Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Journal of Diabetic Complications & Medicine was inaugurated in 2016 and has continued publishing successfully with Volume 5 in 2020. Since the journal was established, JDCM has published in excess of 50 topical and interesting theoretical and Emperical Papers has been published with broad scope, encompassing all the areas of diagnosis and treatment system associated with diabetes. Sometimes reaching our biggest goals takes more time, patience, and grit than we expect, hence the journal took a major step involving social media and making a varied platforms to our researchers to get in touch with us and Google Analytics has revealed an amazing statistics regarding the popularity of this journal. All through Feb 2016-Nov 2019 there were 3,112-page views. The total number of returning visitors were 2,900. Moreover, globally 45,870+ new users have accessed the journal website for information on the journal and the published articles. More than 72,000+ Visitors visiting the journal site to read the published articles or submit their research outcomes Highest number of Visitors reporting both from the developed and developing nations Majority of the visitors have come from USA (37.36%), India (26.97%), Italy (5.73%), Sweden (3.57%), Spain (3.12%), and Australia (2.64%) Canada (4.64%), UK (3.19%), Turkey (2.53%) The Journal received tremendous attention from the researchers in terms of visits from USA, UK, India, Japan, Korea, China, etc. The objective of JDCM is to publish high-quality and original research papers alongside relevant and insightful reviews. As such, the journal aspires to be vibrant, engaging and accessible, and at the same time integrative and challenging, Needless to say, any papers that you wish to submit, either individually or collaboratively, are much appreciated and will make a substantial contribution to the early development and success of the journal. Iam extremely grateful to the group of editors including Vito Borz (Editor in Chief), Sununta Youngwanichseth, Carlos Alberto Yasin Wayhs, Christian Okafor, Yuanjie Mao, Fatma Mahmoud Zaki Ali Zaiton, Daniel Petrovic, Antonino Tuttolomondo, Scicchitano Pietro, Olagbuji N. Biodun, Abdelmjid Chraibi, Jianhua Ma, Ahmed Abd-Rabou Mohamed Ramadan, for bestowing us with their consistent efforts and our reviewer panel for their meticulous work and helping the journal reach international Standards. The Editor-in-Chief and editorial staff of JDCM look forward to working with potential authors of review papers, for which the editorial process would be handled efficiently and in a timely manner. I would also extend my gladness by thanking the advisory and the editorial board, the office bearers and staff at Hilaris secretariat for their support in bringing out yet another volume of JDCM and look forward to their unrelenting support to bring out the Volume 5 in scheduled time.
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 | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.030 |
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".