• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

专家搜索策略:医疗信息专业人员的信息检索实践

Expert Search Strategies: The Information Retrieval Practices of Healthcare Information Professionals.

作者信息

Russell-Rose Tony, Chamberlain Jon

机构信息

UXLabs Ltd, Guildford, United Kingdom.

School of Computer Science and Electronic Engineering, University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom.

出版信息

JMIR Med Inform. 2017 Oct 2;5(4):e33. doi: 10.2196/medinform.7680.

DOI:10.2196/medinform.7680
PMID:28970190
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5643841/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Healthcare information professionals play a key role in closing the knowledge gap between medical research and clinical practice. Their work involves meticulous searching of literature databases using complex search strategies that can consist of hundreds of keywords, operators, and ontology terms. This process is prone to error and can lead to inefficiency and bias if performed incorrectly.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate the search behavior of healthcare information professionals, uncovering their needs, goals, and requirements for information retrieval systems.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to healthcare information professionals via professional association email discussion lists. It investigated the search tasks they undertake, their techniques for search strategy formulation, their approaches to evaluating search results, and their preferred functionality for searching library-style databases. The popular literature search system PubMed was then evaluated to determine the extent to which their needs were met.

RESULTS

The 107 respondents indicated that their information retrieval process relied on the use of complex, repeatable, and transparent search strategies. On average it took 60 minutes to formulate a search strategy, with a search task taking 4 hours and consisting of 15 strategy lines. Respondents reviewed a median of 175 results per search task, far more than they would ideally like (100). The most desired features of a search system were merging search queries and combining search results.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare information professionals routinely address some of the most challenging information retrieval problems of any profession. However, their needs are not fully supported by current literature search systems and there is demand for improved functionality, in particular regarding the development and management of search strategies.

摘要

背景

医疗保健信息专业人员在弥合医学研究与临床实践之间的知识差距方面发挥着关键作用。他们的工作涉及使用复杂的搜索策略对文献数据库进行细致的搜索,这些策略可能包含数百个关键词、运算符和本体术语。如果执行不当,这个过程容易出错,并可能导致效率低下和偏差。

目的

本研究旨在调查医疗保健信息专业人员的搜索行为,揭示他们对信息检索系统的需求、目标和要求。

方法

通过专业协会电子邮件讨论列表向医疗保健信息专业人员分发了一份调查问卷。该问卷调查了他们承担的搜索任务、制定搜索策略的技术、评估搜索结果的方法以及他们在搜索图书馆式数据库时首选的功能。然后对广受欢迎的文献搜索系统PubMed进行评估,以确定其满足他们需求的程度。

结果

107名受访者表示,他们的信息检索过程依赖于使用复杂、可重复且透明的搜索策略。平均而言,制定一个搜索策略需要60分钟,一项搜索任务需要4小时,包含15条策略线路。受访者在每个搜索任务中审查的结果中位数为175条,远远超过他们理想的数量(100条)。搜索系统最需要的功能是合并搜索查询和组合搜索结果。

结论

医疗保健信息专业人员日常要解决任何职业中一些最具挑战性的信息检索问题。然而,当前的文献搜索系统并未充分满足他们的需求,对改进功能存在需求,特别是在搜索策略的制定和管理方面。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/b1203316d1d2/medinform_v5i4e33_fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/7fd802f8b800/medinform_v5i4e33_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/58a83bae3fab/medinform_v5i4e33_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/17254e9e1359/medinform_v5i4e33_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/7fbfc686cbd3/medinform_v5i4e33_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/bcfb84d7a68d/medinform_v5i4e33_fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/b1203316d1d2/medinform_v5i4e33_fig6.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/7fd802f8b800/medinform_v5i4e33_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/58a83bae3fab/medinform_v5i4e33_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/17254e9e1359/medinform_v5i4e33_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/7fbfc686cbd3/medinform_v5i4e33_fig4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/bcfb84d7a68d/medinform_v5i4e33_fig5.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0954/5643841/b1203316d1d2/medinform_v5i4e33_fig6.jpg

相似文献

1
Expert Search Strategies: The Information Retrieval Practices of Healthcare Information Professionals.专家搜索策略:医疗信息专业人员的信息检索实践
JMIR Med Inform. 2017 Oct 2;5(4):e33. doi: 10.2196/medinform.7680.
2
Promoting and supporting self-management for adults living in the community with physical chronic illness: A systematic review of the effectiveness and meaningfulness of the patient-practitioner encounter.促进和支持社区中患有慢性身体疾病的成年人进行自我管理:对医患互动的有效性和意义的系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(13):492-582. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907130-00001.
3
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性:一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
4
Critical Care Network in the State of Qatar.卡塔尔国重症监护网络。
Qatar Med J. 2019 Nov 7;2019(2):2. doi: 10.5339/qmj.2019.qccc.2. eCollection 2019.
5
6
Association between pacifier use and breast-feeding, sudden infant death syndrome, infection and dental malocclusion.安抚奶嘴使用与母乳喂养、婴儿猝死综合征、感染及牙列不齐之间的关联。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2005;3(6):1-33. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200503060-00001.
7
Understanding the information needs of public health practitioners: a literature review to inform design of an interactive digital knowledge management system.了解公共卫生从业者的信息需求:一项为交互式数字知识管理系统设计提供参考的文献综述
J Biomed Inform. 2007 Aug;40(4):410-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2006.12.008. Epub 2007 Jan 11.
8
Email for clinical communication between healthcare professionals.医疗保健专业人员之间用于临床沟通的电子邮件。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12(9):CD007979. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007979.pub2.
9
10
Email for clinical communication between patients/caregivers and healthcare professionals.患者/护理人员与医疗保健专业人员之间用于临床沟通的电子邮件。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Nov 14;11(11):CD007978. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007978.pub2.

