Medical literature searches: A comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar

Health Information and Libraries Journal

Volumn 29, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 214-222

  Nourbakhsh, Eva ^a   Nugent, Rebecca ^a   Wang, Helen ^a   Cevik, Cihan ^a   Nugent, Kenneth ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Citations; Google Scholar; Impact factor; PubMed; Searches

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; LIBRARY; LIBRARY SCIENCE; MEDLINE; METHODOLOGY; NONPARAMETRIC TEST; STATISTICS;

HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; JOURNAL IMPACT FACTOR; LIBRARIES, MEDICAL; LIBRARY SCIENCE; PUBMED; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC;

EID: 84865550002     PISSN: 14711834     EISSN: 14711842     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00992.x     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Assisi, F. C. Acharya Helped Google's ScholarlyAnurag Acharya Helped Google's Scholarly Leap. January 2005. Accessible at: http://www.indolink.com/SciTech/fr010305-075445.php. Accessed 26 September 2009.
2. Quint, B. Changes at Google Scholar: a conversation with Anurag Acharya information. Today, Inc, August 27, 2007. Accessible at: http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/nbReader.asp?ArticleId=37309. Accessed 15 June 2009.
3. Butler, D. Science searches shift up a gear as Google starts Scholar engine. Nature 2004, 432, 423.
4. Vine, R. Electronic resources reviews- Google Scholar. JMIA 2006, 94, 97-99.
5. Henderson, J. Google Scholar: a source for clinicians? CMAJ 2005, 172, 1549-1550.
6. Steinbrook, R. Searching for the right search - reaching the medical literature. New England Journal of Medicine 2006, 354, 4-6.
7. Hoogendam, A., Stalenhoef, A. F., Robbe, P. F. & Overbeke, A. J. Analysis of queries sent to PubMed at the point of care: observation of search behavior in a medical teaching hospital. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2008, 8, 42.
8. Dogan, R. I., Murray, G. C., Névéol, A. & Lu, Z. Understanding PubMed user search behavior through log analysis. Database 2009; article ID bap018, doi: 10, 1093/database/bap018.
9. Bernstam, E. V., Herskovic, J. R., Aphinyanaphongs, Y., Aliferis, C. F., Sriram, M. G. & Hersh, W. R. Using citation data to improve retrieval from MEDLINE. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2006, 3, 96-105.
10. Herskovic, J. R., Tanaka, L. Y., Hersh, W. & Bernstam, E. V. A day in the life of PubMed: analysis of a typical day's query log. JAMIA 2007, 14, 212-220.
11. Cosijn, E. & Ingwersen, P. Dimension of relevance. Information Processing and Management 2000, 36, 533-550.
12. Cohen, J. Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit. Psychological Bulletin 1968, 70, 213-220.
13. Wilcoxon, F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bulletin 1945, 1, 80-83.
14. Hollander, M. & Wolfe, D. Nonparametric Statistical Methods. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1973: 115-120.
15. Beel, J. & Gipp, B. Google Scholar's ranking algorithm: the impact of citation counts (an empirical study). Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science 2009a, 439-446.
16. Beel, J. & Gipp, B. Google Scholar's Ranking Algorithm: The impact of articles' age (an empirical study). Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Technology: New Generations 2009b, 160-164.
17. Shultz, M. Comparing test searches in PubMed and Google Scholar. JMIA 2007, 95, 442-445.
18. Mastrangelo, G., Fadda, E., Rossi, C., Zamprogno, E., Buja, A. & Cegolon, L. Literature search on risk factors for sarcoma: PubMed and Google Scholar may be complementary sources. BMC Research 2010, 3, 131-134.
19. Anders, M. E. & Evans, D. P. Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar literature searches. Respiratory Care 2010, 55, 578-583.
20. Kulkarni, A. V., Aziz, B., Shams, I. & Busse, J. W. Comparisons of citations in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for articles published in general medical journals. JAMA 2009, 302, 1092-1096.
21. Bakkalbasi, N., Bauer, K., Glover, J. & Wang, L. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical Digital Libraries 2006, 3, 7.
22. Lin, Y., Li, W., Chen, K. & Liu, Y. A document clustering and ranking system for exploring MEDLINE citations. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2007, 14, 651-661.
23. Tanaka, L. Y., Herskovic, J. R., Lyengar, M. S. & Bernstam, E. V. Sequential result refinement for searching the biomedical literature. Journal of Biomedical Informatics 2009, 42, 678-684.
24. Whipple, E. C., McGowan, J. J., Dixon, B. E. & Zafar, A. The selection of high-impact health informatics literature: a comparison of results between the content expert and the expert searcher. JMIA. 2009, 97, 212-218.
25. Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E. I., Malietzis, G. A. & Pappas, G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB Journal 2008, 22, 338-342.
26. Hölscher, C. & Strube, G. Web search behavior of Internet experts and newbies. Computer Networks 2000, 33, 337-346.