The modernization of the editorial system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We have reached the end of yet another year of intense work at the Latin-American Journal of Nursing (RLAE), marked by a continuous and increasing flow of manuscripts for publication. In 2005, we received 248 manuscripts, 10% of which was accepted, 78% is under evaluation and 12% was refused. Volume 13 of RLAE totals 143 articles, published in 6 regular editions and 2 special supplements with the research results produced by Latin-American nurses who participated in the Research Training Program Applied to the Drugs Phenomenon, held by the University of Sao Paulo at Ribeirao Preto College of Nursing, WHO Collaborating Centre for Nursing Research Development, in partnership with the Organization of American State / InterAmerican Drug Abuse Control Commission (OAS/CICAD). Authors include nurses, physicians, psychologists, physiotherapists, sociologists, nutritionists and other professional categories represented in multidisciplinary health teams, from different regions in Brazil as well as from other countries (Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Peru, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico, Canada and France). In line with international and national guidelines for health research, the studies published by RLAE discussed both relevant and emerging issues, favoring knowledge transfers to health policy makers and agents, with a view to levering the quality of care delivery and organization. The editorial board is oriented by the principle of relevance of the subjects discussed and problems examined as they relate to care services and institutions responsible for training human resources in health, permanently tuned in with the millennium development goals: “eradicate extreme poverty and hunger; achieve universal primary education; promote gender equality and empower women; reduce child mortality; improve maternal health; combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; ensure environmental sustainability and develop a global partnership for development”. In an attempt to maintain the high editorial level it has conquered, in the first semester of 2006, RLAE will move to an electronic manuscript submission, analysis and publication system. The use of technologies to provide a more agile dissemination of scientific research results is a global tendency, and has been adopted by periodicals in line with the demands posed by the age of knowledge. This system provides other benefits to authors, such as the possibility to follow the status of their manuscript from the initial receipt to the final publication, using a username and password. The different steps of the Editorial Board evaluation and peer review process will also become fully electronic. Reviewers will have access to the manuscripts they reviewed and the respective deadlines. Furthermore, the administrative-financial management of RLAE will be included in the same system, with a view to providing and maintaining high-quality services and relations with authors, subscribers, reviewers, funding agencies and other partners. In 2006, RLAE will work hard to make its scientific and editing quality even better. The main challenges ahead are a wider dissemination in Latin America and Portuguese-speaking countries around the world; an increase in the number of international articles, maintenance of RLAE in current databases and inclusion in new international databases, as well as in the ScieLO Collection Brazil. We are grateful to all authors, consultants, board members, subscribers and readers who were with us in 2005, turning RLAE into the best Nursing journal in Brazil and one of the most respected periodicals in this area in Latin America. We hope you will stay with us in 2006 to maintain this successful partnership!
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.092 | 0.281 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.050 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.033 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".