168 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. Remember the book title and its genre. You will need to define the term "memoir," and recognize the publisher, title, and author for bibliographic information including the year of publication.

    Tags

    Annotators

  2. Oct 2022
  3. Sep 2022
    1. More important is the fact that recently some publishershave started to publish suitable publications not as solid books, but as file card collections.An example would be the Deutscher Karteiverlag [German File Card Publishing Company]from Berlin, which published a “Kartei der praktischen Medizin” [File Card of PracticalMedicine], published unter the co-authorship of doctors like R.F. Weiß, 1st edition (1930ff.).Not to be forgotten here is also: Schuster, Curt: Iconum Botanicarum Index, 1st edition,Dresden: Heinrich 1926

      As many people used slip boxes in 1930s Germany, publishers sold texts, not as typical books, but as file card collections!

      Link to: Suggestion that Scott Scheper publish his book on zettelkasten as a zettelkasten.

  4. Aug 2022
  5. Jul 2022
    1. Famously, Luswig Wittgenstein organized his thoughts this way. Also famously, he never completed his 'big book' - almost all of his books (On Certainty, Philosophical Investigations, Zettel, etc.) were compiled by his students in the years after his death.

      I've not looked directly at Wittgenstein's note collection before, but it could be an interesting historical example.


      Might be worth collecting examples of what has happened to note collections after author's lives. Some obviously have been influential in scholarship, but generally they're subsumed by the broader category of a person's "papers" which are often archived at libraries, museums, and other institutions.

      Examples: - Vincentius Placcius' collection used by his students - Niklas Luhmann's zettelkasten which is being heavily studied by Johannes F.K. Schmidt - Mortimer J. Adler - was his kept? where is it stored?

      Posthumously published note card collections - Ludwig Wittgenstein - Walter Benjamin's Arcades Project - Ronald Reagan's collection at his presidential library, though it is more of an commonplace book collection of quotes which was later published - Roland Barthes' Mourning Diary - Vladimir Nabokov's The Original of Laura - others...


      Just as note collections serve an autobiographical function, perhaps they may also serve as an intellectual autobiographical function? Wittgenstein never managed to complete his 'big book', but in some sense, doesn't his collection of note cards serve this function for those willing to explore it all?


      I'd previously suggested that Scott P. Scheper publish not only his book on note taking, but to actually publish his note cards as a stand-alone zettelkasten example to go with them. What if this sort of publishing practice were more commonplace? The modern day equivalent is more likely a person's blog or their wiki. Not enough people are publicly publishing their notes to see what this practice might look like for future generations.

  6. Apr 2022
  7. Mar 2022
    1. youtube

      YouTube constituyó una fuente de materiales audiovisuales que muchos maestros implementaron como recurso y forma de divulgación. Por otro lado, la plataforma TEAMS brindada por la SED permitió más opciones de trabajo desde sus funciones, sin embargo, es una plataforma muy pesada para cualquier dispositivo o computador y requiere de una banda ancha de internet lo que hizo fue dificultar el acceso pues meet, zoom ... son más sencillas, amables y menos pesadas. Se obligó a las instituciones a implementar Teams sin tener en cuenta las características y necesidades de la mayoría de los estudiantes de las instituciones públicas.

  8. Jan 2022
  9. Nov 2021
    1. COVID-19 Living Evidence. (2021, November 12). As of 12.11.2021, we have indexed 257,633 publications: 18,674 pre-prints 238,959 peer-reviewed publications Pre-prints: BioRxiv, MedRxiv Peer-reviewed: PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO https://t.co/ytOhLG90Pi [Tweet]. @evidencelive. https://twitter.com/evidencelive/status/1459163720450519042

  10. Oct 2021
  11. Sep 2021
    1. Accepted: 19 June 2020

      I am guessing this is when it was actually published. It came out during the pandemic last year!

    Tags

    Annotators

  12. Aug 2021
  13. Jul 2021
  14. Jun 2021
    1. linking from preprints to their journal version 

      We developed a preprint-publication linker that is available on github. Details here:

      Cabanac, G., Oikonomidi, T., Boutron, I. (2021). Day-to-day discovery of preprint–publication links. Scientometrics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03900-7

      We daily track 572 preprints of COVID19 randomized controlled trials for the COVID-NMA project. The results of the linking and validation of preprint-publication pairs by epidemiologists are available here:

      https://www.irit.fr/~Guillaume.Cabanac/covid19-preprint-tracker

    1. we propose that the value of a well-run journal does not lie simply in providing publication technologies, but in the user community itself. Journals should be seen as a technology of social production and not as a communication technology.

