PubMed · 16871946
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
Alexander C Chester. A nasal knowledge gap.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16871946/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
AIM: This paper presents an evaluation of the effectiveness of three search strategies to identify research for a qualitative synthesis of patient experiences of living with a leg ulcer. BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews of research are increasingly the form of evidence used for evaluation of health care. There are well-established methods for conducting systematic reviews of effectiveness incorporating randomized controlled trials. Methods have been developed for the synthesis of qualitative research, but these are not widely used or evaluated. Searching for qualitative research is one of the least developed and tested areas in systematic reviewing of qualitative research. METHOD: The replication of three search strategies (free text, thesaurus and broad-based terms) developed for identification of qualitative research papers within electronic databases is described. Each strategy was run in seven electronic databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, British Nursing Index, Social Science Citation Index, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts, PsychInfo. The effectiveness of these strategies for identifying qualitative research for a synthesis of patients' experiences of living with a leg ulcer is discussed. FINDINGS: Each of the three search strategies produced similar numbers of potentially and actually relevant papers from each of the seven databases. These results were most striking for CINAHL, when all of the papers ultimately included in the review were identified by each search strategy. No other database identified all included papers. CONCLUSION: A simple search strategy using broad-based terms was as effective as a complex one (free text) in locating qualitative research examining patients' experiences of living with a leg ulcer. For a question with a clear nursing focus, it may be sufficient to search only CINAHL in order to locate qualitative research. This result needs replicating with other nursing topics.
Most biomedical librarians are frequent users of the major online services provided by the National Library of Medicine (NLM), part of the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. These services include MEDLINE/PubMed, MedlinePlus, ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed Central, document delivery, and other key biomedical resources. This article highlights less well-known services from reference, to historical information, to training and other services which librarians may not be aware the NLM offers to them. NLM encourages librarians to consider that NLM's unique and unsurpassed collection can help when local resources may be too limited to serve the needs of their patrons. doi:10.1300/J115v26n01_07.
PubMed and HighWire Press are both useful medical literature search engines available for free to anyone on the internet. We measured retrieval accuracy, number of results generated, retrieval speed, features and search tools on HighWire Press and PubMed using the quick search features of each. We found that using HighWire Press resulted in a higher likelihood of retrieving the desired article and higher number of search results than the same search on PubMed. PubMed was faster than HighWire Press in delivering search results regardless of search settings. There are considerable differences in search features between these two search engines.