Expert Search Strategies: The Information Retrieval Practices of Healthcare Information Professionals

被引:38
作者
Russell-Rose, Tony [1 ]
Chamberlain, Jon [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] UXLabs Ltd, 3000 Cathedral Hill, Guildford GU2 7YB, Surrey, England
[2] Univ Essex, Sch Comp Sci & Elect Engn, Colchester, Essex, England
来源
JMIR MEDICAL INFORMATICS | 2017年 / 5卷 / 04期
关键词
review; surveys and questionnaires; search engine; information management; information systems; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS;
D O I
10.2196/medinform.7680
中图分类号
R-058 [];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Healthcare information professionals play a key role in closing the knowledge gap between medical research and clinical practice. Their work involves meticulous searching of literature databases using complex search strategies that can consist of hundreds of keywords, operators, and ontology terms. This process is prone to error and can lead to inefficiency and bias if performed incorrectly. Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the search behavior of healthcare information professionals, uncovering their needs, goals, and requirements for information retrieval systems. Methods: A survey was distributed to healthcare information professionals via professional association email discussion lists. It investigated the search tasks they undertake, their techniques for search strategy formulation, their approaches to evaluating search results, and their preferred functionality for searching library-style databases. The popular literature search system PubMed was then evaluated to determine the extent to which their needs were met. Results: The 107 respondents indicated that their information retrieval process relied on the use of complex, repeatable, and transparent search strategies. On average it took 60 minutes to formulate a search strategy, with a search task taking 4 hours and consisting of 15 strategy lines. Respondents reviewed a median of 175 results per search task, far more than they would ideally like (100). The most desired features of a search system were merging search queries and combining search results. Conclusions: Healthcare information professionals routinely address some of the most challenging information retrieval problems of any profession. However, their needs are not fully supported by current literature search systems and there is demand for improved functionality, in particular regarding the development and management of search strategies.
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文
共 32 条
[1]  
About MEDLINE and PubMed: The Resources Guide, MEDLINE PUBMED RES G
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2018, COCHRANE HDB SYSTEMA
[3]   Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? [J].
Bastian, Hilda ;
Glasziou, Paul ;
Chalmers, Iain .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2010, 7 (09)
[4]   Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry [J].
Borah, Rohit ;
Brown, Andrew W. ;
Capers, Patrice L. ;
Kaiser, Kathryn A. .
BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (02)
[5]  
Chapman D, 2009, J CAN ACAD CHILD ADO, V18, P58
[6]  
Ciapponi A, 2012, 2012 OCT 03 20 COCHR
[7]   Pragmatic approach is effective in evidence based health care [J].
Clark, J ;
Wentz, R .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 321 (7260) :566-567
[8]  
Crook G, HLTH INFORM HLTH INF
[9]   Understanding PubMed® user search behavior through log analysis [J].
Dogan, Rezarta Islamaj ;
Murray, G. Craig ;
Neveol, Aurelie ;
Lu, Zhiyong .
DATABASE-THE JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL DATABASES AND CURATION, 2009,
[10]   Living Systematic Reviews: An Emerging Opportunity to Narrow the Evidence-Practice Gap [J].
Elliott, Julian H. ;
Turner, Tari ;
Clavisi, Ornella ;
Thomas, James ;
Higgins, Julian P. T. ;
Mavergames, Chris ;
Gruen, Russell L. .
PLOS MEDICINE, 2014, 11 (02)