Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25954406›Full record

ArticleAMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium2014

Does query expansion limit our learning? A comparison of social-based expansion to content-based expansion for medical queries on the internet.

Christopher Pentoney, Jeff Harwell, Gondy Leroy

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium, 2014. 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

3 authors.

Christopher PentoneyClaremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.
Jeff HarwellClaremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.
Gondy LeroyClaremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA ; University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Searching for medical information online is a common activity. While it has been shown that forming good queries is difficult, Google's query suggestion tool, a type of query expansion, aims to facilitate query formation. However, it is unknown how this expansion, which is based on what others searched for, affects the information gathering of the online community. To measure the impact of social-based query expansion, this study compared it with content-based expansion, i.e., what is really in the text. We used 138,906 medical queries from the AOL User Session Collection and expanded them using Google's Autocomplete method (social-based) and the content of the Google Web Corpus (content-based). We evaluated the specificity and ambiguity of the expansion terms for trigram queries. We also looked at the impact on the actual results using domain diversity and expansion edit distance. Results showed that the social-based method provided more precise expansion terms as well as terms that were less ambiguous. Expanded queries do not differ significantly in diversity when expanded using the social-based method (6.72 different domains returned in the first ten results, on average) vs. content-based method (6.73 different domains, on average).

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationInternetInformation Seeking BehaviorInformation Storage and RetrievalSearch Engine

Identifiers

PMID25954406
PMCPMC4419949

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.