引用本文的文献

1
The impact of prompting on ChatGPT's adherence to status epilepticus treatment guidelines.提示对ChatGPT遵循癫痫持续状态治疗指南的影响。
Sci Rep. 2025 Aug 28;15(1):31712. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-16902-9.
2
Weightage Identified Network of Keywords Technique: A Structured Approach in Identifying Keywords for Systematic Reviews.加权识别关键词网络技术:一种用于系统评价中识别关键词的结构化方法。
Healthc Inform Res. 2025 Jan;31(1):48-56. doi: 10.4258/hir.2025.31.1.48. Epub 2025 Jan 31.
3
Can the large language model ChatGPT-4omni predict outcomes in adult patients with status epilepticus?

本文引用的文献

1
Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry.利用PROSPERO注册库的数据,分析对医学干预措施进行系统评价所需的时间和人员。
BMJ Open. 2017 Feb 27;7(2):e012545. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-012545.
2
PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement.电子检索策略的PRESS同行评审:2015年指南声明。
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jul;75:40-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021. Epub 2016 Mar 19.
3
Analysis of PubMed User Sessions Using a Full-Day PubMed Query Log: A Comparison of Experienced and Nonexperienced PubMed Users.
大语言模型ChatGPT-4omni能否预测成人癫痫持续状态患者的预后?
Epilepsia. 2025 Mar;66(3):674-685. doi: 10.1111/epi.18215. Epub 2024 Dec 26.
4
Differences in Fear and Negativity Levels Between Formal and Informal Health-Related Websites: Analysis of Sentiments and Emotions.正式与非正式健康相关网站之间的恐惧和消极水平差异:情感分析。
J Med Internet Res. 2024 Aug 9;26:e55151. doi: 10.2196/55151.
5
Effects of Respiratory Muscle Training on Functional Ability, Pain-Related Outcomes, and Respiratory Function in Individuals with Low Back Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.呼吸肌训练对腰痛患者功能能力、疼痛相关结局及呼吸功能的影响:系统评价与Meta分析
J Clin Med. 2024 May 23;13(11):3053. doi: 10.3390/jcm13113053.
6
Effects of Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Training on Muscle Anabolism Biomarkers and Thrombotic Biomarkers Compared with Traditional Training in Healthy Adults Older Than 60 Years: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.与传统训练相比,低负荷血流限制训练对60岁以上健康成年人肌肉合成代谢生物标志物和血栓形成生物标志物的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析
Life (Basel). 2024 Mar 20;14(3):411. doi: 10.3390/life14030411.
7
Evaluating Kaposi Sarcoma in Kidney Transplant Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.肾移植患者中卡波西肉瘤的评估:一项系统评价和荟萃分析。
Cureus. 2024 Jan 18;16(1):e52527. doi: 10.7759/cureus.52527. eCollection 2024 Jan.
8
Performance of large language models on advocating the management of meningitis: a comparative qualitative study.大型语言模型在倡导脑膜炎管理方面的表现:一项比较定性研究。
BMJ Health Care Inform. 2024 Feb 2;31(1):e100978. doi: 10.1136/bmjhci-2023-100978.
9
Effects of Low-Load Blood Flow Restriction Resistance Training on Muscle Strength and Hypertrophy Compared with Traditional Resistance Training in Healthy Adults Older Than 60 Years: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.与传统阻力训练相比,低负荷血流限制阻力训练对60岁以上健康成年人肌肉力量和肥大的影响:系统评价和荟萃分析
J Clin Med. 2022 Dec 13;11(24):7389. doi: 10.3390/jcm11247389.
10
BioADAPT-MRC: adversarial learning-based domain adaptation improves biomedical machine reading comprehension task.BioADAPT-MRC:基于对抗学习的领域自适应提高生物医学机器阅读理解任务。
Bioinformatics. 2022 Sep 15;38(18):4369-4379. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btac508.
利用全天 PubMed 查询日志分析 PubMed 用户会话:有经验和无经验 PubMed 用户的比较。
JMIR Med Inform. 2015 Jul 2;3(3):e25. doi: 10.2196/medinform.3740.
4
Systematic review automation technologies.系统评价自动化技术。
Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 9;3:74. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-74.
5
Living systematic reviews: an emerging opportunity to narrow the evidence-practice gap.实时系统评价:缩小证据-实践差距的新契机。
PLoS Med. 2014 Feb 18;11(2):e1001603. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001603. eCollection 2014 Feb.
6
Evidence of effectiveness of health care professionals using handheld computers: a scoping review of systematic reviews.医疗保健专业人员使用手持计算机的有效性证据:系统评价的范围综述
J Med Internet Res. 2013 Oct 28;15(10):e212. doi: 10.2196/jmir.2530.
7
PubMed and beyond: a survey of web tools for searching biomedical literature.PubMed 及其他:生物医学文献检索网络工具调查。
Database (Oxford). 2011 Jan 18;2011:baq036. doi: 10.1093/database/baq036. Print 2011.
8
Boolean versus ranked querying for biomedical systematic reviews.布尔查询与等级查询在生物医学系统评价中的比较。
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010 Oct 12;10:58. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-10-58.
9
Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up?每天要处理七十五个试验和十一个系统评价:我们怎么才能跟得上?
PLoS Med. 2010 Sep 21;7(9):e1000326. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326.
10
Understanding PubMed user search behavior through log analysis.通过日志分析了解PubMed用户的搜索行为。
Database (Oxford). 2009;2009:bap018. doi: 10.1093/database/bap018. Epub 2009 Nov 27.