搜索结果：Emergency medicine journal : EMJ

Interdisciplinary research, a process of knowledge integration, is vital for scientific advancements. It remains unclear whether prestigious journals that are highly impactful lead in disseminating interdisciplinary knowledge. In this paper, by constructing topic-level correlation networks based on publications, we evaluated the interdisciplinarity of more and less prestigious journals in medicine. We found research from prestigious medical journals tends to be less interdisciplinary than research from other medical journals. We also established that cancer-related research is the main driver of interdisciplinarity in medical science. Our results indicate a weak tendency for differences in topic correlations between more and less prestigious journals to be co-located. Accordingly, we identified that interdisciplinarity in prestigious journals mainly differs from interdisciplinarity in other journals in areas such as infections, nervous system diseases and cancer. Overall, our results suggest that interdisciplinarity in science could benefit from prestigious journals easing rigid disciplinary boundaries.

Interdisciplinary research is critical for innovation and addressing complex societal issues. We characterise the interdisciplinary knowledge structure of PubMed research articles in medicine as correlation networks of medical concepts and compare the interdisciplinarity of articles between high-ranking (impactful) and less high-ranking (less impactful) medical journals. We found that impactful medical journals tend to publish research that are less interdisciplinary than less impactful journals. Observing that they bridge distant knowledge clusters in the networks, we find that cancer-related research can be seen as one of the main drivers of interdisciplinarity in medical science. Using signed difference networks, we also investigate the clustering of deviations between high and low impact journal correlation networks. We generally find a mild tendency for strong link differences to be adjacent. Furthermore, we find topic clusters of deviations that shift over time. In contrast, topic clusters in the original networks are static over time and can be seen as the core knowledge structure in medicine. Overall, journals and policymakers should encourage initiatives to accommodate int

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is revolutionizing emergency medicine by enhancing diagnostic processes and improving patient outcomes. This article provides a review of the current applications of AI in emergency imaging studies, focusing on the last five years of advancements. AI technologies, particularly machine learning and deep learning, are pivotal in interpreting complex imaging data, offering rapid, accurate diagnoses and potentially surpassing traditional diagnostic methods. Studies highlighted within the article demonstrate AI's capabilities in accurately detecting conditions such as fractures, pneumothorax, and pulmonary diseases from various imaging modalities including X-rays, CT scans, and MRIs. Furthermore, AI's ability to predict clinical outcomes like mechanical ventilation needs illustrates its potential in crisis resource optimization. Despite these advancements, the integration of AI into clinical practice presents challenges such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the need for extensive validation across diverse settings. This review underscores the transformative potential of AI in emergency settings, advocating for a future where AI and clinical expertise s

This study examines the social media uptake of scientific journals on two different platforms - X and WeChat - by comparing the adoption of X among journals indexed in the Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) with the adoption of WeChat among journals indexed in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD). The findings reveal substantial differences in platform adoption and user engagement, shaped by local contexts. While only 22.7% of SCIE journals maintain an X account, 84.4% of CSCD journals have a WeChat official account. Journals in Life Sciences & Biomedicine lead in uptake on both platforms, whereas those in Technology and Physical Sciences show high WeChat uptake but comparatively lower presence on X. User engagement on both platforms is dominated by low-effort interactions rather than more conversational behaviors. Correlation analyses indicate weak-to-moderate relationships between bibliometric indicators and social media metrics, confirming that online engagement reflects a distinct dimension of journal impact, whether on an international or a local platform. These findings underscore the need for broader social media metric frameworks that incorporate locally dom

This paper introduces the Unique Citing Documents Journal Impact Factor(Uniq-JIF) as a supplement to the traditional Journal Impact Factor(JIF). The Uniq-JIF counts each citing document only once, aiming to reduce the effects of citation manipulations. Analysis of 2023 Journal Citation Reports data shows that for most journals, the Uniq-JIF is less than 20% lower than the JIF, though some journals show a drop of over 75%. The Uniq-JIF also highlights significant reductions for journals suppressed due to citation issues, indicating its effectiveness in identifying problematic journals. The Uniq-JIF offers a more nuanced view of a journal's influence and can help reveal journals needing further scrutiny.

