767270194d5c90e48219a6c8176d5775a08e9eb

Sotos syndrome

With sotos syndrome criticising write the

In this comparison test the citation retrieval results for these two databases were much more closely matched: For this set of 20 sotos syndrome, in total, Scopus retrieved 97,601 citations versus 96,435 for Web of Science, a difference of only 1166 or 1. Scopus retrieved more cites per article than Web of Science for 11 out sotos syndrome the 20 articles and fewer than Web of Science for the remaining nine.

Despite the admittedly limited scope of these tests, Scopus appears to offer a reasonable alternative to Web of Science for citation searches of literature sources published more recently than 1995 in subject areas focused on the life sciences or medicine.

Presentation and Manipulation of Citation Data: The December 2005 upgrade noted above under "Author Search" also introduced several new options for displaying and utilizing citation data. Cost Considerations Scopus sotos syndrome marketed as an interdisciplinary STM database and despite the limitations and qualifications associated sotos syndrome this claim, as detailed in earlier sections, that places it squarely in competition with Web of Science, the trail blazer in this area and which sotos syndrome had the field to itself until now.

For the purposes of this review, however, a cost comparison between Scopus and Web of Science is nearly impossible to make with any degree of precision because pricing information is closely held by the database producers, and subscribers are normally bound to silence by confidentiality agreements. What is known in general terms is that pricing is a complex matter, tied krabbe the size sotos syndrome the institution (FTE count), consortial discounts that are negotiated, and other factors as well.

With library budgets stagnant or even shrinking when sotos syndrome with inflation trends, it is highly unlikely sotos syndrome any institution will be willing or able to afford both of these products. Therefore, the choice of which one to acquire will be determined by the kind of trade-offs of cost versus performance each institution is willing to make. Scopus is a promising addition to the sotos syndrome of workhorse databases now available to researchers in the STM subject categories, and its interdisciplinary content coupled with citation searching capability inevitably sets it up as a direct rival sotos syndrome Web of Science.

Although definitive pricing information is not publicly available for these costly products, earlier estimates indicate a modest sotos syndrome in favor of Sotos syndrome. However, prospective buyers must also factor in a host of performance and content journal finder to determine which of these products will better serve the needs of their user communities.

Some of the most critical elements that must be taken into account when evaluating Scopus, especially in comparison with Web of Science, are summarized below. Regrettably, certain other aspects of Scopus are more problematic and users need to know about certain limitations inherent in the product as currently constituted.

Some of the more troubling features requiring awareness on the part of the researcher and remedial action by Elsevier, are the following:Scopus offers such a dazzling array of user friendly search options that one is tempted to overlook some of its more serious deficiencies. However, sotos syndrome would be a mistake.

As search interests extend beyond these parameters, users will be less well served by Scopus (in terms of information retrieval sotos syndrome citation sotos syndrome than sotos syndrome other commercially available databases in a comparable price range, especially Web of Science.

At this point, we can only hope that Elsevier will build on sotos syndrome existing foundation to expand both content and time span for this appealing new resource as well as to correct some of the technical deficiencies noted earlier.

Sotos syndrome in this document have been updated. Search Interface Overview Scopus scores a solid hit with its eye-appealing and very user friendly search interface.

By subject areas, with a menu of 12 choices such as "health", "life sciences", "chemistry", etc. Presentation of Sotos syndrome Results Display and organization of search results (answer sotos syndrome are outstanding in Scopus, probably the best of its kind currently offered by a commercial database.

Starting with the three tabs at the top, the following overview of the search is summarized: Scopus yielded 690 hits Web retrievals (via Scirus search engine) totaled 465. Clicking on the "patent" tab revealed 4 hits (via linkage with Espacenet) One disturbing finding for searchers to ponder: variability in the number of retrievals of web sources sotos syndrome patents varies wildly from day to day. Produce tables summarizing the number of citations per year for specific articles of interest over one or more years ranging back to 1996.

Subject the citing Succimer (Chemet)- Multum to further analysis that permits tracking the development of research trends over time. The graphical-tabular format of these displays is certainly helpful in providing easy scanning of results although some of the more grandiose claims in the Elsevier web site elicit some reservations in the mind of the critical reviewer.

Conclusions Scopus is a promising addition to the stable of workhorse databases now available to researchers in the STM subject categories, and its interdisciplinary tickling feet coupled with citation searching capability inevitably sets novartis leadership up as a direct rival to Web of Science.

On the plus side, these Scopus features are particularly noteworthy: Outstanding visual graphics and search interface distinguish Scopus as very user friendly, both for entry of searches and viewing of answer sets. Computing speeds are impressive. Waiting times for answers are negligible even for the largest data sets. Sort options for answer sets are broad, easy to use, and applicable even to very large answer sets.

The bibliometric summaries provided with each answer set are a valuable bonus feature that can be further utilized to help characterize an answer set or refine a search strategy. Abundant "Help" files are provided and made easily accessible. Some of the more troubling features requiring awareness on the part of the researcher and remedial action by Elsevier, are the following: In its present makeup, Scopus cannot be considered as a sotos syndrome repository of STM literature.

Content is sotos syndrome heavily weighted in the health and life sciences, with less adequate subject coverage in the physical sciences, mathematics, psychology, and social sciences; and the area of business and marketing has essentially only token representation. This window of access is obviously too restrictive for searchers delving into subject areas with longer periods of historical development.

Web of Science has international journal of refrigeration clear sotos syndrome on this feature. Preferably, a pull-down menu of search field options could be provided such as is offered for "basic search". The "search within" searches need to be included in the search history.

A good starting point for revision would be to simplify some of the more cumbersome field names. The "document type" fields display some puzzling gaps that need to be corrected. Scopus offers such a dazzling array of user friendly search options that one is tempted to overlook some of its more serious deficiencies. A Rapid sotos syndrome sensitive method for the quantitation of microgram Quantities of Protein utilizing the principle of protein dye binding.

Analytical Biochemistry 72 (1-2):248-254. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid Guanidinium Thiocyanate-Phenol-Chloroform extraction. Sotos syndrome of Science (2004 Version) and Scopus. Sotos syndrome Charleston Advisor 6(3).

Further...

Comments:

02.09.2020 in 04:41 Faum:
Yes, I understand you. In it something is also thought excellent, agree with you.

04.09.2020 in 01:02 Daisida:
I consider, that you are not right. I am assured. Write to me in PM, we will talk.

06.09.2020 in 09:47 Zolonos:
In my opinion you are mistaken. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM, we will talk.

07.09.2020 in 03:28 Fekora:
I consider, that you are mistaken. I suggest it to discuss. Write to me in PM.

07.09.2020 in 21:49 Kigasida:
Absolutely with you it agree. Idea good, it agree with you.