- Главная
- Английский язык
- Хорошие публикации
Содержание
- 2. Agenda Структура статьи, типичные ошибки Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи? Как понять интересна ли
- 3. О себе Профессор кафедры программной инженерии ИК Научные интересы: Мед. информатика, анализ данных, системы поддержки принятия
- 4. Структура статьи
- 5. Что и для кого мы публикуем Предмет исследования Цель to exchange the scientific knowledge to ask
- 6. IMRaD формат Introduction Methods Results and Discussion What problem was studied? What others and you did?
- 7. Introduction Begin by introducing the reader to the state of the art literature Important function: establish
- 8. Materials and Methods Main purpose: provide enough detail for competent worker to repeat study and reproduce
- 9. Results In the results section you present your findings: display items (figures and tables) are central
- 10. Discussion Now its time to interpret your results: Do they support your hypothesis? Are they in
- 11. Discussion – typical structure Statements of principal findings Strengths and weaknesses of your study Differences to
- 12. Conclusions – typical content Very brief revisit of the most important findings with a focus on
- 13. Типичные ошибки и проблемы
- 14. Как не нужно писать Вы сделали что-то впервые? Вы первый, кто занимается этой темой? У вашего
- 15. Основные ошибки Ссылаться только на себя или научного руководителя + классический учебник 1953 года Не сравнивать
- 16. Introduction – common mistakes A common mistake is to introduce authors and their areas of study
- 17. Results – common mistakes The results should be short and sweet. Do not say "It is
- 18. Discussion – common mistakes Discussion unrelated to the results Bad structure which meanders back and forth
- 19. Conclusions – common mistakes Copy and paste from other parts of the paper Treat it as
- 20. Avoid l o n g convoluted sentences "It is shown that area-averaged precipitation in “NoName” River
- 21. Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи?
- 22. What problem was studied? What others and you did? Your study area How do you did
- 23. Где публиковать?
- 24. Ведущие журналы
- 25. Как понять интересна ли статья мировой общественности или только автору? Как отличить действительно хорошую и перспективную
- 26. Хорошая статья Has exactly one, specific, thing to communicate a description of your new theory an
- 27. О чем писать статью О том, что вам интересно О том, что заботит научное сообщество О
- 28. Что читать Sciencedirect Pubmed WOS Scopus Читайте те журналы, где хотите публиковаться
- 29. Ответ на рецензии. Как правильно оформить ответ на рецензию? можно ли опровергнуть мнение рецензента?
- 30. Good practices Take your time to respond to the referees questions - The response to the
- 31. Общение с журналом Reviewer: 1 Comments to Author: Please provide sufficient comments to the author(s) to
- 32. Dear reviewers, Thank you very much for your valuable comments that helped to improve the manuscript.
- 33. Ракета Хирша http://rh.tpu.ru/
- 34. Управление Исследования Принятие решений Персонифицированность экспертных знаний Неполнота знаний предметной области Непроработанность стандартов Разнородность систем Региональная
- 35. Проекты Интеллектуальная информационная система мониторинга качества процесса оказания медицинской помощи и прогнозирования страховых выплат в рамках
- 36. Спасибо georgy.kopanitsa@gmail.com
- 37. Международные проекты
- 39. Как поучаствовать в проекте Что Вы можете предложить? Начните с малого Действуйте!
- 40. Варианты кооперации Совместный грант Работа в лаборатории
- 41. где искать партнеров и гранты https://www.researchgate.net/ https://www.daad.de
- 42. PhD
- 43. Зачем? Отличное начало научной карьеры Благосклонность работодателей Интересно и весело
- 44. Процесс защиты По совокупности трудов Диссертация 2 оппонента 3-4 месяца Совет 3-5 профессоров 3-4 месяца на
- 45. Что после защиты?
- 47. Скачать презентацию
Agenda
Структура статьи, типичные ошибки
Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи?
Как понять
Agenda
Структура статьи, типичные ошибки
Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи?
Как понять
Как отличить действительно хорошую и перспективную статью?
Ответ на рецензии. Как правильно оформить ответ на рецензию? Можно ли опровергнуть мнение рецензента?
