搜索结果：Journal of environmental health science & engineering

Citation network analysis has become one of methods to study how scientific knowledge flows from one domain to another. Health informatics is a multidisciplinary field that includes social science, software engineering, behavioral science, medical science and others. In this study, we perform an analysis of citation statistics from health informatics journals using data set extracted from CrossRef. For each health informatics journal, we extract the number of citations from/to studies related to computer science, medicine/clinical medicine and other fields, including the number of self-citations from the health informatics journal. With a similar number of articles used in our analysis, we show that the Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (JAMIA) has more in-citations than the Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR); while JMIR has a higher number of out-citations and self-citations. We also show that JMIR cites more articles from health informatics journals and medicine related journals. In addition, the Journal of Medical Systems (JMS) cites more articles from computer science journals compared with other health informatics journals included in our analysi

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

The ability of Generative AI (GAI) technology to automatically check, synthesize and modify software engineering artifacts promises to revolutionize all aspects of software engineering. Using GAI for software engineering tasks is consequently one of the most rapidly expanding fields of software engineering research, with over a hundred LLM-based code models having been published since 2021. However, the overwhelming majority of existing code models share a major weakness - they are exclusively trained on the syntactic facet of software, significantly lowering their trustworthiness in tasks dependent on software semantics. To address this problem, a new class of "Morescient" GAI is needed that is "aware" of (i.e., trained on) both the semantic and static facets of software. This, in turn, will require a new generation of software observation platforms capable of generating large quantities of execution observations in a structured and readily analyzable way. In this paper, we present a vision and roadmap for how such "Morescient" GAI models can be engineered, evolved and disseminated according to the principles of open science.

The journal structure in the China Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations Database (CSTPCD) is analysed from three perspectives: the database level, the specialty level and the institutional level (i.e., university journals versus journals issued by the Chinese Academy of Sciences). The results are compared with those for (Chinese) journals included in the Science Citation Index. The frequency of journal-journal citation relations in the CSTPCD is an order of magnitude lower than in the SCI. Chinese journals, especially high-quality journals, prefer to cite international journals rather than domestic ones. However, Chinese journals do not get an equivalent reception from their international counterparts. The international visibility of Chinese journals is low, but varies among fields of science. Journals of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) have a better reception in the international scientific community than university journals.

Growth of the older adult population has led to an increasing interest in technology-supported aged care. However, the area has some challenges such as a lack of caregivers and limitations in understanding the emotional, social, physical, and mental well-being needs of seniors. Furthermore, there is a gap in the understanding between developers and ageing people of their requirements. Digital health can be important in supporting older adults wellbeing, emotional requirements, and social needs. Requirements Engineering (RE) is a major software engineering field, which can help to identify, elicit and prioritize the requirements of stakeholders and ensure that the systems meet standards for performance, reliability, and usability. We carried out a systematic review of the literature on RE for older adult digital health software. This was necessary to show the representatives of the current stage of understanding the needs of older adults in aged care digital health. Using established guidelines outlined by the Kitchenham method, the PRISMA and the PICO guideline, we developed a protocol, followed by the systematic exploration of eight databases. This resulted in 69 primary studies o

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

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

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.

Hydro-Science and Engineering (Hydro-SE) is a critical and irreplaceable domain that secures human water supply, generates clean hydropower energy, and mitigates flood and drought disasters. Featuring multiple engineering objectives, Hydro-SE is an inherently interdisciplinary domain that integrates scientific knowledge with engineering expertise. This integration necessitates extensive expert collaboration in decision-making, which poses difficulties for intelligence. With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), their potential application in the Hydro-SE domain is being increasingly explored. However, the knowledge and application abilities of LLMs in Hydro-SE have not been sufficiently evaluated. To address this issue, we propose the Hydro-SE LLM evaluation benchmark (Hydro-SE Bench), which contains 4,000 multiple-choice questions. Hydro-SE Bench covers nine subfields and enables evaluation of LLMs in aspects of basic conceptual knowledge, engineering application ability, and reasoning and calculation ability. The evaluation results on Hydro-SE Bench show that the accuracy values vary among 0.74 to 0.80 for commercial LLMs, and among 0.41 to 0.68 for small-paramet

There has been growing interest within the computational science and engineering (CSE) community in engaging with software engineering research -- the systematic study of software systems and their development, operation, and maintenance -- to solve challenges in scientific software development. Historically, there has been little interaction between scientific computing and the field, which has held back progress. With the ranks of scientific software teams expanding to include software engineering researchers and practitioners, we can work to build bridges to software science and reap the rewards of evidence-based practice in software development.

Open science describes the movement of making any research artefact available to the public and includes, but is not limited to, open access, open data, and open source. While open science is becoming generally accepted as a norm in other scientific disciplines, in software engineering, we are still struggling in adapting open science to the particularities of our discipline, rendering progress in our scientific community cumbersome. In this chapter, we reflect upon the essentials in open science for software engineering including what open science is, why we should engage in it, and how we should do it. We particularly draw from our experiences made as conference chairs implementing open science initiatives and as researchers actively engaging in open science to critically discuss challenges and pitfalls, and to address more advanced topics such as how and under which conditions to share preprints, what infrastructure and licence model to cover, or how do it within the limitations of different reviewing models, such as double-blind reviewing. Our hope is to help establishing a common ground and to contribute to make open science a norm also in software engineering.

