Secondary publication in the <i>Japan Journal of Nursing Science</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following excerpt about the secondary publication of articles has been obtained from the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication (International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, 2006): Certain types of articles, such as guidelines produced by governmental agencies and professional organizations, may need to reach the widest possible audience. In such instances, editors sometimes choose deliberately to publish material that is also being published in other journals, with the agreement of the authors and the editors of those other journals. Secondary publication for various other reasons, in the same or another language, especially in other countries, is justifiable, and can be beneficial, provided all of the following conditions are met. 1 The authors have received approval from the editors of both journals; the editor concerned with secondary publication must have a photocopy, reprint, or manuscript of the primary version. 2 The priority of the primary publication is respected by a publication interval of at least one week (unless specifically negotiated otherwise by both editors). 3 The paper for secondary publication is intended for a different group of readers; an abbreviated version could be sufficient. 4 The secondary version faithfully reflects the data and interpretations of the primary version. 5 The footnote on the title page of the secondary version informs readers, peers, and documenting agencies that the paper has been published in whole or in part and states the primary reference. A suitable footnote might read: “This article is based on a study first reported in the [title of journal, with full reference].” Permission for such secondary publication should be free of charge. 6 The title of the secondary publication should indicate that it is a secondary publication (complete republication, abridged republication, complete translation, or abridged translation) of a primary publication. Of note, the National Library of Medicine does not consider translations to be “republications”, and does not cite or index translations when the original article was published in a journal that is indexed in MEDLINE. The Japan Journal of Nursing Science (JJNS) Editorial Board and the Editorial Board of the Journal of Japan Academy of Nursing Science (JJANS) agreed in 2003 that JJNS will publish an English translation of papers that have been published in JJANS as a secondary publication. The paper must have been previously published in Japanese in JJANS and is suitable to be translated into English for the global audience as they are suggestive and the contribution to nursing is massive. Under the current situation, a secondary publication in principle is limited to the papers that won awards at the Japan Academy of Nursing Science (JANS) assembly held during the annual academic conference and the selection among the award papers rests with the JJNS editorial board. We have published the following award papers as a secondary publication so far: Effects of a flexed posture in the prone position with boundaries following endotracheal suction in very low birthweight infants. Yoshie KONDOH. JJNS, 1, 47–55. What moral requirements cause ethical dilemmas among nurse executives? Yumiko KATSUHARA. JJNS, 2, 57–65. Practical application and evaluation of a care model for informing and reassuring children undergoing medical examinations and/or procedures (part 2): Methods of relating and practical nursing techniques that best bring out the potential of children. Naomi MATSUMORI, Keiko NINOMIYA, Michiko EBINA, Noriko KATADA, Hitomi KATSUDA, Yukie KOSAKO, Shinobu SASAKI, Tomomi MATSUBAYASHI, Ayami NAKANO, Mayumi TSUTSUI, Naoko IIMURA, Rina EMOTO, Atsuko SUZUKI, Hiromi NARAGINO, Sayako TAKAHASHI, Namiko KISUGI, and Makiko HUKUCHI. JJNS, 3, 51–64. Competencies of genetic nursing practice in Japan; A comparison between basic and advanced Levels. Naoko ARIMORI, Satoko NAKAGOMI, Michiko MIZOGUCHI, Minako MORITA, Hiroto ANDO, Akiko MORI, Shigeko HORIUCHI and William L. HOLZEMER. JJNS, 4, 45–55.
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 | 0.007 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.159 | 0.123 |
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".