Search (271 results, page 1 of 14)

0.05554341 = product of:
  0.11108682 = sum of:
    0.11108682 = sum of:
      0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 4290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04014215 = score(doc=4290,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 4290, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4290)
      0.070944674 = weight(_text_:22 in 4290) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070944674 = score(doc=4290,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4290, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4290)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.3, S.169-190

0.05554341 = product of:
  0.11108682 = sum of:
    0.11108682 = sum of:
      0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04014215 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
      0.070944674 = weight(_text_:22 in 2682) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070944674 = score(doc=2682,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 2682, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=2682)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

17. 1.1999 10:44:22

0.05554341 = product of:
  0.11108682 = sum of:
    0.11108682 = sum of:
      0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 3563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04014215 = score(doc=3563,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 3563, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3563)
      0.070944674 = weight(_text_:22 in 3563) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070944674 = score(doc=3563,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 3563, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=3563)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.5, S.323-336

0.05554341 = product of:
  0.11108682 = sum of:
    0.11108682 = sum of:
      0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 4878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04014215 = score(doc=4878,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 4878, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4878)
      0.070944674 = weight(_text_:22 in 4878) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.070944674 = score(doc=4878,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.38690117 = fieldWeight in 4878, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4878)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

Subject gateways zu den Bereichen: Business economics - The virtual music library - clinical information - food science and food technology - energy technology

Date

22. 6.2002 19:41:31

0.0510857 = product of:
  0.1021714 = sum of:
    0.1021714 = sum of:
      0.04541566 = weight(_text_:science in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04541566 = score(doc=3283,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.3292649 = fieldWeight in 3283, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3283)
      0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 3283) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05675574 = score(doc=3283,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3283, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3283)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Part 12 of a continuing series of articles reporting new online, CD-ROM and other electronic databases in the fields of science, technology and medicine; summarizing and commenting on the new databases. The databases are taken from newly announced databases in the Gale Directory of Databases

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.4, S.263-274

0.046120957 = product of:
  0.09224191 = sum of:
    0.09224191 = sum of:
      0.056769572 = weight(_text_:science in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.056769572 = score(doc=2352,freq=16.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.41158113 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
            4.0 = tf(freq=16.0), with freq of:
              16.0 = termFreq=16.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 2352) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=2352,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2352, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2352)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This study examines the differences between Scopus and Web of Science in the citation counting, citation ranking, and h-index of 22 top human-computer interaction (HCI) researchers from EQUATOR - a large British Interdisciplinary Research Collaboration project. Results indicate that Scopus provides significantly more coverage of HCI literature than Web of Science, primarily due to coverage of relevant ACM and IEEE peer-reviewed conference proceedings. No significant differences exist between the two databases if citations in journals only are compared. Although broader coverage of the literature does not significantly alter the relative citation ranking of individual researchers, Scopus helps distinguish between the researchers in a more nuanced fashion than Web of Science in both citation counting and h-index. Scopus also generates significantly different maps of citation networks of individual scholars than those generated by Web of Science. The study also presents a comparison of h-index scores based on Google Scholar with those based on the union of Scopus and Web of Science. The study concludes that Scopus can be used as a sole data source for citation-based research and evaluation in HCI, especially when citations in conference proceedings are sought, and that researchers should manually calculate h scores instead of relying on system calculations.

Object

Web of Science

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 59(2008) no.11, S.1711-1726

0.04443473 = product of:
  0.08886946 = sum of:
    0.08886946 = sum of:
      0.03211372 = weight(_text_:science in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.03211372 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.23282544 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
      0.05675574 = weight(_text_:22 in 3687) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.05675574 = score(doc=3687,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 3687, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=3687)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 5.1999 19:07:29

Source

Journal of information science. 24(1998) no.6, S.419-429

0.042141877 = product of:
  0.084283754 = sum of:
    0.084283754 = sum of:
      0.041716952 = weight(_text_:science in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.041716952 = score(doc=2358,freq=6.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.30244917 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
            2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
              6.0 = termFreq=6.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
      0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 2358) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042566802 = score(doc=2358,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 2358, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=2358)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

A naïve user seeking introductory information on a topic may perceive a domain as it is shown by the search results in a database; however, inconsistencies in indexing can misrepresent the full picture of the domain by including irrelevant documents or omitting relevant ones, sometimes inexplicably. A bibliometric analysis was conducted on the domain of ethics in knowledge organization in the World of Science (WoS) and Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts (LISTA) databases to discern how it is being presented by search results in those databases and to attempt to determine why inconsistencies occurred.

