Can someone explain to me how Katoh and Katoh get so many papers published? have a look at these pubmed search results.
By the way, is there any link on the web with the authors that occur most often in pubmed? There's no Pubmedbattle yet? (Well you could googlebattle it out but that's not very scientific). (As for Eric s. lander, he seems to be at 237 papers today).
Comments
What about an AuthorID (tm) ?
I wonder if Pubmed could use an identifier for each author. Of course this depend of the existence of a central file of the world's scientists, but that could be useful in this context, to remove all ambiguity when looking at homonyms.
The author ID movement grows
A good idea and one we've discussed before. The time is ripe for this idea.
Author-ity: Medline articles written by a particular author
As long as authors work in separate fields, they can be separated using the Author-ity tool to sort Medline hits by similarity.
http://128.248.65.210/arrowsmith_uic/author.html
Torvik VI, Weeber M, Swanson DR, Smalheiser NR. A probabilistic similarity metric for Medline records: a model for author name disambiguation. JASIST 2005; 56(2): 140-158.
ESL
Well the title of ESL's publication can also be patterned as 'Sequencing and Analysis of some_organism/some_part_of_genome' but it gets through the biggies (journals)... I feel there has to be something more then just new work, it has to be a new work with a novel approach, atleast for biggies! Just a thought MMH, Greg, Neil...
Depressing
A bit depressing to see these publications by Katoh. I can always take it as a joke but there should be some mechanism to remove these entries from pubmed. I thought Pubmed evaluated journals before accepting to track them.
On slightly unrelated news, Microsoft just release a Pubmed/Google Scholar like product. It is called Windows Live Academic.
Firstly sorry for the delay
Firstly sorry for the delay in posting, I didn't check the submission queue over the weekend (I know it isn't optimal, but it works) and second, I made a few minor edits.
The simple answer is they publish in crap journals.
Katoh and Katoh also have an equally enthralling series of papers with the following template title: Identification and characterization of [species] [gene name 1] and [gene name 2] genes in silico. The so-called journals that these papers are published in are all from the same company, very dubious. For amusement value go grab one of their papers (pdf) and count how many of the papers they cite are their own (I counted 15 out of 31). And finally here is the man himself: Masaru Katoh.
Gaming the system ? Could they be more blatant ?
Science parody
There should certainly be some PubMed filtering here. For a moment I thought it was some bizarre joke.