Software plays a central role in scientific discovery. Improving how we develop and use software for research can have both broad and deep impacts on a spectrum of challenges and opportunities society faces today. The emergence of Research Software Engineer (RSE) as a role correlates with the growing complexity of scientific challenges and diversity of software team skills. In this paper, we describe research software science (RSS), an idea related to RSE, and particularly suited to research software teams. RSS promotes the use of scientific methodologies to explore and establish broadly applicable knowledge. Using RSS, we can pursue sustainable, repeatable, and reproducible software improvements that positively impact research software toward improved scientific discovery.

Using the CD-ROM version of the Science Citation Index 2010 (N = 3,705 journals), we study the (combined) effects of (i) fractional counting on the impact factor (IF) and (ii) transformation of the skewed citation distributions into a distribution of 100 percentiles and six percentile rank classes (top-1%, top-5%, etc.). Do these approaches lead to field-normalized impact measures for journals? In addition to the two-year IF (IF2), we consider the five-year IF (IF5), the respective numerators of these IFs, and the number of Total Cites, counted both as integers and fractionally. These various indicators are tested against the hypothesis that the classification of journals into 11 broad fields by PatentBoard/National Science Foundation provides statistically significant between-field effects. Using fractional counting the between-field variance is reduced by 91.7% in the case of IF5, and by 79.2% in the case of IF2. However, the differences in citation counts are not significantly affected by fractional counting. These results accord with previous studies, but the longer citation window of a fractionally counted IF5 can lead to significant improvement in the normalization across fie

Using three years of the Journal Citation Reports (2011, 2012, and 2013), indicators of transitions in 2012 (between 2011 and 2013) are studied using methodologies based on entropy statistics. Changes can be indicated at the level of journals using the margin totals of entropy production along the row or column vectors, but also at the level of links among journals by importing the transition matrices into network analysis and visualization programs (and using community-finding algorithms). Seventy-four journals are flagged in terms of discontinuous changes in their citations; but 3,114 journals are involved in "hot" links. Most of these links are embedded in a main component; 78 clusters (containing 172 journals) are flagged as potential "hot spots" emerging at the network level. An additional finding is that PLoS ONE introduced a new communication dynamics into the database. The limitations of the methodology are elaborated using an example. The results of the study indicate where developments in the citation dynamics can be considered as significantly unexpected. This can be used as heuristic information; but what a "hot spot" in terms of the entropy statistics of aggregated cit

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.

Conference publications in computer science (CS) have attracted scholarly attention due to their unique status as a main research outlet unlike other science fields where journals are dominantly used for communicating research findings. One frequent research question has been how different conference and journal publications are, considering a paper as a unit of analysis. This study takes an author-based approach to analyze publishing patterns of 517,763 scholars who have ever published both in CS conferences and journals for the last 57 years, as recorded in DBLP. The analysis shows that the majority of CS scholars tend to make their scholarly debut, publish more papers, and collaborate with more coauthors in conferences than in journals. Importantly, conference papers seem to serve as a distinct channel of scholarly communication, not a mere preceding step to journal publications: coauthors and title words of authors across conferences and journals tend not to overlap much. This study corroborates findings of previous studies on this topic from a distinctive perspective and suggests that conference authorship in CS calls for more special attention from scholars and administrators

This Journal of Informetrics special issue aims to improve our understanding of the structure and dynamics of science by reviewing and advancing existing conceptualizations and models of scholarly activity. Several of these conceptualizations and models have visual manifestations supporting the combination and comparison of theories and approaches developed in different disciplines of science. Subsequently, we discuss challenges towards a theoretically grounded and practically useful science of science and provide a brief chronological review of relevant work. Then, we exemplarily present three conceptualizations of science that attempt to provide frameworks for the comparison and combination of existing approaches, theories, laws, and measurements. Finally, we discuss the contributions of and interlinkages among the eight papers included in this issue. Each paper makes a unique contribution towards conceptualizations and models of science and roots this contribution in a review and comparison with existing work.

Mobile health has the potential to revolutionize health care delivery and patient engagement. In this work, we discuss how integrating Artificial Intelligence into digital health applications-focused on supply chain, patient management, and capacity building, among other use cases-can improve the health system and public health performance. We present an Artificial Intelligence and Reinforcement Learning platform that allows the delivery of adaptive interventions whose impact can be optimized through experimentation and real-time monitoring. The system can integrate multiple data sources and digital health applications. The flexibility of this platform to connect to various mobile health applications and digital devices and send personalized recommendations based on past data and predictions can significantly improve the impact of digital tools on health system outcomes. The potential for resource-poor settings, where the impact of this approach on health outcomes could be more decisive, is discussed specifically. This framework is, however, similarly applicable to improving efficiency in health systems where scarcity is not an issue.

Using "Analyze Results" at the Web of Science, one can directly generate overlays onto global journal maps of science. The maps are based on the 10,000+ journals contained in the Journal Citation Reports (JCR) of the Science and Social Science Citation Indices (2011). The disciplinary diversity of the retrieval is measured in terms of Rao-Stirling's "quadratic entropy." Since this indicator of interdisciplinarity is normalized between zero and one, the interdisciplinarity can be compared among document sets and across years, cited or citing. The colors used for the overlays are based on Blondel et al.'s (2008) community-finding algorithms operating on the relations journals included in JCRs. The results can be exported from VOSViewer with different options such as proportional labels, heat maps, or cluster density maps. The maps can also be web-started and/or animated (e.g., using PowerPoint). The "citing" dimension of the aggregated journal-journal citation matrix was found to provide a more comprehensive description than the matrix based on the cited archive. The relations between local and global maps and their different functions in studying the sciences in terms of journal lit