Evidence-Based Practice in PubMed: Are Shared Filters Useful to Health Sciences Academic Users?
Contribution à un congrès / Conference object
Date de publication
Autrices et auteurs
Identifiant ORCID de l’auteur
Contributrices et contributeurs
Direction de recherche
Publié dans
Medical Library Association. Annual meeting
Date de la Conférence
Lieu de la Conférence
Éditeur
Cycle d'études
Programme
Mots-clés
- Evidence-based medicine
- PubMed
- Shared filters
- Pratique factuelle
Organisme subventionnaire
Résumé
Résumé
Objectives
In April 2010, the Université de Montréal’s Health Sciences Library has implemented shared filters in its institutional PubMed account. Most of these filters are designed to highlight resources for evidence-based practice, such as Clinical Queries, Systematic Reviews and Evidence-based Synopsis. We now want to measure how those filters are perceived and used by our users.
Methods
For one month, data was gathered through an online questionnaire proposed to users of Université de Montréal’s PubMed account. A print version was also distributed to participants in information literacy workshops given by the health sciences librarians. Respondents were restricted to users affiliated to Université de Montréal’s faculties of Medicine, Dentistry, Veterinary Sciences, Nursing and Pharmacy. Basic user information such as year/program of study or department affiliation was also collected. The questionnaire allowed users to identify the filters they use, assess the relevance of filters, and also suggest new ones.
Results
Survey results showed that the shared filters of Université de Montreal’s PubMed account were found useful by the majority of respondents. Filters allowing rapid access to secondary resources ranked among the most relevant (Reviews, Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Practice Guidelines and Clinical Evidence). For Clinical Study Queries, Randomized Controlled Trial (Therapy/Narrow) was considered the most useful. Some new shared filters have been suggested by respondents. Finally, 18% of the respondents indicated that they did not quite understand the relevance of filters.
Conclusion
Based on the survey results, shared filters considered most useful will be kept, some will be enhanced and others removed so that suggested ones could be added. The fact that some respondents did not understand well the relevance of filters could potentially be addressed through our PubMed workshops, online library guides or by renaming some filters in a more meaningful way.
Table des matières
Notes
Notes
Autre version linguistique
Ensemble de données lié
Licence
Approbation
Évaluation
Complété par
Référencé par
Ce document diffusé sur Papyrus est la propriété exclusive des titulaires des droits d'auteur et est protégé par la Loi sur le droit d'auteur (L.R.C. (1985), ch. C-42). Sauf si le document est diffusé sous une licence Creative Commons, il ne peut être utilisé que dans le cadre d'une utilisation équitable et non commerciale comme le prévoit la Loi (i.e. à des fins d'étude privée ou de recherche, de critique ou de compte-rendu). Pour toute autre utilisation, une autorisation écrite des titulaires des droits d'auteur sera nécessaire.