Suppr超能文献

医学文献数据库(MEDLINE)中的索引一致性

Indexing consistency in MEDLINE.

作者信息

Funk M E, Reid C A

出版信息

Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1983 Apr;71(2):176-83.

Abstract

The quality of indexing of periodicals in a bibliographic data base cannot be measured directly, as there is no one "correct" way to index an item. However, consistency can be used to measure the reliability of indexing. To measure consistency in MEDLINE, 760 twice-indexed articles from 42 periodical issues were identified in the data base, and their indexing compared. Consistency, expressed as a percentage, was measured using Hooper's equation. Overall, checktags had the highest consistency. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and subheadings were applied more consistently to central concepts than to peripheral points. When subheadings were added to a main heading, consistency was lowered. "Floating" subheadings were more consistent than were attached subheadings. Indexing consistency was not affected by journal indexing priority, language, or length of the article. Terms from MeSH Tree Structure categories A, B, and D appeared more often than expected in the high-consistency articles; whereas terms from categories E, F, H, and N appeared more often than expected in the low-consistency articles. MEDLINE, with its excellent controlled vocabulary, exemplary quality control, and highly trained indexers, probably represents the state of the art in manually indexed data bases.

摘要

由于不存在一种“正确”的文献索引方式,所以无法直接衡量书目数据库中期刊索引的质量。然而,一致性可用于衡量索引的可靠性。为了衡量医学期刊数据库(MEDLINE)中的索引一致性,从该数据库中识别出42种期刊中的760篇经过两次索引的文章,并对其索引进行比较。一致性以百分比表示,使用胡珀公式进行测量。总体而言,校验标签的一致性最高。医学主题词(MeSH)及其副标题在应用于核心概念时比应用于边缘内容时更为一致。当在主标题上添加副标题时,一致性会降低。“浮动”副标题比附加副标题更具一致性。索引一致性不受期刊索引优先级、语言或文章长度的影响。来自MeSH树形结构A、B和D类别的术语在高一致性文章中出现的频率高于预期;而来自E、F、H和N类别的术语在低一致性文章中出现的频率高于预期。MEDLINE拥有出色的受控词汇表、堪称典范的质量控制以及训练有素的索引员,它可能代表了人工索引数据库的当前水平。

相似文献

7
Knowledge-based indexing of the medical literature: the Indexing Aid Project.医学文献的基于知识的索引编制:索引辅助项目。
J Am Soc Inf Sci. 1987 May;38(3):184-96. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(198705)38:3<184::AID-ASI7>3.0.CO;2-F.

引用本文的文献

5
Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review.图书馆员在系统评价中的作用:一项范围综述
J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Jan;106(1):46-56. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2018.82. Epub 2018 Jan 2.

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验