http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/5 2026-03-12T11:20:02Z http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/19127 標題: 麻醉學領域與麻醉部門之書目計量與研究前沿比較分析; A Comparative Study of Bibliographic Analysis and Research Front between Anesthesiology and Anesthesia-related Institutions 作者: Ling-Fang Wei; 魏令芳 摘要: 本研究以書目計量方式探討1995年至2014年麻醉學領域論文與部門論文之書目計量特徵與研究前沿，統計高生產力與影響力之期刊、國家、機構與作者之分布狀況，進一步分析國家間的合著樣態。此外辨識麻醉學領域與麻醉部門論文研究前沿的聚類變化與類型，比較兩者之差異。本研究以2014年Journal Citation Reports（JCR）內麻醉學領域共30本收錄之期刊並於Science Citation Index Expanded（SCI-E）搜尋領域期刊1995至2014年研究型文章（article）作為領域論文研究對象，文章共計有64,199篇；部門發表之論文則利用SCI-E內之地址欄檢索，麻醉部門發表論文共130,801篇論文，據以建立個別研究資料集進行相關分析。 研究結果顯示，在論文產出的整體數量方面，領域整體數量於近10年並無顯著成長，而部門論文數則是持續增長，特別是自2007年後部門論文的成長數量與領域論文數量差距逐漸拉大。部門論文數的成長可見麻醉研究人員的研究仍持續增多與成長，相較之下，部門論文數量較能反映當前麻醉研究現況。在期刊層級方面，領域論文與部門論文主要仍以投稿麻醉學主題期刊為主，領域核心期刊不論在領域或部門的影響力皆很高。然而研究顯示部門人員發表的論文數有許多轉投至其他領域，轉投之非麻醉學之主題類別多元，數量最多的Web of Science主題類別為Surgery；麻醉學主題的期刊文章獲得的被引次數約佔整體的三成，許多麻醉部門高影響力論文刊登於非麻醉學主題，Neuroscience為獲得最多被引次數的非麻醉學主題類別。 在國家層級方面，領域論文與部門論文之論文產出與具高影響力之國家前六國相同，皆以美國為首，雖然前六國佔比高，但在集中度大部分未達寡佔，僅有部門被引次數HHI超過0.30，顯示分布過度集中。觀察東亞部門產出狀況，中國大陸、日本、韓國與臺灣有超過一半部門論文是發表於非麻醉學主題類別期刊。機構及作者層級方面，領域論文與部門論文之高產出與高影響力的機構以美國機構、美國作者為主，特別是在部門的論文的生產力與影響力情形更為顯著。合著方面則發現近10年的合著情形越來越多，美國為主要的合著國家，歐洲也自行成系統密切合作，以美國、英國及德國為主要的合著中心點。 麻醉學領域共計產生18個研究前沿，分布在麻醉醫學及疼痛醫學二個知識架構中；而麻醉部門則產生23個研究前沿，分布在導向性基礎研究、麻醉醫學、疼痛醫學及重症醫學四個知識架構。都顯示各階段的研究前沿相對獨立，主題發展期間短，大部分僅能維持在六年內，僅有少數主題橫貫二階段計12年的時間區間。較能即時反應前沿演進，亦不會陷入找出許多經典文章的偏誤。 根據上述研究結果，由於麻醉部門的書目計量研究結果與麻醉學領域存有差異，在部門的主題類別分析中顯示麻醉研究人員不僅發表主題類別多元，亦具有高影響力。特別是部門的前沿受到其他主題高被引文章的影響，因此知識架構中分布在麻醉醫學及疼痛醫學的前沿主題相對較少。因此對於麻醉學整體的研究表現，除瞭解主題領域的研究成果外，亦需考量納入部門研究的論文表現。建議在未來相關研究中，應該針對不同的研究主題，採用適當的資料來源，才能產生適當的推斷及結論。; Most of bibliometric analysis studies for anesthesiology collected data from journal articles which title contained specific keywords or which subject category indexed as the “anesthesiology” in Journal Citation Reports (JCR) and Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCI-E). In order to realize performance of researchers in the anesthesiology department and compare with which in the anesthesiology subject, this study collected data from SCI-E in which articles published on journals indexed in 2014 Journal Citation Reports (JCR) during 1995-2014 as “subject dataset” and also extracted articles which address columns contained “anesthes* or anaesthes*” as “department dataset”. For the whole 20 years period, there were totally 64,199 articles in the subject dataset; 130,801 articles in the department dataset. These two datasets were further utilized to analyze on journal, country, institute, author levels and co-authorship. In addition, research fronts were also identified based on highly-cited articles in the datasets. The results showed that observing number of articles during the 20-year period, subject articles did not grew as much as department articles. Especially since 2007, the discrepancy of article numbers between subject and department apparently had become larger. In near 10 years, even though anesthesiology journals still the most important publications, more and more researchers preferred and turned to publish on non-anesthesiology journals with higher cited times. In addition, journals indexed in the Surgery subject got most department articles and in which Neurosciences received most citations. The diverse of department’s subject distribution