      Such a powerful shift.

  15. May 2021
  16. Apr 2021
  17. Mar 2021
  18. Feb 2021
  19. Jan 2021
    1. The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It should not be retained or copied. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor. Reviewers and editors must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors' specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the article.

      Etika untuk Mitra Bestari

    2. The reviewer should have identified and commented on major strengths and weaknesses of study design and methodology The reviewer should comment accurately and constructively upon the quality of the author's interpretation of the data, including acknowledgment of its limitations. The reviewer should comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as a written communication, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the study. The reviewer should comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of low standards of scientific conduct. The reviewer should provide the author with useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. The reviewer's comments to the author should be constructive and professional The review should provide the editor the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.

      Poin-poin yang mejadi tolok ukur mitra bestari dalam melakukan review

    3. to provide written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for the journal

      Tujuan dari peninjauan sejawat (peer-review) adalah mengetahui kekuatan dan kelemahan naskah sehingga dapat dilakukan peningkatan mutu.

    4. Authorship

      semua orang yang berkontribusi secara substansial terhadap proses perencanaan, pengumpulan data, interpretasi hasil maupun penulisan dan merevisi naskah secara kritis dan menyetujui manuskrip versi akhir dan setuju untuk bertanggung jawab atas semua aspek pekerjaan. Setiap orang yang memenuhi kriteria pertama harus diizinkan berpartisipasi dalam penyusunan dan persetujuan manuskrip versi final (ICMJE 2017). Penulis pertama haruslah seseorang yang berkontribusi paling banyak.

      https://www.ease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/doi.10.20316.ESE_.2018.44.e1.in_.pdf

    5. Animal experiments should require full compliance with local, national, ethical, and regulatory principles, and local licensing arrangements

      Demikian juga dengan penggunaan hewan sebayak objek kajian, harus mengikuti standar etika yang berlaku (Helsinki).

    6. Journals should have explicit policies as to whether these review board approvals must be documented by the authors, or simply attested to in their cover letter, and how they should be described in the manuscript itself

      Seminimal mungkin, penulis harus menyampaikan keputusan etik dari komisi etik dan lebih ideal lagi jika menyertakan surat keputusan bebas etiknya.

    7. For those investigators who do not have access to formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed

      Jika tidak memungkinkan untuk diperoleh hasil review etik, penulis seharusnya secara explisit menjelaskan apakah pelaksanaan kajian sesuai dengan Deklarasi Helsinki atau mereka memiliki pandangan lain.

    8. Documented review and approval from a formally constituted review board (Institutional Review Board or Ethics committee) should be required for all studies involving people, medical records, and human tissues

      Penulis harus menyertakan keterangan bebas review yang diterbitkan oleh komisi etik penelitian kesehatan.

    9. Fabrication, falsification, concealment, deceptive reporting, or misrepresentation of data constitute scientific misconduct

      Untuk mencapai kualitas terbaik pada ilmu pengetahuan yang diterbitkan, kajian harus terbebas dari permasalahan etika tersebut

  20. Dec 2020
    1. Stuaert Rtchie [@StuartJRitchie] (2020) This encapsulates the problem nicely. Sure, there’s a paper. But actually read it & what do you find? p-values mostly juuuust under .05 (a red flag) and a sample size that’s FAR less than “25m”. If you think this is in any way compelling evidence, you’ve totally been sold a pup. Twitter. Retrieved from:https://twitter.com/StuartJRitchie/status/1305963050302877697

    1. Following the model of open-source software, we can enter our ideas and expressions into public discourse

      This also isn't a well-aligned argument. Articles published in a for-profit journal are entered into the public discourse (although obviously not into the public domain). Unless public means "without cost", which I don't think it does.

      We might want to broaden this to include open-access, which is specific to publication models.

  21. Nov 2020
  22. Oct 2020
  23. Sep 2020
  24. Aug 2020
    1. If a prominent magazine like The Lancet is publishing such rubbish, who is to say smaller and less well financed magazines aren’t doing the same on a langer scale?

  25. Jul 2020
    1. "that text has been removed from the official version on the Apache site." This itself is also not good. If you post "official" records but then quietly edit them over time, I have no choice but to assume bad faith in all the records I'm shown by you. Why should I believe anything Apache board members claim was "minuted" but which in fact it turns out they might have just edited into their records days, weeks or years later? One of the things I particularly watch for in modern news media (where no physical artefact captures whatever "mistakes" are published as once happened with newspapers) is whether when they inevitably correct a mistake they _acknowledge_ that or they instead just silently change things.
  26. Jun 2020