Search PubMed⌕ Search

PubMed · 6752044

A personal reference retrieval system for medium sized computers allowing automatic data entry from ONLINE databases.

Abstract

A series of programs has been developed for the storage and retrieval of bibliographic references, which allow automatic cross-referencing of the stored entries. Reference retrieval becomes successively faster as more searches are performed and references are automatically sub-grouped under indexed terms allow complete sub-sets to be scanned independently. The indexing allows complete sub-collections of references to be printed, e.g. for a review, with no further searching requirements. This style of retrieval is conceptually similar to card systems in use by many scientists and should enable a rapid familiarization with the retrieval system. The editing features of the programs provide for the direct collection of references from large ONLINE databases (e.g. MEDLINE) and the automatic entering of the references into the personal data collection. The programs provide reliable storage of references for individual scientists, so that their collections from library databases, or from manual input may be updated and searched quickly.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

P Cooper. 1982. A personal reference retrieval system for medium sized computers allowing automatic data entry from ONLINE databases.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7101(82)90007-1

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: We would expect information on adverse drug reactions in randomised clinical trials to be easily retrievable from specific searches of electronic databases. However, complete retrieval of such information may not be straightforward, for two reasons. First, not all clinical drug trials provide data on the frequency of adverse effects. Secondly, not all electronic records of trials include terms in the abstract or indexing fields that enable us to select those with adverse effects data. We have determined how often automated search methods, using indexing terms and/or textwords in the title or abstract, would fail to retrieve trials with adverse effects data. METHODS: We used a sample set of 107 trials known to report frequencies of adverse drug effects, and measured the proportion that (i) were not assigned the appropriate adverse effects indexing terms in the electronic databases, and (ii) did not contain identifiable adverse effects textwords in the title or abstract. RESULTS: Of the 81 trials with records on both MEDLINE and EMBASE, 25 were not indexed for adverse effects in either database. Twenty-six trials were indexed in one database but not the other. Only 66 of the 107 trials reporting adverse effects data mentioned this in the abstract or title of the paper. Simultaneous use of textword and indexing terms retrieved only 82/107 (77%) papers. CONCLUSIONS: Specific search strategies based on adverse effects textwords and indexing terms will fail to identify nearly a quarter of trials that report on the rate of drug adverse effects.

Abstracting and Indexing↗