means that department articles are more suitable employed for analyzing performance of researchers than subject ones. Observing research performance of countries in the anesthesiology, the U.S. and EU countries published most “department” and “subject” articles, and both received most citations. Although the U.S. got most articles and citations, by HHI measurement, only citation distribution in the department dataset presented highly concentrated in specific countries with HHI over 0.30. Observing countries in East Asia, China, Japan, Korea, and Taiwan had more than 50% of department articles published in non-anesthesiology subjects. About institute and author levels analysis results, US institutions published most department and subject articles and received more citations compared with other countries. The U.S. was also played as important role in the co-authoring with other countries. EU countries tended to co-author with those also from EU. The U.S., Great Britain and Germany are the three countries with most co-authored subject and department articles. With respect to research front analyses, this study set 4 citation windows to group highly cited articles by bibliographic coupling and identified research fronts for each window. In the subject dataset, 18 research fronts were identified and categorized as anesthesiology and pain medicine; in the department dataset, 23 research fronts categorized as oriented based research, anesthesiology, pain medicine, and critical care medicine. Most of research fronts developed independently in one of four window (i.e. 6 years), and only a few of fronts had connections with that in other windows. Researchers from anesthesiology departments not only published on journals indexed in the anesthesiology but in various subjects. High impact articles in other subject were more presented in the result of department research fronts with more fronts categorized in oriented based research and critical care medicine. In general, this study suggests that due to difference between analyzed results in the subject and department datasets, to have exact illustrations and statements, future study should carefully examine which dataset is suitable based on its objective. 2016-01-01T00:00:00Z http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/76118 標題: 鮑延博[知不足齊叢書]之研究 作者: 蔡斐雯 摘要: 清代的學風樸實，重校勘，反映在書籍的刊刻上。使其時所刊印之書一改明朝刻書任意刪改之弊。因而，清版書於研究參考之價值較諸明版為高。 私家彙刻叢書為清代和刻之主要特色。鮑廷博為清朝乾嘉時期著名的藏書家(1728-1814)，曾因獻書四庫館為數多且質精之故，受乾隆賜[古今圖書集成]一部。而後鮑氏以其家藏珍鈔舊刻及時人著作，彙而刻為[知不足齋叢書]。 此叢書以罕見不傳及流傳偽誤而待重新刊刻以傳之典籍為選擇的標準，收書三十集共兩百零七種，歷時乾隆、嘉慶、道光三朝才得以完成。因具有輯刻珍罕典籍、內容廣博實用、首尾完善、序跋不遺、精校精刻等幾個主要的特點，於學術上能刊正傳本訛誤、提供史地、版本研究的重要資料；於文化上則使珍罕本及當世著作得以流傳。可說為叢書刊刻提供良好的示範。不但嘉惠於士林，更因而帶動了清代叢書刊刻的風潮。目前於臺灣諸圖書館中所得見者歸納有初刻、嘉慶道光補刊及嶺南重刊等三個版本，各版本之序跋文多寡不一，校改、校補之記亦不盡相同。 現今圖書作存藏的清刊[知不足齋叢書]以中國大陸地區最多，約有三十八套；日本地區可考者有十三套；臺灣則可考出九套。影印本則以民國十年上海古書流通處據鮑氏家藏本為底所影印之影印本為主，其餘均係以此本為底稿再行影印者。 1994-01-01T00:00:00Z http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/75751 標題: 高麗再雕大藏目錄之研究 作者: 鄭正姬 摘要: 佛法深廣浩翰，欲研究佛學當以藏經?首，佛教的「大藏經」可謂?人類歷史上最早且最?的一部叢書，此乃釋迦牟尼行化生活所留下的訓示，經由弟子收集編錄而成。「高麗再雕大藏經」則?「漢譯大藏經」中最古老且最卓越者，而「再雕大藏目錄」即可謂?「大藏目錄」中之集大成者。 本文從目錄學的角度，採「歷史研究」、「文獻分析」與「調查法」?主，輔以「訪問」?方法，分析「大藏目錄」與「藍本目錄」之相關性及其逐次收藏的源由，旨在研究：一、大藏經概況及大藏經雕刻的歷史背景；二、大藏目錄與藍本入藏目錄之比較分析；三、分析高麗國新雕大藏經校正別錄；四、介紹再雕大藏經內容之特色；五、分析高麗再雕大藏目錄編成體制。 