Nonscientific Articles Research Articles

Can Organizational Spirituality Contribute to Knowledge Management?

Abstract Society demands more sustainable business. Increasing organizational spirituality can be one manner of accomplishing this humanized strategy, and knowledge management is an efficient method to diffuse high-level values through the company. Spirituality has a vital role in organizational theory and practice. Nevertheless, this also places a heavy burden on practitioners. To address this association, we conducted a systematic literature review, systematizing and categorizing the results to answer the research question, “can organizational spirituality contribute to knowledge management?”, and propose a future investigation research agenda. We utilized the Web of Science and Scopus database. We submitted the articles to VOSviewer software version 1.6.16 for building, displaying, and exploring a bibliometric map supported by network data. The beginning was about wisdom, followed by a major focus on knowledge fields after increasing attention to spirituality. VOSviewer provided a network with two clusters, namely, spirituality dynamics and knowledge dynamics. Spirituality and knowledge labels have connections in both clusters. Wisdom and organizational wisdom are isolated from the other terms. Based on the articles analyzed, organizational spirituality can indeed assist knowledge management. One should ponder, however, that there are still few empirical studies with non-generalizable results. Considering the mysticism and excess of non-scientific articles (and scarcity of scientific ones), we recommend a change in approaching it. Traditional and positivist methodologies are not the most suitable; consequently, innovative and mixed methods ought to be used, providing the research’s scientific nature. It is crucial to look at the insertion of spirituality in management with a scientific and critical eye.

Like a Bat Out of…. the Hospital? Development of a Bat Capture and Testing Protocol Prompted by Two Nosocomial Encounters

Background: In the state of Wisconsin, 3%–4% of bats submitted for rabies testing are positive. Inpatient bat encounters at 2 affiliated healthcare facilities at nearly the same time were brought to the attention of the infection prevention and control (IPC) team. The first bat was captured in a patient room and was submitted for testing. Postexposure prophylaxis (PEP) was initiated for 1 patient before the bat testing results came back negative. The second bat was found in a transplant unit hallway and was released before we could request testing. We observed significant variations in responses, including decision to administer PEP and submission of bats for rabies testing. The IPC team developed a protocol to minimize unnecessary PEP, to prevent nosocomial rabies infection from bat exposure, and to limit associated panic. Methods: A systematic literature review of multiple databases was performed. A search of nonscientific articles using Google was also performed to assess unpublished inpatient bat encounters. A workgroup was established including IPC staff, physicians, and facilities management. The county animal services department and the state public health department veterinarian were consulted to aid in development of a protocol. Results: Literature review yielded a single report of a bat discovered in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). A lack of protocol resulted in PEP administration to 7 neonates without observed exposure after the bat was released instead of being submitted for testing. Of the first 100 articles retrieved via Google search of “bat in hospital,” 9 pertained to nosocomial discovery of bats in 5 different states over the past 7 years. Encounters included infestations requiring unit shutdowns and PEP administration. One tertiary-care referral center reported 10 encounters per year but did not elaborate on associated procedures. The county animal services staff assisted in training maintenance and engineering services (MES) personnel on how to secure bats for testing and helped develop a “bat kit” with protective gear and equipment to do so safely. In the new protocol, an inpatient bat encounter prompts personnel to capture the bat and begin an investigation into known or potential occult exposure. Known or potential exposures merit submission of the bat for rabies testing, the results of which guide PEP recommendations. All encounters are investigated for point of entry or roost. Conclusions: Inpatient bat encounters are not uncommon. Encounters should prompt systematic assessment for exposures and an investigation of the root cause. Following a protocol may limit unnecessary PEP administration, prevent nosocomial transmission of rabies from bat to patient, and attenuate associated anxiety.Funding: NoneDisclosures: None

EXTENSIVE READING ON ACCURACY, ACCEPTABILITY, AND READABILITY IN TRANSLATION STUDY

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of extensive reading on the ability to translate scientific and non-scientific articles. Translation techniques that often appear a literal translation, adaptation, discursive creation, borrowing, generalization, and calque. Whereas translation methods use a free translation, adaptation, faithful translation, word for word translation. The research method used experimental quantitative with subject 35 in class A and B. The extensive reading value of 25% had the highest score between 81-92, then 45% had average reading ability between 66-80 and 30% low or level the reading is not good with a value of 0-65. Significant between the two is 80% indicating the level of quality of translation results is good if the ER is high.

