Bibliographic record
Abstract
“On September 30, 1992, during the 7th World Congress for Bronchology, held under the auspices of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, several well-known specialists in bronchoscopy in the United States and Canada met and assented to form a new organization, the American Association for Bronchology.”1 This was how Dr Udaya Prakash, the Journal’s first Editor-in-Chief, began the inaugural issue of the Journal of Bronchology in 1994. Over the subsequent 19 years, the Journal has been committed to advancing the field of bronchoscopy by publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed manuscripts. Dr Atul Mehta became Editor-in-Chief in 2004, and since that time has devoted countless hours to ensuring the highest possible standards for quality. His efforts have not only included organizing the formatting of the Journal, tirelessly requesting the submission of manuscripts from around the world, but also being a primary reviewer of these submissions, perhaps the most important, and thankless component of his role. The Journal has applied for indexing several times over the last 10 years, and 2 years ago, at the annual meeting of the American Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology, the Board committed to a final push to achieve the goal of indexing. This involved a reorganization of the Editorial Board as well as a commitment from the Board of the American Association of Bronchology and Interventional Pulmonology to submit original investigations and actively solicit high-quality manuscripts from colleagues who could have submitted their work to other, already indexed journals. We are now thrilled to announce that this goal has been realized and that Index Medicus has included the JOBIP among their list of indexed journals. This is a major milestone for the Journal as, previously, authors may have favored submitting their important research to other journals solely because of their indexing status. We are confident that this accomplishment will only serve to further increase the quality of research published in the JOBIP and continue to further the field of interventional pulmonology. As Dr Prakash stated 17 years ago, “it is with a lofty feeling of exhilaration and not an insignificant perception of accomplishment that the members of the editorial board and I have the honor and pleasure of presenting this new journal to our readers.”1
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 | 0.019 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.028 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.092 | 0.105 |
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".