Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is time to review the accomplishments of Canadian Journal of Diabetes over the past 3 years and share the Editorial Board's vision for the next year. Our last "report card" was published in the journal in June 2004 (1.Dean H.J. Report card time for Canadian Journal of Diabetes.Can J Diabetes. 2004; 28: 111Google Scholar), although the Editorial Board presents a report at the Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) Professional Conference and Annual Meetings each October, relating accomplishments of the previous year and goals for the next. The mission of the journal is to promote the sharing of multidisciplinary research and evidence-based knowledge from basic and clinical science to public health and education, which leads to advances in the care of diabetes. Our readership is broad: ~3500 print copies of the journal are circulated each issue—80% of recipients are members of the CDA's Diabetes Educator Section, 17% are members of the Clinical & Scientific Section and the remaining 3% are colleagues in government and industry. The Canadian Journal of Diabetes website (2.Canadian Journal of Diabetes website. Available at: http:// www.diabetes.ca/Section_Professionals/pub_cjd.aspAccessed May 15, 2007.Google Scholar) receives ~1700 hits per month. In the past 3 years, we have published 77 papers: 55 (67%) were original research manuscripts, while 27 (33%) were review papers. The journal has had consistent contributions since June 2005 to its Diabetes and Society column from partners in government and non-government organizations such as the Public Health Agency of Canada, the Diabetes Council of Canada, the First Nations and Inuit Health Branch of Health Canada, the Ontario Ministry of Health, the Canadian Obesity Network, the Northern Diabetes Network and the Canadian Agency of Drugs and Technology in Health.The regular Editor's Note has covered topics of essential editorial policy, including conflict of interest, knowledge translation, authorship, qualitative research and the use of Roman numerals, as well as such topics of emerging interest in diabetes as interprofessional undergraduate education, building Aboriginal capacity, media relations, the Cochrane Library and the new diabetes-related Developmental Origins of Health and Disease (DOHaD) organization. There is certainly no shortage of important emerging ideas and policies in diabetes care to cover in the editorial content of the journal! We have increased efficiency at all steps of the peer review process and have accomplished our goal of achieving a target deadline of <60 days from manuscript submission to decision regarding publication for at least 60% of manuscripts. We have now set a new target of reaching a decision for 60% of submissions in <30 days. Our goal of publishing 60% of accepted manuscripts in <6 months has been a little more difficult to achieve. Increased frequency of publication was considered, but we decided to achieve the acceptanceto-publication goal in 2007 by increasing the number of manuscripts in each issue and thereby reducing the number of manuscripts in the queue to be published. The National Editorial Board has recruited new associate editors and national board members. These colleagues were selected for their academic experience as scientists and teachers, their unshakeable commitment to professional integrity and their dedication to ensuring the journal's success using their creative energy, passion and insight about what is relevant, interesting and important to the national and international diabetes community. The journal's Associate Editors meet by teleconference quarterly to review editorial policies and manuscript status. The journal's Terms of Reference were reviewed and updated in April 2006. Duality of interest disclosures for national Editorial Board members and journal authors are transparent and public; the former are now posted on the journal's website and in the print journal each March; the latter are included with each paper published. Other achievements in the past 3 years include open access on the internet: the entire contents of the journal are available to anyone who visits the CDA website (2.Canadian Journal of Diabetes website. Available at: http:// www.diabetes.ca/Section_Professionals/pub_cjd.aspAccessed May 15, 2007.Google Scholar). Advertisements account for about 20% of the printed copy pages and are positioned in a "trough" at the front and back of the issue, separate from all editorial matter. Many of our initiatives reflect the trends identified by close scrutiny of international standards for medical editors: "Editors strive to advance the reporting of science in ways that ensure the highest standards of reliability, accessibility, transparency, and integrity and promote the broader ethical and communal interests of science in the public domain" (3.Scott-Lichter D. the Editorial Policy Committee Council of Science Editors White Paper on Promoting Integrity in Scientific Journal Publications. Council of Science Editors, Reston, VA2006http://www.councilscienceeditors.org/editorial_policies/white_paper.cfm). The journal's goals for 2007 include resubmission for indexing with the National Library of Medicine's Medline, presenting a workshop for new peer reviewers at the CDA/Canadian Society of Endocrinology & Metabolism Professional Conference and Annual Meetings, reducing the time from submission to decision from 60 to 30 days, planning for publication of the 2008 CDA Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Prevention and Management of Diabetes in Canada, enhancing journal content to include publication of regular columns from the CDA's National Research Council, publishing author contributions for every paper and including of study methods in the manuscript title. With respect to editorial content, we hope to continue to pose tough questions and challenge dogma in diabetes practice. We hope to engage more healthcare managers, policy makers and ethicists in our readership and authors. We acknowledge that this is an important step in the eradication of professional tribalism and the advancement of diabetes care. The major goal for 2007/2008 is re-submission of an application for indexing with Medline. The board has established a working group to ensure the best submission possible that highlights the value of the journal as an important contribution to the global fight against diabetes. Scientists in Canada have played a key role in the advances in diabetes research. We believe that the journal plays an important role in celebrating the ongoing success of Canadian scientists in the basic and clinical sciences, as well as expertise in health economics, delivery of remote health services, quality assessment and evidence-based medicine. We believe that the journal also plays a key role in sharing our unique diabetes experience in Canada, one that capitalizes on our public healthcare system, geography and diverse multicultural population within the international community.
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 | 0.004 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.854 | 0.807 |
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".