О себе
Профессор кафедры программной инженерии ИК
Научные интересы:
Мед. информатика, анализ данных, системы
О себе
Профессор кафедры программной инженерии ИК
Научные интересы:
Мед. информатика, анализ данных, системы
Структура статьи
Структура статьи
Что и для кого мы публикуем
Предмет исследования
Цель
to exchange the scientific knowledge
to
Что и для кого мы публикуем
Предмет исследования
Цель
to exchange the scientific knowledge
to
Аудитория
scientists and those interested in the subject
a publisher or an editor
IMRaD формат
Introduction
Methods
Results and
Discussion
What problem was studied? What others and you did?
IMRaD формат
Introduction
Methods
Results and
Discussion
What problem was studied? What others and you did?
How do you did it?
What did you find out?
What do your findings mean?... Combine w/conclusion/summary and future plans
Introduction
Begin by introducing the reader to the state of the art
Introduction
Begin by introducing the reader to the state of the art
Important function: establish the significance of your current work: Why was there a need to conduct the study?
State clearly the scope and objectives. If possible, specify hypothesis
The introduction can finish with the statement of objectives
Materials and Methods
Main purpose: provide enough detail for competent worker to
Materials and Methods
Main purpose: provide enough detail for competent worker to
Equipment and materials available off the shelf should be described exactly
Sources of materials should be given if there is variation in quality among supplies.
Modifications to equipment or equipment constructed specifically be carefully described.
Usual order of presentation of methods is chronological
Be precise in describing measurements and include errors of measurement
Results
In the results section you present your findings: display items (figures
Results
In the results section you present your findings: display items (figures
Present the data, digested and condensed, with important trends extracted and described.
Results comprise the new knowledge that you are contributing to the world – hence, it is important that your findings be clearly and simply stated.
Combine the use of text, tables and figures to condense data and highlight trends.
Discussion
Now its time to interpret your results: Do they support
Discussion
Now its time to interpret your results: Do they support
Are they in line with other published studies?
What do they imply for research and policy making?
Is that supported by your results?
Are other interpretations possible?
What are shortcoming of your study?
How could you improve your study?
Discussion – typical structure
Statements of principal findings
Strengths and weaknesses of your
Discussion – typical structure
Statements of principal findings
Strengths and weaknesses of your
Differences to other studies
Implications of your study for research or policy making
Open questions and future research
Conclusions – typical content
Very brief revisit of the most important findings
Conclusions – typical content
Very brief revisit of the most important findings
Final judgment on the importance and significance of the findings with respect to implications and impact
Suggested further research
Suggested policy changes
Типичные ошибки и проблемы
Типичные ошибки и проблемы
Как не нужно писать
Вы сделали что-то впервые?
Вы первый, кто занимается этой
Как не нужно писать
Вы сделали что-то впервые?
Вы первый, кто занимается этой
У вашего исследования нет аналогов?
http://www.nobelprize.org/
Основные ошибки
Ссылаться только на себя или научного руководителя + классический учебник
Основные ошибки
Ссылаться только на себя или научного руководителя + классический учебник
Не сравнивать свои результаты с существующими исследованиями
Писать, что результаты уникальны
Повторять чужие мысли, не ссылаясь
Introduction – common mistakes
A common mistake is to introduce authors and
Introduction – common mistakes
A common mistake is to introduce authors and
Avoid writing “we did it because we could”
Avoid a list of points or bullets; use prose
Results – common mistakes
The results should be short and sweet. Do
Results – common mistakes
The results should be short and sweet. Do
However, don't be too concise. Readers cannot be expected to extract important trends from the data unaided.
Discussion – common mistakes
Discussion unrelated to the results
Bad structure which meanders
Discussion – common mistakes
Discussion unrelated to the results
Bad structure which meanders
Missing comparison of your results to results from the literature
Conclusions – common mistakes
Copy and paste from other parts of the
Conclusions – common mistakes
Copy and paste from other parts of the
Treat it as a summary
Avoid l o n g convoluted sentences
"It is shown that area-averaged
Avoid l o n g convoluted sentences
"It is shown that area-averaged
“Space-time variability in water availability will be study as function of changes (mean and dispersion) in daily, monthly and yearly amounts of precipitation, characteristics of intense precipitation and drought episodes in the region, as well as function of different background scenario conditions caused by wildfires.”
Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи?
Что первично: подбор журнала или написание статьи?
What problem was studied?
What others and you did?
Your study
What problem was studied?
What others and you did?
Your study
How do you did it?
What did you find out?
What do your findings mean?... Combine w/conclusion/summary and future plans
Где публиковать?
Где публиковать?
Ведущие журналы
Ведущие журналы
Как понять интересна ли статья мировой общественности или только автору?
Как отличить
Как понять интересна ли статья мировой общественности или только автору? Как отличить
Хорошая статья
Has exactly one, specific, thing to communicate
a description of
Хорошая статья
Has exactly one, specific, thing to communicate
a description of
an analysis of how a known theory can be applied to a new situation
a proof of concept
a re-analysis of someone else's work, or a replication with/without minor variations
an investigation of how a particular approach performs against a standard benchmark
a comparison between two approaches (maybe one of which is the author's own)
О чем писать статью
О том, что вам интересно
О том, что заботит
О чем писать статью
О том, что вам интересно
О том, что заботит
О том, в чем вы разбираетесь
Не забудьте обсудить результаты
Что читать
Sciencedirect
Pubmed
WOS
Scopus
Читайте те журналы, где хотите публиковаться
Что читать
Sciencedirect
Pubmed
WOS
Scopus
Читайте те журналы, где хотите публиковаться
Ответ на рецензии. Как правильно оформить ответ на рецензию? можно ли
Ответ на рецензии. Как правильно оформить ответ на рецензию? можно ли
Good practices
Take your time to respond to the referees questions -
Good practices
Take your time to respond to the referees questions -
Make it easy for referees to detect changes and to tick their list
Only argue with the referee if absolutely necessary - If the referees did not get your point you might have to express it differently. - If you disagree with the referees try bring this up in the discussion.
Be polite - Remember, the referees are doing you a favor.
Общение с журналом
Reviewer: 1 Comments to Author: Please provide sufficient comments
Общение с журналом
Reviewer: 1 Comments to Author: Please provide sufficient comments
Dear reviewers,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments that
Dear reviewers,
Thank you very much for your valuable comments that
Reviewer #1: Evaluation team included persons from Clinic in Munich and clinic in Tomsk, and Siberian medical university. Additionally there were persons involved from UMSSoft, the company that had delivered the EHR system. This raises questions about the neutrality of these people? Involvement of company people requires more detailed information: why they were involved, how they were involved and how neutrality apsects were handled?
To preserve the neutrality of the company it was responsible only for technical part of the study. They set up the infrastructure and took care that everything worked properly on the technical side. No people from the company were involved or had access to the evaluation tasks definition and data collection.
Evaluation criteria are presented in fig 5 and fig 6. Usability is one of the criteria, however, it is only studied from learnability perspective, and in connection to patients. Why not for physicians? Why the other aspect of usabilityt were not included? Like ease of use, memorability, efficiency of use, error frequency and their severity. This aspect should ne more elaborated in the revision.
We actually studied the usability of the system in regards of the doctors. The figures 5 and 6 did not contain this because we mistakenly did not want to confuse reader by putting usability as a part of usability. In this revision we have reworked this. We added another figure (10) and reworked figure 11 to emphasize the evaluation of usability.
Usability
The metrics for learnability were derived from the Data accessibility and Doctors’ performance criteria. The measurements were performed during the evaluation of the Data accessibility and Doctors’ performance.
Metrics
1. Number of mistakes doctors made during the completion of tasks;
2. Number of mistakes doctors made during the completion of tasks;
3. Level of users’ satisfaction
Evaluation process
The evaluation process was based on the evaluation of the metrics (that are evaluated within other criteria) several times, comparing the progress of the users. We also rated the mistakes to evaluate how critical they are to complete the task. The mistakes were rated as follows:
• Minor: caused a time delay or an extra operation required to complete the task
• Medium: caused a time delay and required to start the task from the beginning.