We compare the network of aggregated journal-journal citation relations provided by the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) 2012 of the Science and Social Science Citation Indexes (SCI and SSCI) with similar data based on Scopus 2012. First, global maps were developed for the two sets separately; sets of documents can then be compared using overlays to both maps. Using fuzzy-string matching and ISSN numbers, we were able to match 10,524 journal names between the two sets; that is, 96.4% of the 10,936 journals contained in JCR or 51.2% of the 20,554 journals covered by Scopus. Network analysis was then pursued on the set of journals shared between the two databases and the two sets of unique journals. Citations among the shared journals are more comprehensively covered in JCR than Scopus, so the network in JCR is denser and more connected than in Scopus. The ranking of shared journals in terms of indegree (that is, numbers of citing journals) or total citations is similar in both databases overall (Spearman's \r{ho} > 0.97), but some individual journals rank very differently. Journals that are unique to Scopus seem to be less important--they are citing shared journals rather than bein

We propose the Multimodal Clinical Benchmark for Emergency Care (MC-BEC), a comprehensive benchmark for evaluating foundation models in Emergency Medicine using a dataset of 100K+ continuously monitored Emergency Department visits from 2020-2022. MC-BEC focuses on clinically relevant prediction tasks at timescales from minutes to days, including predicting patient decompensation, disposition, and emergency department (ED) revisit, and includes a standardized evaluation framework with train-test splits and evaluation metrics. The multimodal dataset includes a wide range of detailed clinical data, including triage information, prior diagnoses and medications, continuously measured vital signs, electrocardiogram and photoplethysmograph waveforms, orders placed and medications administered throughout the visit, free-text reports of imaging studies, and information on ED diagnosis, disposition, and subsequent revisits. We provide performance baselines for each prediction task to enable the evaluation of multimodal, multitask models. We believe that MC-BEC will encourage researchers to develop more effective, generalizable, and accessible foundation models for multimodal clinical data.

Model Medicine is the science of understanding, diagnosing, treating, and preventing disorders in AI models, grounded in the principle that AI models -- like biological organisms -- have internal structures, dynamic processes, heritable traits, observable symptoms, classifiable conditions, and treatable states. This paper introduces Model Medicine as a research program, bridging the gap between current AI interpretability research (anatomical observation) and the systematic clinical practice that complex AI systems increasingly require. We present five contributions: (1) a discipline taxonomy organizing 15 subdisciplines across four divisions -- Basic Model Sciences, Clinical Model Sciences, Model Public Health, and Model Architectural Medicine; (2) the Four Shell Model (v3.3), a behavioral genetics framework empirically grounded in 720 agents and 24,923 decisions from the Agora-12 program, explaining how model behavior emerges from Core--Shell interaction; (3) Neural MRI (Model Resonance Imaging), a working open-source diagnostic tool mapping five medical neuroimaging modalities to AI interpretability techniques, validated through four clinical cases demonstrating imaging, compari

Overlay journals are characterised by their articles being published on open access repositories, often already starting in their initial preprint form as a prerequisite for submission to the journal prior to initiating the peer-review process. In this study we aimed to identify currently active overlay journals and examine their characteristics. We utilised an explorative web search and contacted key service providers for additional information. The final sample consisted of 34 overlay journals. While the results show that new overlay journals have been actively established within recent years, the current presence of overlay journals remains diminutive compared to the overall number of open access journals. Most overlay journals publish articles in natural sciences, mathematics or computer sciences, and are commonly published by groups of academics rather than formal organisations. They may also rank highly within the traditional journal citation metrics. None of the investigated journals required fees from authors, which is likely related to the cost-effective aspects of the overlay publishing model. Both the growth in adoption of open access preprint repositories and researcher

The increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters underscore the critical importance of effective disaster emergency response planning to minimize human and economic losses. This survey provides a comprehensive review of recent advancements (2019--2024) in five essential areas of disaster emergency response planning: evacuation, facility location, casualty transport, search and rescue, and relief distribution. Research in these areas is systematically categorized based on methodologies, including optimization models, machine learning, and simulation, with a focus on their individual strengths and synergies. A notable contribution of this work is its examination of the interplay between machine learning, simulation, and optimization frameworks, highlighting how these approaches can address the dynamic, uncertain, and complex nature of disaster scenarios. By identifying key research trends and challenges, this study offers valuable insights to improve the effectiveness and resilience of emergency response strategies in future disaster planning efforts.

