ArticleClinical orthopaedics and related research2011
Orthopaedic Web Links (OWL): a way to find professional orthopaedic information on the internet.
Article in Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Editorial.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFinding useful high-grade professional orthopaedic information on the Internet is often difficult. Orthopaedic Web Links (OWL) is a searchable database of vetted online orthopaedic resources. OWL uses a subject directory (OWL Directory) and a custom search engine (OWL Web) to provide a list of resources. The most effective way to find readily accessible, full text on-subject material suitable for education of an orthopaedic surgeon or trainee has not been defined. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We therefore (1) proposed a method for selecting topics and evaluating searches and (2) compared the search results from an orthopaedic-specific directory (OWL Directory), a custom search engine (OWL Web), and standard Google searches.
methodsA scoring system for evaluation of the search results was developed for standardized comparison. Single words and sets of three words from randomly selected examination questions provided the search strings to compare the three strategies.
resultsFor single keyword searches, the OWL Directory scored highest (16.4/50) of the three methods. For the three keywords searches, OWL Web had the highest mean score (26.0/50), followed by Google (22.8/50), and the OWL Directory (1.0/50). OWL Web searches had higher scores than Google searches, while returning 800 times fewer search results.
conclusionThe OWL Directory of orthopaedic subjects on the Internet provides a simple browsable category structure to find information. The OWL Web search engine scored higher than Google and resulted in a greater proportion of valid, on-subject, and accessible resources in the search results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.