Predictors of Citations in Neurosurgical Research

The number of citations an article receives is an important measure of impact for published research. There are limited published data on predictors of citations in neurosurgery research. We aimed to analyze predictors of citations for neurosurgical articles. All articles published in 14 neurosurgical journals in the year 2015 were examined and data collected about their features. The number of citations for each article was tallied using both Web of Science (WoS) and Google Scholar (GS) 2.5 years after their publication in print. Negative binomial regression was then performed to determine the relationship between article features and citation counts for scientific articles. A total of 3923 articles were analyzed, comprising 2867 scientific articles (72.6%) and 1056 nonscientific (editorial, commentary, etc.) articles (27.4%). At 2.5 years, scientific articles had a median [interquartile range] number of citations per article of 3.0 [6.0] and 7.0 [9.0] found in WoS and GS, respectively; nonscientific articles had accumulated median 0.0 [2.0] in both WOS and GS. Articles with the study topic "Spine" had the highest citation count at 4.0 [5.0] and 8.0 [10.0] in WoS and GS, respectively. Significant predictors of citation count in scientific articles were level of evidence, number of centers, number of authors, and impact factor. This is the largest investigation analyzing predictors of citations in the neurosurgical literature. Factors found to be most influential on citation rates in scientific articles included the study's level of evidence, number of participating centers, number of authors, and the publishing journal's impact factor.

Nurses challenges in health assessment skills in Iran and another country: An integrative review

Health assessment skills lead to enhancement of nurses' self-confidence at work. The aim of the present study is to investigate the challenges that nurses face in conducting health assessments in Iran and another country. This study was conducted in integrated review study based on Russell's method. The inclusion criteria were; related to the objectives of the study, English or Persian writings, published during the past 35 years and access to their full text. The nonscientific articles as well as the articles that lacked a specific name or transparent data were excluded from the study. Health assessment, nurse, history taking, and physical examination were used as keywords. We used Persian and international databases such as SID, Magiran, Iranmedex, Google Scholar, Medline, Scopus, Elsevier, PubMed, and Science Direct. Finally, 20 articles were included in the study. the scattered data were summarized for data analysis and interpretation purposes. All of the data reviewed, obtained, compared, and finally, classified into six groups. The most important challenges in the use of these skills in order are Individual -motivational, professional, environmental, educational, cultural, and communicational factors as well as factors that are related to patients and their culture. The results showed that the challenges that nurses face in performing clinical health assessment skills are mostly shared in Iran and across the world. Although all of the factors have been involved in execution of these skills, the health assessment skills are significantly dependent on the need for them as felt by the nurses themselves.

A Pilot Study of the Level of Evidence and Collaboration in Published Neurosurgical Research.

Large-scale studies analyzing neurosurgical published research are lacking. This pilot study was designed to assess feasibility of an ongoing annual neurosurgical literature and research analysis of published articles in English-language neurosurgery journals. All scientific articles published during 2015 in the print version of 14 English-language neurosurgery journals were reviewed individually. During 2015, 4065 articles were published in 14 neurosurgical journals. Of these, 1116 (27.5%) were nonscientific articles and were excluded from the analysis, and 2949 scientific articles were analyzed. Of these, 2% and 8.5% of publications met criteria for levels of evidence 1 and 2, respectively. One third of published manuscripts (33.2%) were retrospective chart reviews. There were 1742 different centers (mean 1.95 centers per article; range, 1-19) represented in 2949 articles from 67 countries (mean 1.23 countries per article; range, 1-12). Multicenter collaboration was present in 47.5% of published articles, and international collaboration was present in 17.5%. The highest numbers of U.S. author international collaborations were with Canada (70 collaborations), China (33 collaborations) and Italy (25 collaborations). Data for levels of evidence, multicenter collaborations, and international collaborations are presented for each individual journal and subject within neurosurgery. This pilot analysis provides a descriptive assessment of levels of evidence and collaboration based on journal, general subject matter, and subcategories of subject allowing for comparison. This methodology may be used on an annual basis to establish neurosurgery publication trends and to identify underrepresented areas of research within the specialty.

