refine its focus.We continued to publish a wide range of key papers that align with our focus on infections in immunocompromised hosts.In fact, this year saw an increase in the number of papers focused on stem cell transplantation and oncology ID submitted and accepted.We published our third special edition, focused on donor-derived infections.I want to thank our guest editors Stephanie Pouch and Karen Waller who accomplished the herculean task of getting this done.We continued to collaborate with the Transplant Infectious Diseases Section of the Transplantation Society to conduct Clinico-Pathologic Conferences (CPCs) -the recordings of the webinar are now available with each published article online.I want to personally thank our amazing CPC team: Maricar Malinis, who leads the program, along with Wanessa Clemente, Dennis Neofytos, and Stephanie Pouch.We have begun collaborating with other global TID groups on these CPC and I am personally excited about collaborations with ESGICH, the European Study Group on Infections in Compromised Hosts, and BRITMIC, the British Transplant ID, Mycology and Infection in Immunocompromised Network.We welcome other societies or organizations who want to collaborate on a CPC to reach out to tidedjournal@gmail.com and we can work on ways to move forward.We have introduced a new process to consider papers that have been previously rejected at other journals -you just submit a revised paper, addressing key concerns raised in the prior review, the decision letter, and a response letter to the comments as a new submission to the journal.We work hard to consider papers quickly -we've had seven such transferred papers that were accepted within 5 days of submission and several others that were accepted after further reviewer comments were addressed within a month of sending the journal to us.Importantly, this is all accomplished without a charge fee for review or publication.Despite a continued high rate of submissions, we have maintained our average turn-around-time from submission to decision at 20.6 days.To accomplish this, we need your help in providing timely review of articles.I am continually amazed at how many of you respond positively to our requests to review our papers.We have to remember that this is a two-way street -if you are going to submit papers, you also need to participate in the peer review process to allow for timely publication of articles.This year represents a time of change on the editorial board.I want to thank Saima Aslam and Monica Slavin who will be stepping away as Deputy Editors for the Journal.We have welcomed Stephanie Pouch and will be welcoming one more new editor by the end of 2024 to the team.In addition, we are developing working groups to better engage our editorial board members in the day-to-day operations of the journal.We have created working groups that will help the editors in focused activities as outlined below: CPC Working Group
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 | 0,047 | 0,203 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,008 |
| Communication savante | 0,036 | 0,022 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,024 | 0,032 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,021 | 0,023 |
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 ».