Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27147494›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2016

Interactive use of online health resources: a comparison of consumer and professional questions.

Kirk Roberts, Dina Demner-Fushman

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A conversational agent system for dietary supplements use.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2022
    Article
  6. What Would it Take to get Biomedical QA Systems into Practice?Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · 2021
    Article
  7. The Unified Medical Language System SPECIALIST Lexicon and Lexical Tools: Development and applications.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2020
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. How user intelligence is improving PubMed.Nature biotechnology · 2018
    Article
  12. Review
  13. UMLS to DBPedia link discovery through circular resolution.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
  14. Qcorp: an annotated classification corpus of Chinese health questions.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Semantic Parsing Method for Mapping Clinical Questions to Logical Forms.AMIA ... Annual Symposium proceedings. AMIA Symposium · 2017
    Article
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.

Kirk RobertsLister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health 8600 Rockville Pike, Building 38A/1003H Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA kirk.roberts@nih.gov.
Dina Demner-FushmanLister Hill National Center for Biomedical Communications, US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health 8600 Rockville Pike, Building 38A/1003H Bethesda, MD, 20894, USA.

Funding

Natural Language Question Understanding for Electronic Health RecordsR00LM012104 · NLM · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCI CTR HOUSTON · PI ROBERTS, KIRK EDWARD · 2016 to 2018
$747k
NLM NIH HHS R00 LM012104
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo understand how consumer questions on online resources differ from questions asked by professionals, and how such consumer questions differ across resources. MATERIALS AND

methodsTen online question corpora, 5 consumer and 5 professional, with a combined total of over 40 000 questions, were analyzed using a variety of natural language processing techniques. These techniques analyze questions at the lexical, syntactic, and semantic levels, exposing differences in both form and content.

resultsConsumer questions tend to be longer than professional questions, more closely resemble open-domain language, and focus far more on medical problems. Consumers ask more sub-questions, provide far more background information, and ask different types of questions than professionals. Furthermore, there is substantial variance of these factors between the different consumer corpora. DISCUSSION: The form of consumer questions is highly dependent upon the individual online resource, especially in the amount of background information provided. Professionals, on the other hand, provide very little background information and often ask much shorter questions. The content of consumer questions is also highly dependent upon the resource. While professional questions commonly discuss treatments and tests, consumer questions focus disproportionately on symptoms and diseases. Further, consumers place far more emphasis on certain types of health problems (eg, sexual health).

conclusionWebsites for consumers to submit health questions are a popular online resource filling important gaps in consumer health information. By analyzing how consumers write questions on these resources, we can better understand these gaps and create solutions for improving information access.This article is part of the Special Focus on Person-Generated Health and Wellness Data, which published in the May 2016 issue, Volume 23, Issue 3.

Indexed as

Consumer Health InformationInformation Seeking BehaviorConsumer BehaviorConsumer Health InformaticsHealth PersonnelHumansInternetNatural Language Processingconsumer health informaticsconsumer languageonline information seekingquestion answering

Identifiers

PMID27147494
PMCPMC4926747

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.