Each item includes the number of links to it - in effect, a citation tracker, providing for free what interfaces such as Web of Science and Elsevier's Scopus provide at much cost. 2 Using text analysis and the number of links from other sites, Scholar rapidly delivers a ranked listing, as Google does. Through agreements with publishers, Scholar accesses the “invisible” or “deep” Web, that is, commercial Web sites the automated “spiders” used by search engines such as Google cannot access. The current version of Google Scholar focuses on Internet sites that contain information that is critically appraised, such as the peer-reviewed journal literature, or that are produced by reputable sources, such as universities. Ideally, this engine would provide integrated, powerful access to many sources, including full-text journal literature and textbooks, evidence-based information, information for patients, and drug information, achieving for clinical sources what Google has for the entire public Internet. Features enabling search refinement would be welcome, such as a tool to find related articles by subject or by using links or citations, including more recent articles that cite the retrieved items. Busy clinicians would wish for succinct reviews and for the best evidence, with links to key papers that would be determined as such by the number of times they have been cited, thus balancing popularity with relevance and quality. The ideal tool for finding clinical information would be a fast engine that provides the best hits from scholarly journal literature and clinical resources such as guidelines, perhaps emphasizing sites favoured by physicians in the way that Google emphasizes popular websites for general audiences. Searchers are often frustrated by the large number of links Google will generate for common topics. Google, however, emphasizes Web sites that are popular, as measured by the number of links from other sites, and does not weigh quality or date. Most people, including physicians, who are using the Internet to search for information go first to Google ( because it usually generates useful links quickly. This overview evaluates Scholar as an alternative for clinicians seeking information. 1 With this service, Google hopes to make scholarly literature more accessible by indexing academic and professional sources, including peer-reviewed articles, preprints, theses and conference proceedings. The release of the beta version of Google Scholar ( ) in November 2004 generated much media coverage and academic commentary.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |