<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>Nature Network - pubmed</title>
    <description>The latest taggings for pubmed</description>
    <link>http://network.nature.com/announcements</link>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <ttl>40</ttl>
    <item>
      <title>Online reference managers: not quite there yet</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - For my "Paper Writing Dream Machine":http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/mfenner/2008/06/14/my-paper-writing-dream-machine-1-0 I obviously need a reference manager. My list of required features includes: * Easy addition of references by integration with Pubmed, Google Scholar and other online databases. A special bookmarklet would be a bonus.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Sorting pubmed articles on the impact factor</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Pierre Lindenbaum - Hi all, We recently had an interesting discussion on friendfeed about how it would be possible to "order the articles in pubmed using the impact factor of their journals as a key of sorting":http://friendfeed.com/e/f4acb881-9adb-dbc6-dcbd-f52210ea4207/I-wish-I-could-sort-pubmed-results-on-the-Impact/ Lars Juhl Jensen and Deepak Singh]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Chernoff Faces</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Euan Adie - !http://www.ghastlyfop.com/new_faces.png! (with apologies for the cross posting) I've been working on a Pubmed / Eigenfactors / Scopus mashup that represents data as photorealistic Chernoff Faces. There more in the "blog post on FnL":http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/euan/2008/06/09/pubmed-faceoff.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pubmed Faceoff</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Euan Adie - I find the science of "face perception":http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_perception fascinating. The human brain is highly tuned to identify, process and interpet faces - understandable, as they play a tremendously important role in our social interactions. It's a hardwired proficiency that kicks in]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Microsoft stops Live Search Academic</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - Microsoft yesterday "announced":http://blogs.msdn.com/livesearch/archive/2008/05/23/book-search-winding-down.aspx on the Live Search Blog that their "Academic Search":http://search.live.com/academic/ will be closed next week. And "Google Scholar":http://scholar.google.com still has shortcomings, including the lack of special limitation features that are found in PubMed. A more detailed comparison of]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Web 2.0 for Scientists: Where are the Applications?</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - The "success or failure":http://www.cshblogs.org/cshprotocols/2008/02/14/why-web-20-is-failing-in-biology/ of Web 2.0 efforts for scientists depends to a large extend on the availability of cool applications that make the everyday life of a scientist easier. Many of these applications of course already exist, but I]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pubmed and other Annoyances in the Paper Writing Process</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - Anna's "recent post":http://network.nature.com/blogs/user/U2929A0EA/2008/03/22/i-am-not-yelling-not-out-loud about her struggles with Pubmed searches reminded me that there is still a lot that could and should be done to improve the paper (or thesis) writing process. This is my personal list of major annoyances: #]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>I Am Not Yelling. Not Out Loud.</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Anna Kushnir - It is possible that I am about to preach to the choir, but I am going to come right out and say it anyway. I hate "PubMed":http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez. I hate it with a burning passion. For a site that is as]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Inclusion in PubMed</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Santosh Patnaik - Is there any chance of PubMed covering _Nature Precedings_? Is there any ongoing or planned effort by NPG towards this? PubMed "does accept":http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/peerrev.html non-peer-reviewed publications.]]>
      </description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Thomson Scientific launches ResearcherID to uniquely identify authors</title>
      <description>
        <![CDATA[Martin Fenner - Thomson Scientific last week "announced":http://scientific.thomson.com/press/2008/8429910/ *ResearcherID*. ResearcherID tries to solve a problem that has annoyed me for many years. In contrast to papers and journals, authors are not associated with a unique ID in databases such as PubMed. You are]]>
      </description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
