Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16848134›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical systems2006

Comparative analysis of medical web search using generalized vs. niche technologies.

Daniel Lorence, Joanna Abraham

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical systems, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Daniel LorenceDepartment of Health Policy and Administration and The School of Information Science and Technology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park 16802, USA. dpl10@psu.edu
Joanna Abraham

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One increasingly popular solution to the problem of information overload is the niche search engine, designed as a customized knowledge management tool to meet the needs of information seekers with similar interests. By limiting web crawling to a specific subject area, the niche engine is able to crawl deeper and more discreetly than commercial counterparts. This exploratory technology assessment study sought to examine differences in information search and retrieval patterns between commercial and niche search engines in areas of debated or uncertain healthcarer treatment. Findings suggest that while information found within the niche search is generally more trustworthy, niche searches leave out many reliable sources which are retrievable through commercial search engines. Also, consumer-friendly (non-technical) resources were found to be more prevalent using commercial search engines, suggesting greater relevance for the layperson within this domain.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsInternetInformation Storage and RetrievalMedical InformaticsModels, Theoretical

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.