Comparing AGRICOLA by Vendor

Casler, Carla Long; Herring, Eileen; Smith, Helen; Moberly, Heather K.; Flood, Susan; Perry, Valerie

doi:10.1300/j108v04n03_05

Cited by 1 publication

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies in this area had predominantly looked at the variations in results generated from the same database but hosted on different platforms, and reasons for these variations . This project bridges the gap between this understanding and the practical assessment of host platforms for complex searches, as would be expected in a systematic review.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…For example, Kimball produced an analysis of three platforms (OvidSP, EBSCO and Engineering Village) for searching one database (GeoRef) but did not examine the specific requirements for complex searching or produce a useable checklist. In addition, there are several studies that examined the results of individual searches carried out on the same database but on different platforms . Younger and Boddy assessed the performance of the database AMED across three platforms (DIALOG DataStar, OVID and EBSCOhost) and found the number of hits can vary considerably with basic searches.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Younger and Boddy assessed the performance of the database AMED across three platforms (DIALOG DataStar, OVID and EBSCOhost) and found the number of hits can vary considerably with basic searches. Sewell and Casler compared the performance and features of various host platforms for searching CAB abstracts and AGRICOLA, respectively. Sewell evaluated CAB direct, EBSCOhost, ISI and OvidSp and found no statistically significant differences in precision or recall.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies focus either on the performance of individual databases on different platforms or on how alterations in search strategies translated across different platforms affect the results. [6][7][8][9][10] For example, Kimball 7 produced an analysis of three platforms (OvidSP, EBSCO and Engineering Village) for searching one database (GeoRef) but did not examine the specific requirements for complex searching or produce a useable checklist. In addition, there are several studies that examined the results of individual searches carried out on the same database but on different platforms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, there are several studies that examined the results of individual searches carried out on the same database but on different platforms. 6,[8][9][10] Younger and Boddy 8 assessed the performance of the database AMED across three platforms (DIA-LOG DataStar, OVID and EBSCOhost) and found the number of hits can vary considerably with basic searches. Sewell 9 and Casler 10 compared the performance and features of various host platforms for searching CAB abstracts and AGRICOLA, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A checklist to assess database‐hosting platforms for designing and running searches for systematic reviews

Bethel

Rogers

2014

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Systematic reviews require literature searches that are precise, sensitive and often complex. Database-hosting platforms need to facilitate this type of searching in order to minimise errors and the risk of bias in the results. Objectives: The main objective of the study was to create a generic checklist of criteria to assess the ability of host platforms to cope with complex searching, for example, for systematic reviews, and to test the checklist against three host platforms (EBSCOhost, OvidSP and ProQuest). Method: The checklist was developed as usual review work was carried out and through discussion between the two authors. Attributes on the checklist were designated as 'desirable' or 'essential'. The authors tested the checklist independently against three host platforms and graded their performance from 1 (insufficient) to 3 (performs well). Results: Fifty-five desirable or essential attributes were identified for the checklist. None of the platforms performed well for all of the attributes on the checklist. Conclusions: Not all database-hosting platforms are designed for complex searching. Librarians and other decision-makers who work in health research settings need to be aware of the different limitations of host platforms for complex searching when they are making purchasing decisions or training others.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%