EndNote检索与直接检索MEDLINE（Ovid和PubMed）的比较。

Retrieval comparison of EndNote to search MEDLINE (Ovid and PubMed) versus searching them directly.

作者信息

Gall Carole, Brahmi Frances A

机构信息

Ruth Lilly Medical Library, Indiana University School of Medicine, 975 W. Walnut St. IB Rm. 322, Indianapolis, IN 46202-5121, USA.

出版信息

Med Ref Serv Q. 2004 Fall;23(3):25-32. doi: 10.1300/J115v23n03_03.

DOI:10.1300/J115v23n03_03

PMID:15364649

Abstract

Using EndNote version 7.0, the authors tested the search capabilities of the EndNote search engine for retrieving citations from MEDLINE for importation into EndNote, a citation management software package. Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed were selected for the comparison. Several searches were performed on Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed using EndNote as the search engine, and the same searches were run on both Ovid and PubMed directly. Findings indicate that it is preferable to search MEDLINE directly rather than using EndNote. The publishers of EndNote do warn its users about the limitations of their product as a search engine when searching external databases. In this article, the limitations of EndNote as a search engine for searching MEDLINE were explored as related to MeSH, non-MeSH, citation verification, and author searching.

摘要

作者使用EndNote 7.0版本测试了EndNote搜索引擎从MEDLINE检索引文以导入到EndNote（一款引文管理软件包）中的搜索能力。选择了Ovid MEDLINE和PubMed进行比较。使用EndNote作为搜索引擎在Ovid MEDLINE和PubMed上进行了几次搜索，并直接在Ovid和PubMed上运行相同的搜索。结果表明，直接搜索MEDLINE比使用EndNote更可取。EndNote的出版商确实警告其用户，在搜索外部数据库时，其产品作为搜索引擎存在局限性。在本文中，探讨了EndNote作为搜索MEDLINE的搜索引擎在与医学主题词表（MeSH）、非MeSH、引文验证和作者搜索相关方面的局限性。