Cargando…
Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Literature review using search engines results in a list of manuscripts but does not provide the content contained in the manuscripts. Our goal was to evaluate user performance-based criteria of concept retrieval accuracy and efficiency using a new database system that con...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9644076/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36351703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100616 |
_version_ | 1784826668453462016 |
---|---|
author | Torfs-Leibman, Camille Ashikaga, Takamaru Krag, David Lunna, Shania Robtoy, Sarah Bombardier, Rachel |
author_facet | Torfs-Leibman, Camille Ashikaga, Takamaru Krag, David Lunna, Shania Robtoy, Sarah Bombardier, Rachel |
author_sort | Torfs-Leibman, Camille |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Literature review using search engines results in a list of manuscripts but does not provide the content contained in the manuscripts. Our goal was to evaluate user performance-based criteria of concept retrieval accuracy and efficiency using a new database system that contained information extracted from 1000 COVID-19 articles. METHODS: A sample of 17 students from the University of Vermont were randomly assigned to use the COVID-19 publication database or their usual preferred search methods to research eight prompts about COVID-19. The relevance and accuracy of the evidence found for each prompt were graded. A Cox proportional hazards’ model with a sandwich estimator and Kaplan-Meier plots were used to analyse these data in a time-to-correct answer context. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that students using the new information management system answered significantly more prompts correctly and, in less time, than students using conventional research methods. Bivariate models for demographic factors indicated that previous research experience conferred an advantage in study performance, though it was found to be independent from the assigned research method. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this pilot randomised trial present a potential tool for more quickly and thoroughly navigating the literature on expansive topics such as COVID-19. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9644076 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-96440762022-11-14 Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods Torfs-Leibman, Camille Ashikaga, Takamaru Krag, David Lunna, Shania Robtoy, Sarah Bombardier, Rachel BMJ Health Care Inform Original Research BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Literature review using search engines results in a list of manuscripts but does not provide the content contained in the manuscripts. Our goal was to evaluate user performance-based criteria of concept retrieval accuracy and efficiency using a new database system that contained information extracted from 1000 COVID-19 articles. METHODS: A sample of 17 students from the University of Vermont were randomly assigned to use the COVID-19 publication database or their usual preferred search methods to research eight prompts about COVID-19. The relevance and accuracy of the evidence found for each prompt were graded. A Cox proportional hazards’ model with a sandwich estimator and Kaplan-Meier plots were used to analyse these data in a time-to-correct answer context. RESULTS: Our findings indicate that students using the new information management system answered significantly more prompts correctly and, in less time, than students using conventional research methods. Bivariate models for demographic factors indicated that previous research experience conferred an advantage in study performance, though it was found to be independent from the assigned research method. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this pilot randomised trial present a potential tool for more quickly and thoroughly navigating the literature on expansive topics such as COVID-19. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9644076/ /pubmed/36351703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100616 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Torfs-Leibman, Camille Ashikaga, Takamaru Krag, David Lunna, Shania Robtoy, Sarah Bombardier, Rachel Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title | Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title_full | Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title_fullStr | Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title_full_unstemmed | Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title_short | Pilot trial comparing COVID-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
title_sort | pilot trial comparing covid-19 publication database to conventional online search methods |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9644076/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36351703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjhci-2022-100616 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT torfsleibmancamille pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods AT ashikagatakamaru pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods AT kragdavid pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods AT lunnashania pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods AT robtoysarah pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods AT bombardierrachel pilottrialcomparingcovid19publicationdatabasetoconventionalonlinesearchmethods |