The Stanford MediaServer Project: strategies for building a flexible digital media platform to support biomedical education and research. (25/310)

Medical media collections are growing at a pace that exceeds the value they currently provide as research and educational resources. To address this issue, the Stanford MediaServer was designed to promote innovative multimedia-based application development. The nucleus of the MediaServer platform is a digital media database strategically designed to meet the information needs of many biomedical disciplines. Key features include an intuitive web-based interface for collaboratively populating the media database, flexible creation of media collections for diverse and specialized purposes, and the ability to construct a variety of end-user applications from the same database to support biomedical education and research.  (+info)

Use of a MeSH-based index of faculty research interests to identify faculty publications: an IAIMSian study of precision, recall, and data reusability. (26/310)

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether MEDLINE searches based on an existing automated faculty research interest index or on author name entities can be used to automate construction of accurate online lists of faculty publications. METHODS: Curricula vitae (CVs) for 36 faculty members were selected at random. Their lists of journal publications were used to determine recall and precision of two MEDLINE search strategies. OUTCOME: Most faculty publications in the CVs (86%) were indexed in MEDLINE. The research-interest-enhanced MEDLINE searches retrieved citations in the CVs that were also in MEDLINE with a recall of 0.53 and precision of 0.85. For every 10 citations in the research interest-enhanced search, on average 8.5 were in the CVs. The name entity searches retrieved a higher proportion of citations in the CVs (recall 0.94, precision 0.59) with a higher rate of citations not in the CVs: For every 10 citations in the faculty name searches, 7.3 citations were in the CVs. Name commonness or clinical or basic sciences appointment did not change these results. CONCLUSION: MEDLINE searches, especially those based on research interests, can be used to populate faculty publication lists with high rates of accuracy. Author based searches can also be used, but they retrieve a higher proportion of irrelevant citations. This study confirms a successful instance of data reusability and integration at a large health academic sciences institution.  (+info)

Converting systematic reviews to Cochrane format: a cross-sectional survey of Australian authors of systematic reviews. (27/310)

BACKGROUND: Despite the growing reputation and subject coverage of the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, many systematic reviews continue to be published solely in paper-based health care journals. This study was designed to determine why authors choose to publish their systematic reviews outside of the Cochrane Collaboration and if they might be interested in converting their reviews to Cochrane format for publication in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of Australian primary authors of systematic reviews not published on the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identified from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness. RESULTS: We identified 88 systematic reviews from the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness with an Australian as the primary author. We surveyed 52 authors for whom valid contact information was available. The response rate was 88 per cent (46/52). Ten authors replied without completing the survey, leaving 36 valid surveys for analysis. The most frequently cited reasons for not undertaking a Cochrane review were: lack of time (78%), the need to undergo specific Cochrane training (46%), unwillingness to update reviews (36%), difficulties with the Cochrane process (26%) and the review topic already registered with the Cochrane Collaboration (21%). (Percentages based on completed responses to individual questions.) Nearly half the respondents would consider converting their review to Cochrane format. Dedicated time emerged as the most important factor in facilitating the potential conversion process. Other factors included navigating the Cochrane system, assistance with updating and financial support. Eighty-six per cent were willing to have their review converted to Cochrane format by another author. CONCLUSION: Time required to complete a Cochrane review and the need for specific training are the primary reasons why some authors publish systematic reviews outside of the Cochrane Collaboration. Encouragingly, almost half of the authors would consider converting their review to Cochrane format. Based on the current number of reviews in the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness, this could result in more than 700 additional Cochrane reviews. Ways of supporting these authors and how to provide dedicated time to convert systematic reviews needs further consideration.  (+info)

An author co-citation analysis of medical informatics. (28/310)

OBJECTIVE: This study presents the results of an author co-citation analysis of the interdisciplinary field of medical informatics. METHODS: An author co-citation analysis was conducted for the years 1994 to 1998, using the fifty most-cited American College of Medical Informatics fellows as an author population. Co-citation data were calculated for every author pair, and multivariate analyses were performed to ultimately show the relationships among all authors. A multidimensional map was created, wherein each author is represented as a point, and the proximity of these points reflects the relationships of authors as perceived by multiple citers. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The results from this analysis provide one perspective of the field of medical informatics and are used to suggest future research directions to address issues related to better understanding of communication and social networks in the field to inform better provision of information services.  (+info)

