| 1. |
- Bo, A D, et al.
(författare)
-
Ethyl(hydroxyethyl)cellulose-sodium dodecanoate interaction investigated by surface tension and electrical conductivity techniques
- 2005
-
Ingår i: Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects. - : Elsevier BV. - 0927-7757. ; 256:2-3, s. 171-180
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Mixtures of ethyl (hydroxyethyl)cellulose (EHEC) and sodium dodecanoate (SDoD) were investigated using surface tension, conductivity and transmittance measurements. The parameters of the surfactant to polymer association processes such as the critical aggregation concentration (cac) and saturation of the polymer by SDoD (psp) were determined from the plots of surface tension and specific conductivity versus surfactant concentration. The transmittance versus [SDoD] profiles exhibited bands that, in conjunction with conductivity and surface tension data, gave support to the explanation of the behavior of EHEC-SDoD-water solutions. Transmittance bands determined in the presence of EHEC and surfactant are sensitive to the process of surfactant to polymer binding. In this process, a discontinuity point represented by a second broader peak in the transmittance plots was identified, implying a slight inhibition of the breakdown of the network process. This is explained as a kind of intermediate re-structural network of the complexes produced by the formation of regular SDoD micelles. It was demonstrated that the second conductivity breakpoint marks the polymer saturation by surfactant clusters, and the effect of the EHEC concentration on the process of binding can be described by a linear correlation when the psp breakpoint is plotted against the polymer concentration. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
|
|
| 2. |
- Carneiro, Clarissa F. D., et al.
(författare)
-
Comparing quality of reporting between preprints and peer-reviewed articles in the biomedical literature
- 2020
-
Ingår i: RESEARCH INTEGRITY AND PEER REVIEW. - : BMC. - 2058-8615. ; 5:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background Preprint usage is growing rapidly in the life sciences; however, questions remain on the relative quality of preprints when compared to published articles. An objective dimension of quality that is readily measurable is completeness of reporting, as transparency can improve the reader's ability to independently interpret data and reproduce findings. Methods In this observational study, we initially compared independent samples of articles published in bioRxiv and in PubMed-indexed journals in 2016 using a quality of reporting questionnaire. After that, we performed paired comparisons between preprints from bioRxiv to their own peer-reviewed versions in journals. Results Peer-reviewed articles had, on average, higher quality of reporting than preprints, although the difference was small, with absolute differences of 5.0% [95% CI 1.4, 8.6] and 4.7% [95% CI 2.4, 7.0] of reported items in the independent samples and paired sample comparison, respectively. There were larger differences favoring peer-reviewed articles in subjective ratings of how clearly titles and abstracts presented the main findings and how easy it was to locate relevant reporting information. Changes in reporting from preprints to peer-reviewed versions did not correlate with the impact factor of the publication venue or with the time lag from bioRxiv to journal publication. Conclusions Our results suggest that, on average, publication in a peer-reviewed journal is associated with improvement in quality of reporting. They also show that quality of reporting in preprints in the life sciences is within a similar range as that of peer-reviewed articles, albeit slightly lower on average, supporting the idea that preprints should be considered valid scientific contributions.
|
|