Developmental Strategies for Nursing Ethics Education

Developmental Strategies for Nursing Ethics Education

Rethinking Scientific Publishing

Rethinking Scientific Publishing

Bibliography of Finnish Population Studies 2011–2013

The bibliography covers the literature on population research published by Finnish authors in Finland and abroad during the year 2011-2013. Also included are studies by foreign authors on Finnish population. Included are independent publications and articles in periodicals and compiled works as well as nationwide Finnish statistics. In general the bibliography excludes nonscientific articles in newspapers and weeklies as well as unpublished reports and academic theses. Also not included are studies presented in proceedings of conferences held in Finland if they are written abroad and treated subjects outside Finland. Neither are comparative studies where Finland not forms a substantial part included in the bibliography. Coverage is less complete in peripheral fields.

Journal impact factor: uses and misuses.

s a lecturer of biomedical writing, I have usually been asked about the impact factor of journals and how authors can publish their scientific manuscripts in journals with high impact factors. This is particularly important for faculty members since recently, many officials in Iran evaluate the scientific merit of an article based on the impact factor of the journal that published it. Sometimes, the impact factor is also used for academic career promotion, awarding prize, or allocating research grant to a researcher or research center. However, this issue is not confined to Iran and is a common practice in some other countries. To see whether it is reasonable to use the journal impact factor to determine the value of an article or evaluation of researchers or research centers, let us see what this index really is. In 1955, Eugene Garfield created the “journal impact factor.” The impact factor of a journal reflects the frequency with which the journal’s articles are cited in scientific literature. A journal’s impact factor is a quotient the numerator of which is the number of citations in the current year to items published in the previous two years in the journal; the denominator is the number of substantive articles published within the same two years in the journal. For example, assume that in year 2008, there were 500 citations to items published in 2006 –2007 in a journal and that the journal published 100 substantive articles in 2006 –2007; then, the 2008 impact factor of that journal is 5 (=500/100). Each year, this index is calculated and reported in Journal Citation Report (JCR) by Thomson Scientific (formerly Thomson ISI) for over 8000 journals. This index reflects the average number of citations that each article published in the previous two years in that journal has received. Those in favor of using impact factor for evaluating an article, in fact assume that publication in a high impact journal indicates greater scientific merit. This assumption would be correct if the citation rate of individual articles published in a journal have a narrow (preferably normal) distribution. Nonetheless, it has been shown that this is not the case; the distribution is very skewed so that the most cited half of the articles are cited almost 10 times as often as those least cited. Furthermore, it was shown that the impact factor of a journal does not affect the citation rate of an article. Another point is that if the citation rate of an article is high, it does not necessarily mean that the article is of great scientific value; many nonscientific articles on controversial issues receive numerous citations. Furthermore, the Thomson Scientific, the body which calculates and reports the impact factor, clearly states that “drawing conclusions about individual performance is not the proper way to interpret impact factor.” Finally, the value of the journal impact factor, even as a metric for evaluation of journal quality, is also under question. Based on the current evidence, I therefore believe that for the time being, for evaluation of scientific quality of an article, researcher, or research center, there is no alternative but to seek expert opinion of qualified peer reviewers.

Scientometric assessment of publishing patterns of agricultural researchers in the Slovenian national journals as indexed by the national online bibliographic database COBISS/COBIB

The aim was to systematically analyze the patterns of scatter of both scientific and non-scientific articles by the scientists of the Agronomy, Biology, Food Science and Technology, Forestry, Wood Science and Technology, and the Zootechnical Departments of the Biotechnical Faculty of the University of Ljubljana in the Slovenian national journals in the period 1995-2002. The national online catalogue and bibliographic databases COBISS/ COBIB were employed to this end. Two experimental databases were set up to upload the data for further analysis. 240 different journals that published 4163 different articles were identified. 3141 Scientific and 1022 non-scientific articles were published in 82 and 203 journals respectively. 45 journals published both scientific and non-scientific articles. 12 journals published more than 100 articles each, and 78 different journals published a single article. The five core journals published 39% of all articles. This is an assessment of the national serial productivity and does not reflect the total scientific productivity as many authors may publish mainly in international periodicals which were not the object of this analysis. The main difficulties of this kind of study were presented in establishing a uniform group of authors. COBIB can be used to some extent but with limitations as a lot of manual editing is needed to extract the relevant data into a consistent group of articles for further analysis.