Randomized controlled trials in pediatric complementary and alternative medicine: where can they be found? (29/310)

BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of CAM interventions are of great relevance to pediatric health care providers. The objective of this study is to identify sources of reported randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the field of pediatric complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). METHODS: Reports of RCTs were identified by searching Medline and 12 additional bibliographic databases and by reviewing the reference lists of previously identified pediatric CAM systematic reviews. RESULTS: We identified 908 reports of RCTs that included children under 18 and investigated a CAM therapy. Since 1965, there has been a steady growth in the number of these trials that are being published. The four journals that published the most reported RCTs are The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Pediatrics, Journal of Pediatrics, and Lancet. Medline, CAB Health, and Embase were the best database sources for identifying these studies; they indexed 93.2%, 58.4% and 42.2 % respectively of the journals publishing reports of pediatric CAM RCTs. CONCLUSIONS: Those working or interested in the field of pediatric CAM should routinely search Medline, CAB Health and Embase for literature in the field. The four core journals identified above should be included in their collection.  (+info)

LASIK complications and the Internet: is the public being misled? (30/310)

BACKGROUND: LASIK (Laser in Situ Keratomileusis) is a very popular combined surgical and laser procedure, which is used to correct myopia (shortsightedness) and hyperopia (farsightedness). There is concern that the public is being misled regarding the safety of the procedure. OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality and quantity of the information on complications on LASIK Web sites. METHOD: Serial analysis and evaluation of the authorship, content, and technical quality of the information on the complications of LASIK on 21 Web sites. RESULTS: Of the 21 LASIK Web sites visited, 17 were commercial. Of the 21 Web sites, 5 (24%) had no information on complications. Of the 16 sites that had information on complications the author of the information was clearly identified in 5 (31%), the content was only referenced in 2 (12.5%), and evidence of the information having been updated was only seen in 2 (12.5%). The quantity of information is generally minimal and the information itself is generally difficult to understand and locate. CONCLUSION: The quality and quantity of the information on the Web on the complications of LASIK are poor. More work is required to encourage clear, accurate, up-to-date, clearly authored, and well-referenced, balanced ophthalmic information.  (+info)

Interface between authorship, industry and science in the domain of therapeutics. (31/310)

BACKGROUND: Changes in the character of medical authorship. Aims To compare the impact of industry-linked and non-industry linked articles. METHOD: We compared articles on sertraline being coordinated by a medical writing agency with articles not coordinated in this way. We calculated numbers of Medline-listed articles per author, journal impact factors, literature profiles and citation rates of both sets of articles. RESULTS: Non-agency-linked articles on sertraline had an average of 2.95 authors per article, a mean length of 3.4 pages, a mean Medline listing of 37 articles per author (95% CI 27-47) and a mean literature profile of 283 per article (95% CI 130-435). Agency-linked articles on sertraline had an average of 6.6 authors per article, a mean length of 10.7 pages, a mean Medline listing of 70 articles per author (95% CI 62-79) and a mean literature profile of 1839 per article (95% CI 1076-2602). The citation rate for agency articles was 20.2 (95% CI 13.4-27.0) and for non-agency articles it was 3.7 (95% CI 3.3-8.1). CONCLUSIONS: The literature profiles and citation rates of industry-linked and non-industry-linked articles differ. The emerging style of authorship in industry-linked articles can deliver good-quality articles, but it raises concerns for the scientific base of therapeutics.  (+info)

Is email a reliable means of contacting authors of previously published papers? A study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001. (32/310)

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether it is possible to contact authors of previously published papers via email. METHODS: A cross sectional study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001. RESULTS: 118 articles were included in the study. The response rate from those with valid email addresses was 73%. There was no statistical difference between the type of email address used and the address being invalid (p=0.392) or between the type of article and the likelihood of a reply (p=0.197). More responses were obtained from work addresses when compared with Hotmail addresses (86% v 57%, p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Email is a valid means of contacting authors of previously published articles, particularly within the emergency medicine specialty. A work based email address may be a more valid means of contact than a Hotmail address.  (+info)