评价数字图书馆：系统综述。

Evaluating digital libraries: a systematised review.

机构信息

School of Management and Medical Information, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

Medical Library and Information Sciences, School of Management and Medical Information, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.

出版信息

Health Info Libr J. 2018 Sep;35(3):180-191. doi: 10.1111/hir.12231.

DOI:10.1111/hir.12231

PMID:30160384

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the models and methods for evaluating digital libraries.

METHODS

Springer, Science Direct, ProQuest, Emerald, Wiley, LISTA, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, Magiran (Persian), Irandoc (Persian), SID (Persian) and Noormags (Persian) databases were searched systematically based on the defined criteria. Selection criteria included full-text articles and dissertations published in English and Persian languages in 2004-2017. The final included articles (n = 64) were reviewed, selected and analysed by group discussions.

RESULTS

The results of analysing 64 included articles for this systematised review specified that the evaluation of digital libraries is mostly focused on the service quality aspect, and DigiQual was the most frequently used model. Few studies have evaluated digital libraries in the health sector. The researcher developed questionnaire is the most frequently used method to evaluate digital libraries.

CONCLUSION

Because there are fewer studies of digital libraries evaluation in the health sector, the specific features of health digital libraries should be addressed by librarians and health digital library designers to develop specific models.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在考察数字图书馆评估的模型和方法。

方法

基于既定标准，系统检索了 Springer、Science Direct、ProQuest、Emerald、Wiley、LISTA、Web of Science（WOS）、Scopus、Magiran（波斯语）、Irandoc（波斯语）、SID（波斯语）和 Noormags（波斯语）数据库。纳入标准为 2004-2017 年以英文和波斯文全文发表的文章和学位论文。对最终纳入的 64 篇文章进行了综述、选择和小组讨论分析。