• Major: caused a misinterpretation of data or using a wrong data during the process.
To evaluate the level of satisfaction we asked users to estimate their level of satisfaction using 1-10 scale.
Also in the revision, the applied methodology and its pros and cons in this study should be discussed/elaborated in the discussion and conclusion. Was the approach suitable, what were the benefits, or drawbacks, in applying this methodology.
The evaluation approach that we applied to study the efficiency of the data visualization method showed its flexibility and adaptability to different evaluation tasks. The approach is very scalable and can be applied both for the whole EHR infrastructure and for the certain aspect of the EHR (as in the presented study). On the other hand it is too generic and did not provide any evaluation methods or metrics. So it can serve as a skeleton and requires a very detailed specification of evaluation criteria, metrics, data acquisition and analysis methods. Reviewer #2:
The abstract of the manuscript reports that "The objective of this evaluation study is to assess a method for standard based medical data visualization." Fulfillment of this objective requires 2 components -- a description of the data visualization method, and a description and results of the evaluation. The text of the article is replete with evaluation methods, but provides no description of the visualization method. The reader has no notion of the visualization method that is being evaluated, and how it applies to and used by doctors or patients. The data description is given as ISO 13606 archetype based medical data which I know is a standard for interoperability, but does not, by itself, imply any specific type of data or a specific mode of visualization.
ISO 13606 Archetypes are hierarchical structures and support an XPath-like definition to access substructures [21, 22]. An XML schema for visual medical concepts was developed considering the archetype model of ISO 13606 to ensure a full compatibility with archetypes. Each visual medical concept is stored as XML file.
A visual medical concept is logically divided into three main sections: metadata, visual content and visual layout. The metadata section specifies the properties of the VMC. The visual content section defines the data fields that are included in the VMC. The data fields are derived from different archetypes and combined into visual groups. Visual groups are processed as one entity when the GUI is being built. The visual layout section specifies the presentation properties of the GUI elements. The VMC allows specifying the user groups and the media for each element.
The XSL templates provide a platform-independent description of the actual display of the visual concept, for example, an HTML page. Templates implement the concept of different views on the same data.
The visual model is based on the archetype model of the ISO 13606. On the instance level there are archetypes and visual medical concepts that contain the corresponding presentation options. Visual medical concepts add a detailed description of visual properties of each archetype data field. A VMC combines and organizes data fields of an archetype into visual documents. In our projects we used XML Schema to define the archetypes instead of ADL definitions [20]. On the data level VMC files with specified content and presentation properties are associated with corresponding XML data files. This combination is used by the visual templates to build the user interface. To present the medical document an EHR System applies a predefined XSL Template. The template analyses the visual medical concept file and defines the following parameters:
Visual document content;
Data source files;
Data fields;
Visual groups;
Visual document layout;
Presentation type (diagram, table, etc.);
Users and devices that this view is available for.
XSL templates are used in the proof of the concept application and are not the part of the developed information model.
What type of data is being visualized -- Labs, Vital signs, medication use, visit activity, or perhaps some combination of all of them?
We used the following dataset in the evaluation study:
For the patients:
Laboratory tests results
Vital Signs
We also added visit activities for the doctors in the Doctor’s performance tests. The data that was used for each task is presented in the evaluation process section of each metrics.
On page 10, the text finally mentions two of the components of the EHR -- 1. Web-based appointment system, 2. Web-based access to the personal medical data, but again no details of the visualization are provided. On pages 5 and 6, A reference (15) is provided for is provided for a visual medical concept (VMC), but the detail provided is not enough to allow the reader to understand the fundamentals of this visualization approach and why it may be better than others.
We added the description of the visualization approach in the Object of Evaluation section. The evaluation methods are quite detailed, and seem to follow a motif of Assessment Processes and Metrics. THis information may be better presented in a summary table to enable better comparisons of the differences in approaches.
The choice of information displayed on the test subjects is puzzling, with only prior EHR experience and specialty for the doctors and seemingly superfluous ID numbers for the patients.