Date

17. 2.2018 16:50:22

Object

World of Science

0.038314275 = product of:
  0.07662855 = sum of:
    0.07662855 = sum of:
      0.034061745 = weight(_text_:science in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.034061745 = score(doc=1540,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.24694869 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
      0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 1540) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042566802 = score(doc=1540,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 1540, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1540)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

18.11.2014 13:22:03

Series

Advances in information science

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 65(2014) no.12, S.2381-2403

0.03780724 = product of:
  0.07561448 = sum of:
    0.07561448 = sum of:
      0.04014215 = weight(_text_:science in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.04014215 = score(doc=228,freq=8.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.2910318 = fieldWeight in 228, product of:
            2.828427 = tf(freq=8.0), with freq of:
              8.0 = termFreq=8.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=228)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 228) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=228,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 228, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=228)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Presents a brief, critical review of LISA PLaus: the CD-ROM database version of LISA and which includes the database of Current Research in Library and Information Science (CRLIS). The review covers the DOS version only, as it appeared in the Summer 1996 CD-ROM, noting that the Windows version was planned for the future. Points to the way LISA has found its mark, if not its fortune, in LISA Plus and notes its strengths, including: ideal suitability for current awareness in library and information science (LIS); massive and convenient consolidation of the published LIS literature; and massive increase in coverage from 7.900 abstracts in 1993 to over 12.000 currently. Criticizes certain features of LISA Plus, notably: the OPTI-Ware search interface; the combination of 2 databases (LISA and CRLIS) in a single, searchable database; and certain unexpected effects caused by the building of the Subject and Free Text indexes. Points particularly to great lack of consistency in the indexes and the indexing (faults that were fully rectified by a complete overhaul of the data in Summer 1996). Notes that LISA Plus is the first port of call for both information researchers and information science students. The Windows version of LISA Plus was launched in Spring 1997

Date

9. 2.1997 18:44:22

Source

Journal of librarianship and information science. 29(1997) no.3, A.161-162

0.035115823 = product of:
  0.07023165 = sum of:
    0.07023165 = product of:
      0.1404633 = sum of:
        0.1404633 = weight(_text_:22 in 502) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.1404633 = score(doc=502,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.76602525 = fieldWeight in 502, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.109375 = fieldNorm(doc=502)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

3. 5.1997 8:44:22
22. 9.2003 10:02:00

0.034652654 = product of:
  0.06930531 = sum of:
    0.06930531 = product of:
      0.20791592 = sum of:
        0.20791592 = weight(_text_:3a in 5669) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.20791592 = score(doc=5669,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.44393432 = queryWeight, product of:
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.46834838 = fieldWeight in 5669, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=5669)
      0.33333334 = coord(1/3)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Content

"Die Englischsprachige Wikipedia verfügt jetzt über mehr als 6 Millionen Artikel. An zweiter Stelle kommt die deutschsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.3 Millionen Artikeln, an dritter Stelle steht die französischsprachige Wikipedia mit 2.1 Millionen Artikeln (via Researchbuzz: Firehose <https://rbfirehose.com/2020/01/24/techcrunch-wikipedia-now-has-more-than-6-million-articles-in-english/> und Techcrunch <https://techcrunch.com/2020/01/23/wikipedia-english-six-million-articles/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Techcrunch+%28TechCrunch%29&guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9yYmZpcmVob3NlLmNvbS8yMDIwLzAxLzI0L3RlY2hjcnVuY2gtd2lraXBlZGlhLW5vdy1oYXMtbW9yZS10aGFuLTYtbWlsbGlvbi1hcnRpY2xlcy1pbi1lbmdsaXNoLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAK0zHfjdDZ_spFZBF_z-zDjtL5iWvuKDumFTzm4HvQzkUfE2pLXQzGS6FGB_y-VISdMEsUSvkNsg2U_NWQ4lwWSvOo3jvXo1I3GtgHpP8exukVxYAnn5mJspqX50VHIWFADHhs5AerkRn3hMRtf_R3F1qmEbo8EROZXp328HMC-o>). 250120 via digithek ch = #fineBlog s.a.: Angesichts der Veröffentlichung des 6-millionsten Artikels vergangene Woche in der englischsprachigen Wikipedia hat die Community-Zeitungsseite "Wikipedia Signpost" ein Moratorium bei der Veröffentlichung von Unternehmensartikeln gefordert. Das sei kein Vorwurf gegen die Wikimedia Foundation, aber die derzeitigen Maßnahmen, um die Enzyklopädie gegen missbräuchliches undeklariertes Paid Editing zu schützen, funktionierten ganz klar nicht. *"Da die ehrenamtlichen Autoren derzeit von Werbung in Gestalt von Wikipedia-Artikeln überwältigt werden, und da die WMF nicht in der Lage zu sein scheint, dem irgendetwas entgegenzusetzen, wäre der einzige gangbare Weg für die Autoren, fürs erste die Neuanlage von Artikeln über Unternehmen zu untersagen"*, schreibt der Benutzer Smallbones in seinem Editorial <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2020-01-27/From_the_editor> zur heutigen Ausgabe."