With the increasing interest in deploying Artificial Intelligence in medicine, we previously introduced HAIM (Holistic AI in Medicine), a framework that fuses multimodal data to solve downstream clinical tasks. However, HAIM uses data in a task-agnostic manner and lacks explainability. To address these limitations, we introduce xHAIM (Explainable HAIM), a novel framework leveraging Generative AI to enhance both prediction and explainability through four structured steps: (1) automatically identifying task-relevant patient data across modalities, (2) generating comprehensive patient summaries, (3) using these summaries for improved predictive modeling, and (4) providing clinical explanations by linking predictions to patient-specific medical knowledge. Evaluated on the HAIM-MIMIC-MM dataset, xHAIM improves average AUC from 79.9% to 90.3% across chest pathology and operative tasks. Importantly, xHAIM transforms AI from a black-box predictor into an explainable decision support system, enabling clinicians to interactively trace predictions back to relevant patient data, bridging AI advancements with clinical utility.

Background: AI-driven prediction algorithms have the potential to enhance emergency medicine by enabling rapid and accurate decision-making regarding patient status and potential deterioration. However, the integration of multimodal data, including raw waveform signals, remains underexplored in clinical decision support. Methods: We present a dataset and benchmarking protocol designed to advance multimodal decision support in emergency care. Our models utilize demographics, biometrics, vital signs, laboratory values, and electrocardiogram (ECG) waveforms as inputs to predict both discharge diagnoses and patient deterioration. Results: The diagnostic model achieves area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC) scores above 0.8 for 609 out of 1,428 conditions, covering both cardiac (e.g., myocardial infarction) and non-cardiac (e.g., renal disease, diabetes) diagnoses. The deterioration model attains AUROC scores above 0.8 for 14 out of 15 targets, accurately predicting critical events such as cardiac arrest, mechanical ventilation, ICU admission, and mortality. Conclusions: Our study highlights the positive impact of incorporating raw waveform data into decision support models, im

Rankings of scholarly journals based on citation data are often met with skepticism by the scientific community. Part of the skepticism is due to disparity between the common perception of journals' prestige and their ranking based on citation counts. A more serious concern is the inappropriate use of journal rankings to evaluate the scientific influence of authors. This paper focuses on analysis of the table of cross-citations among a selection of Statistics journals. Data are collected from the Web of Science database published by Thomson Reuters. Our results suggest that modelling the exchange of citations between journals is useful to highlight the most prestigious journals, but also that journal citation data are characterized by considerable heterogeneity, which needs to be properly summarized. Inferential conclusions require care in order to avoid potential over-interpretation of insignificant differences between journal ratings. Comparison with published ratings of institutions from the UK's Research Assessment Exercise shows strong correlation at aggregate level between assessed research quality and journal citation `export scores' within the discipline of Statistics.

An exploratory, descriptive analysis is presented of the national orientation of scientific, scholarly journals as reflected in the affiliations of publishing or citing authors. It calculates for journals covered in Scopus an Index of National Orientation (INO), and analyses the distribution of INO values across disciplines and countries, and the correlation between INO values and journal impact factors. The study did not find solid evidence that journal impact factors are good measures of journal internationality in terms of the geographical distribution of publishing or citing authors, as the relationship between a journal's national orientation and its citation impact is found to be inverse U-shaped. In addition, journals publishing in English are not necessarily internationally oriented in terms of the affiliations of publishing or citing authors; in social sciences and humanities also USA has their nationally oriented literatures. The paper examines the extent to which nationally oriented journals entering Scopus in earlier years, have become in recent years more international. It is found that in the study set about 40 per cent of such journals does reveal traces of internati

