Credit allocation based on journal impact factor and coauthorship contribution

Some research institutions demand researchers to distribute the incomes they earn from publishing papers to their researchers and/or co-authors. In this study, we deal with the Impact Factor-based ranking journal as a criteria for the correct distribution of these incomes. We also include the Authorship Credit factor for distribution of the incomes among authors, using the geometric progression of Cantor's theory and the Harmonic Credit Index. Depending on the ranking of the journal, the proposed model develops a proper publication credit allocation among all authors. Moreover, our tool can be deployed in the evaluation of an institution for a funding program, as well as calculating the amounts necessary to incentivize research among personnel.Comment: 9 pages; 3 figures; 2 table

Credit Allocation Based on Journal Impact Factor and Co-authorship Contribution

Abstract. Some research institutions demand researchers to distribute the incomes they earn from publishing papers to their researchers and/or co-authors. In this study, we deal with the Impact Factor-based ranking journal as a criteria for the correct distribution of these incomes. We also include the Authorship Credit factor for distribution of the incomes among authors, using the geometric progression of Cantor’s theory and the Harmonic Credit Index. Depending on the ranking of the journal, the proposed model develops a proper publication credit allocation among all authors. Moreover, our tool can be deployed in the evaluation of an institution for a funding program, as well as calculating the amounts necessary to incentivize research among personnel.Keywords. Co-author credit; Impact factor; Ranking; Cantor’s succession; Harmonic credit.JEL. A12, C02, C10

Dissemination of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA300 sequence type 8 lineage in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococus aureus (MRSA) is an important nosocomial and community-associated (CA) pathogen. Recently, a variant of the MRSA USA300 clone emerged and disseminated in South America, causing important clinical problems. METHODS: S. aureus isolates were prospectively collected (2006-2008) from 32 tertiary hospitals in Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Venezuela. MRSA isolates were subjected to antimicrobial susceptibility testing and pulsed-field gel electrophoresis and were categorized as health care-associated (HA)-like or CA-like clones on the basis of genotypic characteristics and detection of genes encoding Panton-Valentine leukocidin and staphylococcal cassette chromosome (SCC) mec IV. In addition, multilocus sequence typing of representative isolates of each major CA-MRSA pulsotype was performed, and the presence of USA300-associated toxins and the arcA gene was investigated for all isolates categorized as CA-MRSA. RESULTS: A total of 1570 S. aureus were included; 651 were MRSA (41%)--with the highest rate of MRSA isolation in Peru (62%) and the lowest in Venezuela (26%)--and 71%, 27%, and 2% were classified as HA-like, CA-like, and non-CA/HA-like clones, respectively. Only 9 MRSA isolates were confirmed to have reduced susceptibility to glycopeptides (glycopeptide-intermediate S. aureus phenotype). The most common pulsotype (designated ComA) among the CA-like MRSA strains was found in 96% of isolates, with the majority (81%) having a \u3c or =6-band difference with the USA300-0114 strain. Representative isolates of this clone were sequence type 8; however, unlike the USA300-0114 strain, they harbored a different SCCmec IV subtype and lacked arcA (an indicator of the arginine catabolic mobile element). CONCLUSION: A variant CA-MRSA USA300 clone has become established in South America and, in some countries, is endemic in hospital settings

Antimicrobial resistance among migrants in Europe: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Rates of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are rising globally and there is concern that increased migration is contributing to the burden of antibiotic resistance in Europe. However, the effect of migration on the burden of AMR in Europe has not yet been comprehensively examined. Therefore, we did a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify and synthesise data for AMR carriage or infection in migrants to Europe to examine differences in patterns of AMR across migrant groups and in different settings. METHODS: For this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Scopus with no language restrictions from Jan 1, 2000, to Jan 18, 2017, for primary data from observational studies reporting antibacterial resistance in common bacterial pathogens among migrants to 21 European Union-15 and European Economic Area countries. To be eligible for inclusion, studies had to report data on carriage or infection with laboratory-confirmed antibiotic-resistant organisms in migrant populations. We extracted data from eligible studies and assessed quality using piloted, standardised forms. We did not examine drug resistance in tuberculosis and excluded articles solely reporting on this parameter. We also excluded articles in which migrant status was determined by ethnicity, country of birth of participants' parents, or was not defined, and articles in which data were not disaggregated by migrant status. Outcomes were carriage of or infection with antibiotic-resistant organisms. We used random-effects models to calculate the pooled prevalence of each outcome. The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043681. FINDINGS: We identified 2274 articles, of which 23 observational studies reporting on antibiotic resistance in 2319 migrants were included. The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or AMR infection in migrants was 25·4% (95% CI 19·1-31·8; I2 =98%), including meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (7·8%, 4·8-10·7; I2 =92%) and antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (27·2%, 17·6-36·8; I2 =94%). The pooled prevalence of any AMR carriage or infection was higher in refugees and asylum seekers (33·0%, 18·3-47·6; I2 =98%) than in other migrant groups (6·6%, 1·8-11·3; I2 =92%). The pooled prevalence of antibiotic-resistant organisms was slightly higher in high-migrant community settings (33·1%, 11·1-55·1; I2 =96%) than in migrants in hospitals (24·3%, 16·1-32·6; I2 =98%). We did not find evidence of high rates of transmission of AMR from migrant to host populations. INTERPRETATION: Migrants are exposed to conditions favouring the emergence of drug resistance during transit and in host countries in Europe. Increased antibiotic resistance among refugees and asylum seekers and in high-migrant community settings (such as refugee camps and detention facilities) highlights the need for improved living conditions, access to health care, and initiatives to facilitate detection of and appropriate high-quality treatment for antibiotic-resistant infections during transit and in host countries. Protocols for the prevention and control of infection and for antibiotic surveillance need to be integrated in all aspects of health care, which should be accessible for all migrant groups, and should target determinants of AMR before, during, and after migration. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, the Wellcome Trust, and UK National Institute for Health Research Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare-associated Infections and Antimictobial Resistance at Imperial College London