MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A welcome from the Editor

2004· article· en· W2133471419 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Douglas Queen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Wound Journal · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicWound Healing and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubject (documents)General partnershipPresentation (obstetrics)Public relationsMedicinePosition (finance)Multidisciplinary approachWork (physics)Political scienceBusinessLibrary scienceEngineeringLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Welcome to the first edition of the International Wound Journal. Our aim is your aim – that is to create an environment where all patients can benefit from the extensive and rapidly developing clinical and laboratory research findings on work undertaken in this area. It is our intention to be the pre-eminent source of information on wounds that is disseminated on a global basis. We have a large, multidisciplinary and international group of experts helping us. The editorial executive currently consists of representatives from the United Kingdom, mainland Europe, North America, Japan and Australia. This group is supported by a large editorial advisory board who further extend our representation to a host of other countries. In addition to advice from clinical and academic colleagues, we are in a fortunate position of being able to create a new group who are also important for the success of this journal. These are the strategic partners who represent a number of global commercial concerns and who are also key stakeholders in the development of this subject. These companies provide assistance in a number of ways other than simply placing advertisements in the journal. They will play an active role in the marketing, dissemination and growth of the journal and provide advice to the editors on the changing needs of industry in this subject area. This partnership is unique and a true symbiosis whereby industry will have an international educational vehicle, and we will have a much greater chance of achieving our goal of being truly international. This close and cosy relationship will not, however, interfere in any way with the editorial content of the journal. The final decision on what will be published rests with the senior members of the editorial team. All work submitted will be subject to rigorous peer-review, and under no circumstances will any advantage be offered to the strategic partner organisations. The process will be managed in an open and professional way to ensure that the quality of the journal is never compromised. This journal is not owned by or exclusively linked to any specific society or association. It will, however, be keen to develop relationships with many such organisations as appropriate. To this end, we are pleased to announce that we will be linked to the World Union of Wound Healing Societies (WUWHS) at a meeting to be held in France in July. We look forward to seeing many of our authors, subscribers and advertisers – whether existing or potential – at that meeting. Knowledge is said to give people power. The new information that is contained in this journal will undoubtedly provide power to our readers. In addition, language is the key to effective communication. Through multiple languages and contributions from around the world, the International Wound Journal will provide a global voice and power to all those involved in this subject irrespective of discipline or background. Use that power to improve the care of patients with wounds. •Europe Suzie Calne, UK Dr Robertto Cassino, Italy Dr George Cherry, UK Dr Mike Clarke, UK Dr Sebastian Debus, Germany Dr Mieke Flour, Belgium Prof. Peter Franks, UK Prof. Finn Gottrup, Denmark David Gray, UK Dr Dirk Hollander, Germany Prof. David Leaper, UK Dr Mario Marazzi, Italy Dr Sylvie Meaume, France Prof. Hugo Partsch, Austria Dr Elaine Pina, Portugal Cath Vowden, UK Dr Peter Vowden, UK •North America Dr Adrian Barbul, USA Dr Diane Cooper, USA Dr Jeff Davidson, USA Dr William Ennis, USA Dr Vincent Falanga, USA Evonne Fowler, USA Dr Pamela Houghton, Canada Dr David Keast, Canada Dr Diane Krasner, USA Dr Courtney Lyder, USA Dr Joe McCulloch, USA Yvette Moulin, Canada Nancy Parslow, Canada Dr George Rodeheaver, USA •Australasia Dr Ian Darby, Australia Prof. Xiabong Fu, China Dr Satsue Hagisawa, Japan Dr Kazuo Kishi, Japan•Rest of World Prof. Zulifiqarali Abbas, Tanzania Prof. Bishara Atiayeh, Lebanon Dr Celesttini Celebi, Turkey Dr Jose Contreras Ruiz, Mexico Prof. Kent Jönsson, Zimbabwe Dr Manoj Pandey, India Prof. Hermelinda Pedrosa, Brazil Prof. Vijay Shukla, India

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.292
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Wound JournalSame topicWound Healing and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207