What does Artificial Intelligence (AI) have to contribute to health care? And what should we be looking out for if we are worried about its risks? In this paper we offer a survey, and initial evaluation, of hopes and fears about the applications of artificial intelligence in medicine. AI clearly has enormous potential as a research tool, in genomics and public health especially, as well as a diagnostic aid. It's also highly likely to impact on the organisational and business practices of healthcare systems in ways that are perhaps under-appreciated. Enthusiasts for AI have held out the prospect that it will free physicians up to spend more time attending to what really matters to them and their patients. We will argue that this claim depends upon implausible assumptions about the institutional and economic imperatives operating in contemporary healthcare settings. We will also highlight important concerns about privacy, surveillance, and bias in big data, as well as the risks of over trust in machines, the challenges of transparency, the deskilling of healthcare practitioners, the way AI reframes healthcare, and the implications of AI for the distribution of power in healthcare ins

Using the Scopus dataset (1996-2007) a grand matrix of aggregated journal-journal citations was constructed. This matrix can be compared in terms of the network structures with the matrix contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI). Since the Scopus database contains a larger number of journals and covers also the humanities, one would expect richer maps. However, the matrix is in this case sparser than in the case of the ISI data. This is due to (i) the larger number of journals covered by Scopus and (ii) the historical record of citations older than ten years contained in the ISI database. When the data is highly structured, as in the case of large journals, the maps are comparable, although one may have to vary a threshold (because of the differences in densities). In the case of interdisciplinary journals and journals in the social sciences and humanities, the new database does not add a lot to what is possible with the ISI databases.

Predatory journals are Open Access journals of highly questionable scientific quality. Such journals pretend to use peer review for quality assurance, and spam academics with requests for submissions, in order to collect author payments. In recent years predatory journals have received a lot of negative media. While much has been said about the harm that such journals cause to academic publishing in general, an overlooked aspect is how much articles in such journals are actually read and in particular cited, that is if they have any significant impact on the research in their fields. Other studies have already demonstrated that only some of the articles in predatory journals contain faulty and directly harmful results, while a lot of the articles present mediocre and poorly reported studies. We studied citation statistics over a five-year period in Google Scholar for 250 random articles published in such journals in 2014, and found an average of 2,6 citations per article and that 60 % of the articles had no citations at all. For comparison a random sample of articles published in the approximately 25,000 peer reviewed journals included in the Scopus index had an average of 18,1 cit

The launch of Google Scholar Metrics as a tool for assessing scientific journals may be serious competition for Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports, and for Scopus powered Scimago Journal Rank. A review of these bibliometric journal evaluation products is performed. We compare their main characteristics from different approaches: coverage, indexing policies, search and visualization, bibliometric indicators, results analysis options, economic cost and differences in their ranking of journals. Despite its shortcomings, Google Scholar Metrics is a helpful tool for authors and editors in identifying core journals. As an increasingly useful tool for ranking scientific journals, it may also challenge established journals products

A number of journal classification systems have been developed in bibliometrics since the launch of the Citation Indices by the Institute of Scientific Information (ISI) in the 1960s. These systems are used to normalize citation counts with respect to field-specific citation patterns. The best known system is the so-called "Web-of-Science Subject Categories" (WCs). In other systems papers are classified by algorithmic solutions. Using the Journal Citation Reports 2014 of the Science Citation Index and the Social Science Citation Index (n of journals = 11,149), we examine options for developing a new system based on journal classifications into subject categories using aggregated journal-journal citation data. Combining routines in VOSviewer and Pajek, a tree-like classification is developed. At each level one can generate a map of science for all the journals subsumed under a category. Nine major fields are distinguished at the top level. Further decomposition of the social sciences is pursued for the sake of example with a focus on journals in information science (LIS) and science studies (STS). The new classification system improves on alternative options by avoiding the problem