0.033326045 = product of:
  0.06665209 = sum of:
    0.06665209 = sum of:
      0.024085289 = weight(_text_:science in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.024085289 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.17461908 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
      0.042566802 = weight(_text_:22 in 3460) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.042566802 = score(doc=3460,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.23214069 = fieldWeight in 3460, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3460)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

1. 6.2010 10:13:22

Source

Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 61(2010) no.6, S.1198-1212

0.03192856 = product of:
  0.06385712 = sum of:
    0.06385712 = sum of:
      0.028384786 = weight(_text_:science in 6543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028384786 = score(doc=6543,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 6543, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6543)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 6543) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=6543,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 6543, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=6543)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

29. 9.2001 20:22:45

Series

Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science; vol.36

Source

Knowledge: creation, organization and use. Proceedings of the 62nd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science, 31.10.-4.11.1999. Ed.: L. Woods

0.03192856 = product of:
  0.06385712 = sum of:
    0.06385712 = sum of:
      0.028384786 = weight(_text_:science in 2952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.028384786 = score(doc=2952,freq=4.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.20579056 = fieldWeight in 2952, product of:
            2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
              4.0 = termFreq=4.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2952)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 2952) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=2952,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 2952, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=2952)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Literaturflut. Medizinische Forschung gibt es nicht nur in Forschungsinstituten mit vielerlei Spezialgebieten wie Vergiftungen, Krebsforschung, Zellbiologie usw., sondern auch in Universitätsklinika, Spezialkliniken und nicht zuletzt in der pharmazeutischen Industrie. Ärzte sind fleißige Schreiber, die auch über Kasuistiken, retrospektive Auswertungen der Krankenakten, prospektive Erhebungen, klinische Studien und natürlich auch über vielerlei Laborforschung, Versuche mit Zellkulturen und über Tierversuche berichten. Hinzu kommt Literatur von Institutionen und Firmen, die Medizingeräte (z.B. Beatmungsgeräte, Narkosegeräte, chirurgisches Instrumentarium, Röntgengeräte usw.) oder Medizinprodukte (z.B. Verbandsmaterial, Prothesen, Nahtmaterial, orthopädische Hilfen) herstellen. Vermutlich ist die Literaturflut in der Medizin größer als in jedem anderen Fachgebiet. Datenbasen und Datenbanken. Die derzeit wichtigsten Datenbasen für die medizinische Literaturdokumentation sind MEDLINE der US National Library of Medicine (siehe Glossar), BIOSIS, hergestellt von BIOSciences Information Service, EMBASE, hergestellt von Elsevier Science B.V. sowie eine ganze Reihe von Datenbasen mit Spezialgebieten wie z.B. TOXLINE. Der wichtigste Anbieter medizinischer Datenbanken in Deutschland ist das Deutsche Institut für Medizinische Dokumentation und Information (DIMDI) in Köln, das 90 Datenbanken mit zusammen über 100 Millionen Dokumenten anbietet. Die Bedeutung der medizinischen Literatur zeigt sich auch am Science Citation Index (SCI). Im SCI sind 2345 medizinische Zeitschriften erfasst. Das sind 39% aller 6073 vom SCI erfassten naturwissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften. Nimmt man den Social-SCI mit 1798 Zeitschriften und den Art and Humanities-CI mit 1133 Zeitschriften noch hinzu, so haben die medizinischen Zeitschriften immer noch einen Anteil von 26%. Hinzu kommt, dass medizinische Zeitschriften meist mehr Hefte pro Jahr und dickere Hefte haben als die Zeitschriften anderer Fachgebiete.

