EURAPA moves to open access: Research trends and challenges in physical activity in old age
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise of the Internet has radically changed scholarly communication. It is now widely recognized that having an open access to research results contributes to better and more efficient science, and to innovation in the public and private sectors [1]. The global trend towards offering free online (open) access to the results of publicly-funded research (publications and data) has been a core strategy in the European Commission to accelerate the circulation of knowledge and thus innovation [1]. In accordance of this trend, the European Union (EU) is striving to improve access to scientific information and to boost the benefits of public investment in the research funded under the EU framework [2] so that everyone with access to the Internet can benefit from the latest scientific insights. As Editors-in-Chief of EURAPA, we very much look forward to the changes entailed in the journal’s transition to BioMed Central. Thanks to the open access format, the quality research and review articles that appear in our journal will be available to a much larger audience with an interest in aging and physical activity than was possible until now. EURAPA is the official publication of the European Group for Research into Elderly and Physical Activity (EGREPA). EGREPA fills an important niche in the study of physical activity for the elderly. The first volume of EURAPA, as the official journal of EGREPA, was issued on the occasion of the 6th World Congress on Aging and Physical Activity in London, Ontario, Canada in 2004. The first volumes were published without a publisher. The decision to publish EURAPA with Springer Publishers was taken in 2005. The first issue with Springer, Volume 3, Number 1, appeared in May 2006. EURAPA has meanwhile become a well-established and accepted peer-reviewed journal. With Volume 8, Number 1, 2011, EURAPA became an electronic-only version. The year 2011 also marked the introduction of new publication formats so that EURAPA began to accept papers in categories such as: original research, theoretical and methodological articles, brief reports, guest editors and guest editorials [3]. In January 2015 the journal began publishing with BMC with the intention of further expanding its role as an interdisciplinary platform for the development and dissemination of scientific research relating to physical activity and aging. A new editorial board, comprised of new scientists in all relevant areas was created. This is a great opportunity to express our appreciation and thanks to the founders of the journal – Prof. Michael Sagiv and Prof. Heinz Mechling. Prof. Sagiv was the Co-Editor-in-Chief for life and medical sciences and Prof. Mechling for behavioral sciences. Both of them were pioneers in research on physical activity and aging and contributed greatly to the success of the journal. We also extend our thanks to Dr. Michael Brach, who has served as an associate editor and continues to contribute in making the journal an important voice for research in our field. We would also like to extend sincere thanks to three academic institutes that have provided essential resources and necessary operational support to both EGREPA and EURAPA: The Zinman College of Physical Education and Sport Sciences at the Wingate Institute; The Institute of Movement and Sport Gerontology at the German Sport University, Cologne (former at University of Bonn); and the Institute of Sport at the Westfalische Wilhelms-University, Munster. We hope these institutes continue to provide their support. We also take the opportunity to thank all of our past reviewers for their service to the journal, the authors for their willingness to publish their work in EURAPA, and the readers, who have accepted EURAPA as a part of the scholarly literature.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it