1990-01-01T00:00:00Z http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/44960 標題: 高中圖書館電子資源館藏及其服務之研究; The Study of Electronic Resources Collection and Its Service in High School Libraries 作者: Yu-Chun Huang; 黃喻淳 摘要: 本研究主要探討，在當今電子資源多元且豐富的情況下，高中圖書館如何選擇與組織電子資源以及教師是如何將這些資源應用於教學中。學校圖書館是數量最多也最重要的圖書館類型，除了供應教學資源，同時應培養學生閱讀與利用圖書館之習慣，其中，高中圖書館更擔負著培養學生養成自我學習能力之重任，使學生及早適應未來獨立學習與思考的大學生活。因此首先，高中圖書館必須蒐藏豐富的資源以達此目的。 本研究分析圖書館選擇與組織電子資源之原則、提供之服務、並瞭解其使用情形。主要的研究方法包括內容分析法與訪談法，以臺北市高中為抽樣母體，採立意取樣，最後訪談了12所高中共15位圖書館主管人員。透過對圖書館網站所做的內容分析結果，於訪談時針對各館不同的情況進行更深入的探究。 本研究有以下結論：第一，高中圖書館的電子資源類型以資料庫及網路資源為主，資源來源主要為圖書館自行決定及教師推薦，而且除了圖書館外，校內各學科領域也提供教學相關資源；第二，高中圖書館普遍未訂定電子資源選擇政策，大部分由負責選擇的人員依自己的原則決定。此外，在選擇與組織電子資源時皆遇到許多困難，而且這些電子資源多未編目，僅以清單方式提供給師生使用；第三，高中圖書館透過多種管道提供電子資源服務，也與教師合作將其應用於教學；第四，高中圖書館大多沒有進行使用者調查，因此對教師及學生的使用情況不甚瞭解。 本研究建議高中圖書館應訂定電子資源選擇政策，並聯合各校圖書館共同採購或蒐集資源，並與校內其他單位整合，朝教學資源中心發展，提供師生更完整的電子資源及服務。此外，對師生使用電子資源的情況也應進行調查，以探討是否有需要改進之處。在未來進一步的研究方面，應進行使用者研究，並對其他類型的學校圖書館、或不同類型的高中圖書館，如高職圖書館的電子資源館藏及其使用進行探究。; The study explores how high school libraries choose and organize electronic resources, and how school teachers deploy them in the digital world. There are reasons why the study chooses high school libraries as my research objects. First of all, school libraries are the largest numbers among all kinds of libraries. They not only provide teaching resources, but also help students to cultivate reading habits and know how to access library resources. Besides, high school libraries play an important role in developing students’ self-learning skills, which would help them be ready for college student living. Hence, in order to achieve the foregoing goals, for high school libraries, having a plenty of collection is important. The study examines how high school libraries choose and organize electronic resources, what services they provide, and how electronic resources are been used. The research methods of the study include content analysis and interview method. With purposive sampling, 15 high school librarians were interviewed. By pre-reviewing the websites of those school libraries, the author pinpoints on the very different problems those high school libraries might have. The findings of the study as follow. First of all, the major types of electronic resources are database and internet resources, and the major sources of them are determined by library director or librarians, and recommended by teachers. Except for libraries, discipline teachers also shared electronic resources about teaching. Second, there is no electronic resources selection policy in high school libraries, and resources usually chose by library inside members. Furthermore, there are much difficult when choosing and organizing electronic resources. Then the chose resources are provided to users in resources list. Third, there are many methods to promote electronic resources, and to collaborate with teachers by using electronic resources at class. Finally, librarians don’t know teachers and students’ user satisfaction because they don’t have user survey. There are some suggestions for this topic, high school libraries should establish electronic resources collection policy or selection principles, and collaborate with other high school libraries to purchase electronic resources together. It also can integrate with other department in school to develop a teaching and learning center, in order to provide complete electronic resources and service. 2010-01-01T00:00:00Z