Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first issue of 2011 prompts me to reflect on a number of changes for Veterinary Dermatology in 2010 and these are highlighted below. I hope that all of our readers, authors and reviewers find the information of value and interest. The Journal has been the official journal for several societies including the parent organizations the European Society of Veterinary Dermatology (ESVD) and the American College of Veterinary Dermatology. Over the years these have been joined by the American Academy of Veterinary Dermatology (AAVD), the Canadian Academy of Veterinary Dermatology, the Australian Chapter of the Australian College of Veterinary Scientists, and the European College of Veterinary Dermatology (ECVD). In recent years the newly formed Asian Society of Veterinary Dermatology has joined the list of affiliates. In 2010 the International Society of Veterinary Dermatopathology joined the list. All of these affiliated groups can publish meeting abstracts in the journal and these are primarily through the two annual meetings of ECVD-ESVD and the North American Veterinary Dermatology Forum (ACVD-AAVD). Every four years there is a world congress and this is organized by the World Association for Veterinary Dermatology (WAVD) and they will be the latest organization to become affiliated with the journal. This association has historically been associated with the publication of the world congress abstracts as a special issue of the Journal and in 2009, for the first time, we published the main congress papers in the journal and there is also a link to the congress workshop reports on the journal website. The journal-society affiliations reflect the international relations that exist between these various organizations that pursue the study of various aspects of veterinary dermatology. For more information about the societies affiliated to the journal one should refer to the Wiley Online library website. This site was launched in August 2010 for Veterinary Dermatology and replaces the Wiley InterScience platform. It is designed to allow for faster updates and to provide information relating to the journal content including recent manuscripts that are “hot topics” as well as society information including links to their congress websites. There is also information about veterinary dermatology textbooks. A major change in October 2010 was the move from the electronic submission system Editorial Manager to ScholarOne Manuscripts™ (formerly known as Manuscript Central) for processing manuscripts. Authors and reviewers using this system for the first time have to register and it is hoped that people using the site will appreciate the various tools available. We have customised to some extent the ScholarOne website for the Journal. This includes two documents for new reviewers on how to review a manuscript and one for new or prospective authors about how to write for publication. The first is from the Wiley-Blackwell quarterly online publication Nurse Author & Editor and the resource is entitled “Guidebook for Manuscript Reviewers” (2007) by Charon Pierson. Reviewers are asked to use a standard reviewer guidance sheet to help standardise the review process. The journal editorial board meet once a year and in 2010 this was held during the annual ECVD-ESVD congress in Firenze, Italy. We discussed the merits of single versus double blind review. For a review of this topic consider the article by Richard Snodgrass entitled Single vs. Double Blind reviewing – an analysis of the literature. SIGMOD Record 2006; 35 (3): 8–21, which is freely available in the public domain. There has been a growing interest in veterinary journals to consider the value of double blind review (DBR) where the reviewer does not know the identity of the author as well as the author not knowing the identity of the reviewer (single blind review). The board decided to adopt DBR because it potentially offers a fairer review process, especially for authors from less well known institutions. The main change for authors is that they will need to avoid any reference to their authorship within the main text of the submitted manuscript. On initial submission the editorial office will check that the author affiliations and acknowledgements are provided separate to the main text before the manuscript goes forward for review.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".