This is notable given that physicians and institutions in developing nations may lack the resources needed to maintain subscriptions to journals. Abstract Background: Physicians frequently search PubMed for information to guide patient care. Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Ebell MH, Bergus GR, Levy BT, Chambliss ML, Evans ER. 8600 Rockville Pike Epub 2011 Jun 15. We identified the systematic reviews from the EvidenceUpdates service in November 2009, by selecting the option to view all reviews for the discipline of nephrology; our search yielded 207 systematic reviews. Across all searches, Google Scholar retrieved a total of 247 citations, 125 (50.61%) of which were unique to Google Scholar. The searches, performed between August and September 2006, were by topic, author, title, journal name, and/ or combinations of those fields (Appendix online). Freeman MK, Lauderdale SA, Kendrach MG, Woolley TW. 2009 Mar;43(3):478-84. doi: 10.1345/aph.1L223. Anders ME, Evans DP. Accessibility Google : Google indexes the entire web and is different from Google Scholar. PDF Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar Literature Searches PubMed and Google Scholar are accessed for free. Younger P. Using google scholar to conduct a literature search. Download scientific diagram | Difference between Google Scholar and PubMed in parameter "Cited by" (14 vs 21) from publication: Meta-analysis of the Scientific Contents of Materia Socio-Medica . Learning radiology a survey investigating radiology resident use of textbooks, journals, and the internet. Information retrieval: a health and biomedical perspective. Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for Comprehensive J Med Internet Res. Two online resources that are freely accessible around the world are PubMed and Google Scholar. These additional features, while powerful, often lead to a complexity that may require a substantial investment of time to master. Google Scholar help: about Google Scholar, [Web document]. eCollection 2023 Jan. Nourbakhsh E, Nugent R, Wang H, Cevik C, Nugent K. Medical literature searches: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar. Our results suggest that PubMed searches with the Clinical Queries filter are more precise than with the Advanced Scholar Search in Google Scholar for respiratory care topics. An official website of the United States government. Along with ease of use, Google Scholar carries the familiar Google brand name. doi: 10.7717/peerj.15436. It therefore finds articles in which the . This prompted one Canadian university library to cancel subscription access to the Web of Science bibliographic database, citing a challenging fiscal climate as a primary reason [44-46]. For best results, choose precise search terms and configure Advanced Scholar Search to look for them in article titles. Retrieval of diagnostic and treatment studies for clinical use through PubMed and PubMed's Clinical Queries filters. To determine content coverage, we searched for each primary article using advanced search strategies as outlined in other coverage studies [32,33]. Preliminary findings of a study. Difference between Google Scholar and PubMed in - ResearchGate Results: Thirty-two items (12.96%) retrieved by Google Scholar were formats other than journal articles. They lack the time to develop efficient search strategies and often retrieve large numbers of nonrelevant articles [1-9]. In Google Scholar we used the search filters in the Advanced Scholar Search option. As recommended, we used primary studies included in high-quality systematic reviews to define relevance [14,20,49-54]. PMC MeSH Christianson M. Ecology articles in Google Scholar: Levels of Access to Articles in Core Journals. We followed recommendations of search database evaluations from the field of information retrieval and designed our study to improve on limitations of previous studies [47,48]. National Library of Medicine It has been observed that Google Scholar may allow searchers to find some resources they can use rather than be frustrated by a database's search screen [2]. Medical literature searches: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar While Google Scholar offers the ability to use a tilde () to retrieve alternative terminology, this ability does not provide the control that subject headings do. Irrigation in endodontics | British Dental Journal - Nature Physicians' characteristics in the usage of online database: a representative nationwide survey of regional hospitals in Taiwan. An official website of the United States government. This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Scopus covers a wider journal range, of help both in keyword searching and citation analysis, but it is currently limited to recent articles (published after 1995) compared with Web of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Nephrologists increasingly rely on online bibliographic databases to guide the care of their patients. Retraction of Clinical Trials about the SARS-CoV-2 Infection: An Unaddressed Problem and Its Possible Impact on Coronavirus Disease (COVID)-19 Treatment. One of the most advantageous features of searching PubMed is the ability to utilize the MeSH vocabulary, as Google Scholar does not currently implement controlled vocabulary searching mechanisms. More recently, Google Scholar has gained popularity as another freely accessible bibliographic database. 