Beyond relevance and recall: Testing new user-centred measures of database performance

Health Information and Libraries Journal

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 220-231

  Stokes, Peter ^a   Foster, Allen ^b   Urquhart, Christine ^b  

^a ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b ABERYSTWYTH UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; BRITISH NURSING INDEX; CINAHL; DATA BASE; EMBASE; FRIEDMAN TEST; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LIBRARY SCIENCE; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; MIDWIFERY EDUCATION; NURSING RESEARCH; NURSING STUDENT; PERFORMANCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RECALL; RESEARCH;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; EDUCATION, NURSING, BACCALAUREATE; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; ODDS RATIO; PERIODICALS AS TOPIC; STUDENTS, NURSING;

EID: 69449093806     PISSN: 14711834     EISSN: 14711842     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00822.x     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Shorten, A., Wallace, M. C. Crookes, P. A. Developing information literacy: a key to evidence-based nursing. International Nursing Review 2001, 48, 86 92.
2. Wallace, M. C., Shorten, A. Crookes, P. A. Teaching information literacy skills: an evaluation. Nurse Education Today 2000, 20, 485 489.
3. Kaplan-Jacobs, S., Rosenfeld, P. Haber, J. Information literacy as the foundation for evidence-based practice in graduate nursing education: a curriculum-integrated approach. Journal of Professional Nursing 2003, 19, 320 328.
4. Verhey, M. P. Information literacy in an undergraduate nursing curriculum: development, implementation and evaluation. Journal of Nursing Education 1999, 38, 252 259.
5. van-Rijsbergen, C. J. Information Retrieval, 2nd edn. London : Butterworths 2004.
6. Korfhage, R. R. Information Storage and Retrieval. New York : John Wiley 1997.
7. Schamber, L., Eisenberg, M. A. Nilan, M. S. A re-examination of relevance: toward a dynamic, situational definition. Information Processing and Management 1990, 26, 755 776.
8. Barry, C. L. Schamber, L. Users' criteria for relevance evaluation: a cross situational comparison. Information Processing and Management 1998, 34, 219 236.
9. Spink, A. Greisdorf, H. Regions and levels: mapping and measuring users' relevance judgments. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 2001, 52, 161 173.
10. Spink, A., Greisdorf, H. Bateman, J. From highly relevant to nonrelevant: examining different regions of relevance. Information Processing and Management 1998, 34, 599 622.
11. Greisdorf, H. Spink, A. Recent relevance research: implications for information professionals. Online Information Review 2000, 24, 389 395.
12. Vakkari, P. Hakala, N. Changes in relevance criteria and problem stages in task performance. Journal of Documentation 2000, 56, 540 562.
13. Rieh, S. Y. Judgment of the information quality and cognitive authority of the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2002, 53, 145 161.
14. Booth, A. The number needed to retrieve: a practically useful measure of information retrieval? Health Information and Libraries Journal 2006, 23, 229 232.
15. McDonald, S., Taylor, L. Adams, C. Searching the right database: a comparison of four databases for psychiatry journals. Health Libraries Review 1999, 16, 151 156.
16. Brettle, A. J. Long, A. F. Comparison of bibliographic databases for information on the rehabilitation of people with severe mental illness. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 2001, 89, 353 362.
17. Subirana, M., Sola, I., Garcia, J. M., Gich, I. Urrutia, G. A nursing systematic review required medline and cinahl for study identification. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2005, 58, 20 5.
18. Subirana, M., Sola, I., Garcia, J. M. et al. Importance of the database in the literature search: the first step in a systematic review. Enfermeria Clinica 2002, 12, 296 300.
19. Watson, M. M. Perrin, R. A comparison of cinahl and medline CD-ROM in four allied health areas. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1994, 82, 214 216.
20. Yonker, V. A., Young, K. P., Beecham, S. K., Horwitz, S. Cousin, K. Coverage and overlaps in bibliographic databases relevant to forensic medicine: a comparative analysis of medline. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1990, 78, 49 56.
21. Suarez-Almazor, M. E., Belseck, E., Homik, J., Dorgan, M. Ramos-Remus, C. Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: medline alone is not enough. Controlled Clinical Trials 2000, 21, 476 487.
22. Watson, R. J. D. Richardson, P. H. Accessing the literature on outcome studies in group psychotherapy: the sensitivity and precision of medline and PsycINFO bibliographic database searching. British Journal of Medical Psychology 1999, 72, 127 134.
23. Marson, A. G. Chadwick, D. W. How easy are randomized controlled trials in epilepsy to find on medline? The sensitivity and precision of two medline searches. Epilepsia 1996, 37, 377 380.
24. Jenuwine, E. S. Floyd, J. A. Comparison of medical subject headings and textword searches in medline to retrieve studies on sleep in healthy individuals. Journal of the Medical Library Association 2004, 92, 349 355.
25. Gehanno, J.-F. Assessment of bibliographic databases performance in information retrieval for occupational and environmental toxicology. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 1998, 55, 562 566.
26. Okuma, E. Selecting CD-ROM databases for nursing students: a comparison of medline and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1994, 82, 25 9.
27. Brown, C. M. Complementary use of the SciSearch database for improved biomedical information searching. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 1998, 86, 63 7.
28. Brown, C. M. The benefits of searching embase versus medline for pharmaceutical information. Online and CDROM Review 1998, 22, 3 8.
29. Brand-de-Heer, D. L. A comparison of the coverage of clinical medicine provided by pascal biomed and medline. Health Information and Libraries Journal 2000, 17, 110 116.
30. McCain, K. W., White, H. D. Griffith, B. C. Comparing retrieval performance in online databases. Information Processing and Management 1987, 23, 539 553.
31. Brazier, H. Begley, C. M. Selecting a database for literature searches in nursing: medline or cinahl? Journal of Advanced Nursing 1996, 24, 868 875.
32. Burnham, J. Shearer, B. Comparison of cinahl, embase and medline databases for the nurse researcher. Medical Reference Services Quarterly 1993, 12, 45 57.
33. Saracevic, T., Mokros, H. Su, L. Nature of interaction between users and intermediaries in online searching: a qualitative analysis. In : Henderson, D. (ed.). ASIS '90 Information in the Year 2000: from Research to Applications Proceedings of the 53rd Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science. Medford, New Jersey : Learned Information, 1990 : 47 54.
34. Riegelman, R. K. Studying a Study and Testing a Test. Philadelphia : Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins, 2005.