Bibliometric studies on single journals: a review

This paper covers a total of 82 bibliometric studies on single journals (62 studies cover unique titles) published between 1998 and 2008 grouped into the following fields; Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (12 items); Medical and Health Sciences (19 items); Sciences and Technology (30 items) and Library and Information Sciences (21 items). Under each field the studies are described in accordance to their geographical location in the following order, United Kingdom, United States and Americana, Europe, Asia (India, Africa and Malaysia). For each study, elements described are (a) the journal’s publication characteristics and indexation information; (b) the objectives; (c) the sampling and bibliometric measures used; and (d) the results observed. A list of journal titles studied is appended. The results show that (a)bibliometric studies cover journals in various fields; (b) there are several revisits of some journals which are considered important; (c) Asian and African contributions is high (41.4 of total studies; 43.5 covering unique titles), United States (30.4 of total; 31.0 on unique titles), Europe (18.2 of total and 14.5 on unique titles) and the United Kingdom (10 of total and 11 on unique titles); (d) a high number of bibliometrists are Indians and as such coverage of Indian journals is high (28 of total studies; 30.6 of unique titles); and (e) the quality of the journals and their importance either nationally or internationally are inferred from their indexation status

A review of the characteristics of 108 author-level bibliometric indicators

An increasing demand for bibliometric assessment of individuals has led to a growth of new bibliometric indicators as well as new variants or combinations of established ones. The aim of this review is to contribute with objective facts about the usefulness of bibliometric indicators of the effects of publication activity at the individual level. This paper reviews 108 indicators that can potentially be used to measure performance on the individual author level, and examines the complexity of their calculations in relation to what they are supposed to reflect and ease of end-user application.Comment: to be published in Scientometrics, 201

A review of the literature on citation impact indicators

Citation impact indicators nowadays play an important role in research evaluation, and consequently these indicators have received a lot of attention in the bibliometric and scientometric literature. This paper provides an in-depth review of the literature on citation impact indicators. First, an overview is given of the literature on bibliographic databases that can be used to calculate citation impact indicators (Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar). Next, selected topics in the literature on citation impact indicators are reviewed in detail. The first topic is the selection of publications and citations to be included in the calculation of citation impact indicators. The second topic is the normalization of citation impact indicators, in particular normalization for field differences. Counting methods for dealing with co-authored publications are the third topic, and citation impact indicators for journals are the last topic. The paper concludes by offering some recommendations for future research

What Matters Most? A Survey of Accomplished Middle-Level Educators\u27 Beliefs and Values about Literacy

Ninety teachers working in award-winning middle schools responded to a survey that explored, quantitatively and qualitatively, how they (1) defined themselves as teachers of literacy, (2) viewed multiliteracies in adolescents\u27 lives, and (3) valued these literacies in the classroom. Mean scores indicated that Basic Literacies (e.g., comprehension, word identification, fluency, writing) were rated more favorably than New Literacies (e.g., media, Internet, critical, out of school). Strong qualitative support existed for literacy instruction in all disciplines, but interpretations varied. The most positive agreement centered on every teacher being a teacher of literacy. Little support existed for developing students\u27 out-of-school literacies in schools. Such findings have strong implications for altering curricular emphases and merging teacher practice with adolescents\u27 needs and interests

Predictors of Engagement in Postpartum Weight Self-management Behaviours in the First 12 Weeks After Birth

Aim To explore factors that influence postpartum weight self-management behaviours. Transitions Theory and the Integrated Theory of Health Behaviour Change guided selection of variables. Transition conditions, level of patient activation and social facilitation were examined for association with postpartum weight self-management behaviours. Background Retention of pregnancy weight increases risk of overweight and obesity later in life. Little is known about what women do to self-manage return to pre-pregnant weight and how providers can influence their behaviours. Design Prospective, longitudinal, correlational. Methods Data collection occurred from March through October, 2013. One hundred and twenty-four women completed surveys during postpartum hospitalization; telephone interviews were completed by 91 women at 6 weeks and 66 women at 12 weeks. Standard and hierarchical multiple regression methods were used for analyses. Results Transition difficulty was negatively associated with patient activation and immediate postbirth patient activation was positively associated with eating behaviours at 6 weeks, eating behaviours at 12 weeks and physical activity at 12 weeks. Social support and social influence were not significant predictors in the regression models. Conclusion Patients experiencing a difficult postpartum transition have lower activation levels; those less activated are less probably to engage in weight self-management behaviours in the 12 weeks following their baby\u27s birth. Patient activation level should be considered in tailoring promotion of healthy postpartum weight management

Lineage specific recombination rates and microevolution in Listeria monocytogenes

Background: The bacterium Listeria monocytogenes is a saprotroph as well as an opportunistic human foodborne pathogen, which has previously been shown to consist of at least two widespread lineages (termed lineages I and II) and an uncommon lineage (lineage III). While some L. monocytogenes strains show evidence for considerable diversification by homologous recombination, our understanding of the contribution of recombination to L. monocytogenes evolution is still limited. We therefore used STRUCTURE and ClonalFrame, two programs that model the effect of recombination, to make inferences about the population structure and different aspects of the recombination process in L. monocytogenes. Analyses were performed using sequences for seven loci (including the house-keeping genes gap, prs, purM and ribC, the stress response gene sigB, and the virulence genes actA and inlA) for 195 L. monocytogenes isolates. Results: Sequence analyses with ClonalFrame and the Sawyer's test showed that recombination is more prevalent in lineage II than lineage I and is most frequent in two house-keeping genes (ribC and purM) and the two virulence genes (actA and inlA). The relative occurrence of recombination versus point mutation is about six times higher in lineage II than in lineage I, which causes a higher genetic variability in lineage II. Unlike lineage I, lineage II represents a genetically heterogeneous population with a relatively high proportion (30% average) of genetic material imported from external sources. Phylograms, constructed with correcting for recombination, as well as Tajima's D data suggest that both lineages I and II have suffered a population bottleneck. Conclusion: Our study shows that evolutionary lineages within a single bacterial species can differ considerably in the relative contributions of recombination to genetic diversification. Accounting for recombination in phylogenetic studies is critical, and new evolutionary models that account for the possibility of changes in the rate of recombination would be required. While previous studies suggested that only L. monocytogenes lineage I has experienced a recent bottleneck, our analyses clearly show that lineage II experienced a bottleneck at about the same time, which was subsequently obscured by abundant homologous recombination after the lineage II bottleneck. While lineage I and lineage II should be considered separate species from an evolutionary viewpoint, maintaining single species name may be warranted since both lineages cause the same type of human disease