79-82 Students in particular utilize Google as a main source in information seeking. PubMed and Google have much in common: 1) both are freely-available search interfaces that help people locate digital information on the Internet; 2) both were launched in the late 1990's (PubMed in 1996 and Google in 1998), just as access to the World Wide Web was becoming more widely available; 3) and both are high-traffic tools on which milli. PeerJ. Google Scholar Beta: About Google Scholar. The following search engines and tools were assessed: Google Web, Google Scholar, PubMed, PubMed Clinical Queries set to narrow search, and PubMed Clinical Queries set to broad search. Giustini D. How Google is changing medicine. Nephrologists were selected from the sampling frame using a random number generator; one nephrologist was selected at a time and randomly assigned a clinical question. 2019 The Authors. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship. Vine R. Google Scholar electronic resources review. eCollection 2022. Whereas PubMed indexes only peer reviewed biomedical literature, Google Scholar also indexes articles, theses, books, abstracts, and court opinions from a variety of disciplines and sources including academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities, and other websites [22]. JSTOR & Google Scholar - JSTOR Support These citations acted as a set of relevant articles for the corresponding clinical question (also referred to as the reference standard). 2021 Jul;85(5):2012-2021. doi: 10.1007/s00426-020-01371-8. Felter noted that as researchers work with Google Scholar and reach limitations of searching capabilities and options, they may become more receptive to other products [5]. Turner AM, Liddy ED, Bradley J, and Wheatley JA. In search #2 (Mobius syndrome), Google Scholar returned eleven citations, while PubMed found ten citations but with an overlap of only two citations retrieved by both systems. Simplicity and complexity in health care: what medicine can learn from Google and iPod, Google Scholar, Scirus, and the scholarly search revolution, Science in the Web age: start your engines, Scholarly Web searching: Google Scholar and Scirus. The reviews cited a mean of 19 articles, totaling 1574 unique citations across all reviews. Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Google Scholar provided significantly greater access to free full-text publications (PubMed: 5%; Google Scholar: 14%; P<.001). Differences between domains of reviews. We used SAS, Version 9.2 for all statistical analyses. As shown in Table 4, nearly half (48.98%; 72/147) of PubMed citations provided full-text access through the author's institution. Evidence-based practice. Inference with non-probability samples and survey data integration: a science mapping study. 2011 Mar-Apr;77(2):135-40. doi: 10.4103/0378-6323.77451. Epub 2012 Jun 19. 2023 Jun 13;11:e15436. Abstract. Canadian University Hopes to Lead Fight Against High Subscription Prices. The sampling frame consisted of nephrologists practicing in Canada and included both academic (practicing in a center with a fellowship training program) and community-based nephrologists. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the Bibliometric and visualized analysis of drug resistance in ovarian cancer from 2013 to 2022. The key terms used were: Coronavirus, SARS-COV-2, COVID-19 pandemic, vaccines, Pfizer/BioNTech . Shariff SZ, Sontrop JM, Iansavichus AV, Haynes RB, Weir MA, Gandhi S, Cuerden MS, Garg AX. PubMed Google Scholar Malentacca A, Uccioli U, Zangari D, Lajolo C, Fabiani C . doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-069929. Effect of the Intake of Isoflavones on Risk Factors of Breast Cancer-A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Intervention Studies. Slobogean GP, Verma A, Giustini D, Slobogean BL, Mulpuri K. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane index most primary studies but not abstracts included in orthopedic meta-analyses. Medical literature searches: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar. It is important to note that both PubMed and Google Scholar are often upgraded with new features or with intended improvement of existing functions. The information provided includes title, author (s), abstract and if applicable, links to full-text content. Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB, Hedges Team Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey. Clipboard, Search History, and several other advanced features are temporarily unavailable. Lupus. 2023 Jan 19;20(3):1835. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20031835. As more systematic reviews for diagnosis, prognosis, and etiology are published, we will be able to expand this study to test searches for these types of studies as well. PubMed and Google Scholar are accessed for free. Google Scholar also returned items that contained the search terminology but did not match the intention of the search. 2012 Sep;29(3):214-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00992.x. These are mostly unique PubMed references, which are not assigned MeSH terms, and are often freely available via PubMed Central. Conclusion: Scopus and Google Scholar on average have a higher citation count than WoS, whereas the difference is much larger between Google Scholar and WoS. Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies The search results were analyzed to determine possible reasons for the retrieval of unique items in each resource and to gather information on the general features of the Google Scholar results. Objective: Methods We surveyed nephrologists (kidney specialists) and provided each with a unique clinical question derived from 100 renal therapy systematic reviews. Sodium bicarbonate-based hydration prevents contrast-induced nephropathy: a meta-analysis. Google Scholar retrieved twice as many relevant articles as PubMed within the first 40 records (average recall: 21.9% vs 10.9%; Table 3). These results yielded few gray literature items. Dr Garg was supported by a Clinician Scientist Award from the CIHR. In PubMed we used the Clinical Queries search filter. While its advantages are substantial, Google Scholar is not without flaws. Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web - Springer . Kesselman M, Watstein SB.. Google Scholar(tm) and libraries: point/counterpoint. government site. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal PubMed remains an optimal tool in biomedical electronic research. In this study, we compare the ability of PubMed and Google Scholar to retrieve relevant renal literature for searches created by nephrologists to address questions of renal therapy. Given the nature of the survey, we are uncertain about how many steps nephrologists take to refine their search and future research should explore this. While 77% of nephrologists reported previous use of search limits, only 37% used controlled vocabularies, and only 20% used filters such as the Clinical Queries feature in PubMed [28,29]. However, Google Scholar provides some advantages in that it is an easy place to begin a search to find an initial retrieval of possibly worthwhile articles. An official website of the United States government. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic Garg AX, Iansavichus AV, Wilczynski NL, Kastner M, Baier LA, Shariff SZ, Rehman F, Weir M, McKibbon KA, Haynes RB. Answering physicians' clinical questions: obstacles and potential solutions. We extracted the citations to the primary studies referenced in each review that met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. Sensitivity and predictive value of 15 PubMed search strategies to answer clinical questions rated against full systematic reviews. Items in other formats included: 9 books, 11 book reviews, 2 Web pages, 1 subject index listing, 1 thesis, 1 newsletter item, 1 bibliography, 4 author replies, 1 annual meeting abstract, and 1 draft document. The site is secure. Kitchin DR, Applegate KE. In contrast, due to its expanded search capabilities, Google Scholar may provide greater access to free full-text publications. Careers, Unable to load your collection due to an error. Chambliss ML, Conley J. Answering clinical questions. Google Scholar also includes links to the online collections of some academic libraries. Both Scholar and PubMed belong in your search tool box. Google Scholar vs. PubMed for Health Sciences Literature Searching The evaluation of published indexes and abstract journals: criteria and possible procedures. For example, the objective of one review was to assess the effectiveness of normal saline versus sodium bicarbonate for prevention of contrast-induced nephropathy. Topics included iron-deficiency anemia, bupropion for smoking cessation, and articles by specific authors in specific journals. Previous article . Difference between Google Scholar and PubMed in - ResearchGate the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. d PubMed searches and Google Scholar searches often identify different articles. We used the example of a keyword search to evaluate the usefulness of these databases in biomedical information retrieval and a specific published article to evaluate their utility in performing citation analysis. Unable to load your collection due to an error, Unable to load your delegates due to an error. We did not use any pay-for-privilege accesses. Conclusions: Quality relevance ratio, defined as the ratio of high-quality relevant hits to low-quality irrelevant hits, was calculated for each tool according to these searches. and transmitted securely. The site is secure. Google Scholar has been met with both enthusiasm and criticism since its introduction in 2004. More recently, Google Scholar has gained popularity as an alternative online bibliographic search resource [11-21]. In addition, the search queries used in previous studies were created and tested by researchers in idealized settings, which may not generalize as well to searches generated by physicians in busy clinical settings. By the end of this workshop, learners will be able to: 416-864-5059 Our findings are consistent with those of previous studies [12,14,15,20,21]. Google Scholar retrieved the highest number of systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, and returned the most complete search results, finding relevant citations other search engines did not. Evidence. University of California Tries Just Saying No to Rising Journal Costs. Shariff SZ, Sontrop JM, Haynes RB, Iansavichus AV, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Weir MA, Speechley MR, Thind A, Garg AX.
Jefferson City, Mo Mayor Salary,
Qualities Of A Catholic Priest,
Bergen County Senior Services,
Articles D
