ArticleMethods and protocols2021
Authorship Weightage Algorithm for Academic Publications: A New Calculation and ACES Webserver for Determining Expertise.
Article in Methods and protocols, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite the public availability, finding experts in any field when relying on academic publications can be challenging, especially with the use of jargons. Even after overcoming these issues, the discernment of expertise by authorship positions is often also absent in the many publication-based search platforms. Given that it is common in many academic fields for the research group lead or lab head to take the position of the last author, some of the existing authorship scoring systems that assign a decreasing weightage from the first author would not reflect the last author correctly. To address these problems, we incorporated natural language processing (Common Crawl using fastText) to retrieve related keywords when using jargons as well as a modified authorship positional scoring that allows the assignment of greater weightage to the last author. The resulting output is a ranked scoring system of researchers upon every search that we implemented as a webserver for internal use called the APD lab Capability & Expertise Search (ACES).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.