Evaluation of an information source illustrated by a case study: Effect of screening for breast cancer

Abstract

It is argued that to evaluate an information source (e.g., a Wikipedia article), it is necessary to relate the content of that source to an interpretation of the state of knowledge at the research front (which is typically developing dynamically). In the research literature, there is a controversy about the effect of screening programs for breast cancer. This controversy is used to compare the value of Wikipedia with Encyclopedia Britannica and two Danish encyclopedias as information sources. It is argued that this method of examining information sources is preferable to other methods which have been suggested in the literature.

A Wikipédia como fonte de informação de referência: avaliação e perspectivas

“…Hjørland (2011) propôs um método e alguns critérios para avaliar fontes de informação, com os quais analisou quatro enciclopédias quanto à qualidade como fonte de informação para um tema específico e controverso: o efeito dos exames de detecção precoce de câncer de mama. Concluiu que a melhor das quatro foi a Wikipédia em inglês, seguida da Enciclopédia Nacional Dinamarquesa, da Encyclopedia Britannica e da Wikipédia em dinamarquês.…”

A quality assessment framework for natural hazard event documentation: application to trans-basin flood reports in Germany

“…Bailin andGrafstein, 2010 andHjørland, 2012). We consider the technical experience of the producing body as important for the quality of the report; however, we acknowledge peer reviewing as the gold standard for quality control.…”

“…Hjørland (2012) provides a concise list of methods for evaluating information sources as they are applied in the field of information sciences. In total they discuss 12 widely used concepts, most of which originate from critical research assessment (and are therefore primarily intended for "white" literature) and address quality through the classical peer review, author credentials, publisher reputation or journal impact factors.…”

“…Broader concepts that acknowledge the heterogeneity of information sources are checklist approaches (most common for evaluating websites, e.g. Hjørland, 2011), comparative studies (evaluating a study against "authoritative works" in the field, e.g. Bragues, 2009), or evidence-based evaluations.…”

Evidence, Not Authority

“…We need to consider whether the arguments on each side are important, and if so, we have to evaluate information sources in relation to how the arguments are represented in the sources. 40 Fallis writes that it is difficult to find information-especially online information-that we know is accurate, even for librarians and information professionals. Authority is important to the information seeker, but Fallis also notes that the vastness of the Internet makes it difficult to know much about the source.…”