Adding perspectiveĬitation counts are conventionally seen by researchers as measures of influence.
SCITE CITATION FULL
Scite.ai gets about 1,000 visitors a day and has some 2,700 registered users, a number that is growing since the site began requiring users to register to view the full citation analysis for a given paper on 20 March. (The preprint’s authors have since withdrawn it for revision in response to researchers’ comments on the work.) At the moment, Scite.ai’s analysis of the COVID-19 database of papers is not fully automated, so there is sometimes a delay in how quickly the preprints are analysed by the tool. They found that one 22 February preprint 1, which indicated that higher levels of certain immune-signalling molecules are associated with more-severe cases of COVID-19, was supported by a preprint 2 from another group just five days later (see the Scite.ai report at go./2ztuokb).Ĭonversely, users who search Scite.ai for a preprint that suggested HIV contributed to the formation of the new coronavirus will find that the report was contradicted by two follow-ups and supported by none (see go./2vtdfxd). In March, the site’s developers pointed its artificial intelligence (AI)-based engine to a database, which at the time included 30,000 papers on different kinds of coronavirus, to help provide context about how much weight each of the articles might carry (see go./35nchkp). Still, the tool - accessible through a searchable website and as Chrome and Firefox browser plug-ins - can provide clarity. “They’re limited by the literature they can get hold of and the machine-learning algorithms,” notes Jodi Schneider, an information scientist at the University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign. But that is just a fraction of the scientific literature. So far, Scite.ai has analysed more than 16 million full-text scientific articles from publishers such as BMJ Publishing Group in London and Karger in Basle, Switzerland. The resulting reports display citations in the context in which they are mentioned, allowing users to assess for themselves how the paper is being cited.
Unlike conventional citation-metrics tools, Scite.ai tells users how often a paper has been supported or contradicted by the studies that cite it, as well as how many times it has simply been mentioned. Now, one start-up company says that its platform - called Scite.ai - can automatically tell readers whether papers have been supported or contradicted by later academic work. This makes it all the harder to judge their merit. Many of these papers are published first on preprint servers, which means they are made public before having undergone peer review.
The number of new papers on the COVID-19 pandemic is doubling every two weeks, and shows no sign of slowing.
0 kommentar(er)