We reworked the table removing the IDs
The axes, particularly the x-axis in Figure 7 requires a label.
We added the axes in Figure 7 (see in the manuscript)
Similarly it is not clear what the x-axis is in figure 8, and why there are no bars over the "5" on the x axis.
We added the axes in Figure 8 (see the manuscript). There should not be any bars over “5” it was corrected.
In figure 9, the doctors are represented by different colored bars that are grouped over an x-axis with numbers from 1 to 5, and again, it is not clear what the numbers 1 through 5 represent. In Figure 8, the number may present the doctor IDs, but in figure 9, it is clearly not the case. Perhaps the x axis numbers in figure 9 represent a time dimension, but the text describing figure 9 says "Doctors from both groups demonstrated better performance working with the solution." but I do not see hoe figure 9 shows a comparison of "the solution" with something else (presumably paper). From the title of figure 9, I presume it is showing the speed with which doctors did something, and perhaps that speed was improving over time, but this exercise requires too much guesswork on the part of the reader.
The testing day one demonstrates the performance using the paper based process for the doctors who did not use EHR system before (Doctors’ IDs 1,2,4) and native EHR for the experienced doctors (Doctors’ IDs 3 and 5).
We also added the axes in Figure 9 (see in the manuscript).
Figures 10 and 11 seem to imply a time dimension in the x axis and a y axis that shows improvement in satisfaction and efficiency. Despite the earlier text describing the assessment of efficiency, I see no indication of how the scale on the y axis of figure 11 is derived, and how significant the changes are.
We added axes to the mentioned figures and added a text description
The solution has also proved to provide efficient modeling functionality. The performance shown by doctors has reached the expert level both in wizard and manual modes (figure 12). As the expert level time is a time that the developer of the system showed the fact that doctors reached this performance demonstrates the usability and efficiency of the system.
Ракета Хирша
http://rh.tpu.ru/
Ракета Хирша
http://rh.tpu.ru/
Управление
Исследования
Принятие решений
Персонифицированность экспертных знаний
Неполнота знаний предметной области
Непроработанность стандартов
Разнородность систем
Региональная статистика
Стандарты лечения
Содержат
Управление
Исследования
Принятие решений
Персонифицированность экспертных знаний
Неполнота знаний предметной области
Непроработанность стандартов
Разнородность систем
Региональная статистика
Стандарты лечения
Содержат
Проекты
Интеллектуальная информационная система мониторинга качества процесса оказания медицинской помощи и прогнозирования
Проекты
Интеллектуальная информационная система мониторинга качества процесса оказания медицинской помощи и прогнозирования
Разработка технологии нормализации, обмена и анализа медицинских данных на основе международных стандартов.
Интеллектуальная экспертная телемедицинская система эффективной автономной генерации врачебных заключений на основе результатов лабораторных исследований пациента.
Спасибо
georgy.kopanitsa@gmail.com
Спасибо
georgy.kopanitsa@gmail.com
Международные проекты
Международные проекты
Как поучаствовать в проекте
Что Вы можете предложить?
Начните с малого
Действуйте!
Как поучаствовать в проекте
Что Вы можете предложить?
Начните с малого
Действуйте!
Варианты кооперации
Совместный грант
Работа в лаборатории
Варианты кооперации
Совместный грант
Работа в лаборатории
где искать партнеров и гранты
https://www.researchgate.net/
https://www.daad.de
где искать партнеров и гранты
https://www.researchgate.net/
https://www.daad.de
PhD
PhD
Зачем?
Отличное начало научной карьеры
Благосклонность работодателей
Интересно и весело
Зачем?
Отличное начало научной карьеры
Благосклонность работодателей
Интересно и весело
Процесс защиты
По совокупности трудов
Диссертация
2 оппонента 3-4 месяца
Совет 3-5 профессоров
3-4 месяца
Процесс защиты
По совокупности трудов
Диссертация
2 оппонента 3-4 месяца
Совет 3-5 профессоров
3-4 месяца
Что после защиты?
Что после защиты?