Date

5. 4.2013 10:22:15

0.02837787 = product of:
  0.05675574 = sum of:
    0.05675574 = product of:
      0.11351148 = sum of:
        0.11351148 = weight(_text_:22 in 4085) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.11351148 = score(doc=4085,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.61904186 = fieldWeight in 4085, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.125 = fieldNorm(doc=4085)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

7.11.1999 18:22:39

0.027771706 = product of:
  0.05554341 = sum of:
    0.05554341 = sum of:
      0.020071074 = weight(_text_:science in 3779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020071074 = score(doc=3779,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 3779, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3779)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 3779) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=3779,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 3779, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=3779)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

Vorbemerkung: zur aktuellen Problematik im Zeitschriftenwesen Derzeit kann auf einschlägigen Fachveranstaltungen und Expertlnnentagungen oftmals (großteils berechtigte) Kritik am Verlags- und Zeitschriftenwesen vernommen werden. Mitunter werden regelrechte Zeitschriftenkrisen oder gar Informationskrisen ausgerufen, um im Anschluss daran auch gleich passende Auswege aufzuzeigen. Solche Geschütze werden hier nicht aufgefahren, doch soll mit Rückgriff auf Harnad u.a. (2004) kurz ein Schlaglicht auf die existierende Problematik im Zeitschriftenwesen geworfen werden. Einerseits leiden Bibliotheken unter dem so genannten Preisproblem (journal-affordability problem), womit gemeint ist, dass es aufgrund der Preisentwicklung wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften für Bibliotheken zunehmend schwieriger wird, diese gedruckt oder elektronisch zu erwerben. Verbunden mit knapper werdenden Ressourcen sind hier Engpässe in der Informationsversorgung unvermeidlich. Daraus resultiert eine zweite Facette dieser Problemlage, nämlich dass - aus der Autorlnnensicht - viel an potentiellem Impact aufgrund der Nichtverfügbarkeit der Forschungsliteratur ungenutzt bleibt (article-access/impact problem). Als Impact wird dabei das Ausmaß der Rezeption der Forschungsergebnisse in der Scientific Community definiert. Viel spricht dafür, dass Open Access tatsächlich als möglicher Lösungsweg für diese beiden unterschiedlichen, aber zusammenhängenden Problemlagen gesehen werden kann. In diesem Artikel wird deshalb kurz aufgezeigt, was man unter Open Access versteht; anschließend wird das Volltextarchiv E-LIS: E-Prints in Library and Information Science etwas genauervorgestellt. Wir sind nämlich der Meinung, dass BibliothekarInnen und Informationsexpertinnen Open Access nicht nur bewerben und einfordern, sondern selbst mit gutem Beispiel vorangehen und deshalb möglichst alle ihre bibliotheks- und informationswissenschaftlichen Schriften entsprechend publizieren sollten.

Date

6.11.2005 12:33:22

0.027771706 = product of:
  0.05554341 = sum of:
    0.05554341 = sum of:
      0.020071074 = weight(_text_:science in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.020071074 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.13793045 = queryWeight, product of:
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.1455159 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            2.6341193 = idf(docFreq=8627, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
      0.035472337 = weight(_text_:22 in 34) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.035472337 = score(doc=34,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.052363027 = queryNorm
          0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 34, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=34)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

12.11.2020 13:22:09

Source

Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 71(2020) no.12, S.1484-1499

0.02508273 = product of:
  0.05016546 = sum of:
    0.05016546 = product of:
      0.10033092 = sum of:
        0.10033092 = weight(_text_:22 in 183) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10033092 = score(doc=183,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 183, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=183)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 2.1999 17:50:37

Source

Online and CD-ROM review. 22(1998) no.4, S.277-279

0.02508273 = product of:
  0.05016546 = sum of:
    0.05016546 = product of:
      0.10033092 = sum of:
        0.10033092 = weight(_text_:22 in 4872) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.10033092 = score(doc=4872,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.1833664 = queryWeight, product of:
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.052363027 = queryNorm
            0.54716086 = fieldWeight in 4872, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
              0.078125 = fieldNorm(doc=4872)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Date

22. 6.2002 19:40:22