Journal of The Medical Library Association 

About: Journal of The Medical Library Association is an academic journal published by University Library System, University of Pittsburgh. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medical library & Health care. It has an ISSN identifier of 1536-5050. It is also open access. Over the lifetime, 1514 publications have been published receiving 34862 citations. The journal is also known as: JMLA & J Med Libr Assoc.

The Cochrane Library

Abstract: Accessible through the Wiley InterScience Website, the new interface to the Cochrane Library provides easy access to a collection of high-quality, evidence-based health care databases assembled by the Cochrane Collaboration and related organizations including the United Kingdom's National Health Service (NHS). Established in 1993, the Cochrane Collaboration aims to produce and disseminate reliable and up-to-date information to support decision making in health care. The Cochrane Library database collection includes the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Methodology Reviews, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Methodology Register, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database, and NHS Economic Evaluation Database. A wide and growing range of health, social, and economic topics are covered and can be utilized to determine the effectiveness and appropriateness of interventions, to develop guidelines, and to use in policy making. All users can search the databases free of charge from the Wiley Website and access abstract material. Subscribers can search the databases and access full-text material. The Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook is available from the Cochrane Library Website and is useful reading for any librarian wishing to understand the systematic review process more fully. Database coverage ranges from 1992 to the present, and the resource is updated on a quarterly basis. At the time of this review, over 470,700 records were available and searchable from the combined Cochrane Library database collection. In particular, 2,249 complete reviews and 1,539 protocols were available from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Once logged into the Cochrane Library on Wiley InterScience, users find a straightforward and easy-to-navigate interface. Links to browse functions are clearly labeled. Users can browse an alphabetical list of titles in each individual database or browse topics by Cochrane Review Group, such as Pregnancy and Childbirth or Heart. Basic searches can be performed using the search box also located on the home page. Users can quickly search across the entire content of the database collection by entering a keyword or search terms. Boolean operators (“AND,” “OR,” “NOT”) may also be used when performing a quick search and are effective for combining multiple search terms. Search tips explain how to perform wildcard truncation and proximity searches. To refine a search, the Cochrane Advanced Search page offers several options and limits, such as limiting to a particular database or databases. In addition, users can limit searches by fields that they wish to search such as author, source, or publication type using pull-down menus. Searches may be limited by date range or by record status including new, commented, commented and updated, or withdrawn. A search for Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms is also available to assist in locating specific and relevant terms. The search history keeps a list of searches performed during the current session, and searches can be combined. Results are displayed in an uncluttered results list. The total number of record matches in each of the Cochrane Library databases is displayed. Results can be sorted alphabetically by title, by relevancy, or by publication date, and twenty-five results are displayed on each page. Search results consist primarily of structured abstracts and completed full-text reviews and protocols carried out by the Cochrane Collaboration. Color-coded symbols are used to indicate reviews and protocols. Highlighting search terms in a selected record would be a useful addition. Several viewing and output options are offered. The document display format includes abstracts and synopses. A left-column table of contents section allows quick navigation in the document. Full-text documents are available to view and print in hypertext markup language (HMTL) and portable document format (PDF) versions. Users can manage the results by using the check boxes next to each record to select individual records. Selected citations and abstracts can be exported in text format and imported into standard bibliographic management programs. A more efficient and clearer method for sorting, displaying, emailing, and printing selected records would be a desirable enhancement. One of the value-added features is the option of creating a personal profile. After completing a one-time registration, users can use a “personal navigation bar” to manage their saved articles and saved searches and to register for customized alerts in their chosen topic areas. In addition, a feedback system is available to view and add comments and criticisms of reviews or protocols. Users are encouraged to submit comments to help ensure the highest quality of reviews. Major strengths of the resource include an easy-to-use interface, a variety of flexible searching and browsing features, and the option to create a customized profile with alerts. Users will appreciate the ability to locate reliable and current information from a single interface, to store saved searches, and to receive customized alerts. Overall, the Cochrane Library via Wiley InterScience provides easy access to a wealth of quality evidence-based material useful for developing guidelines, making policy, and assessing the effects of health care interventions. This resource is a valuable tool for a broad range of people interested in evidence-based health care, including clinicians, consumers, policy makers, researchers, educators, and others.

De-duplication of database search results for systematic reviews in EndNote

Abstract: When conducting exhaustive searches for systematic reviews, information professionals search multiple databases with overlapping content. They typically remove duplicate records to reduce the reviewers’ workload associated with screening titles and abstracts; sometimes the reviewers remove the duplicates.This article describes a de-duplication method.

Avoiding versus seeking: the relationship of information seeking to avoidance, blunting, coping, dissonance, and related concepts.

Abstract: Question: How have theorists and empirical researchers treated the human tendency to avoid discomforting information? Data Sources: A historical review (1890–2004) of theory literature in communication and information studies, coupled with searches of recent studies on uptake of genetic testing and on coping strategies of cancer patients, was performed. Study Selection: The authors' review of the recent literature included searches of the MEDLINE, PsychInfo, and CINAHL databases between 1992 and summer of 2004 and selective, manual searches of earlier literature. Search strategies included the following subject headings and key words: MeSH headings: Genetic Screening/psychology, Decision Making, Neoplasms/diagnosis/genetics/psychology; CINAHL headings: Genetic Screening, Genetic Counseling, Anxiety, Decision Making, Decision Making/Patient; additional key words: avoidance, worry, monitoring, blunting, cancer. The “Related Articles” function in MEDLINE was used to perform additional “citation pearl” searching. Main Results: The assumption that individuals actively seek information underlies much of psychological theory and communication practice, as well as most models of the information-seeking process. However, much research has also noted that sometimes people avoid information, if paying attention to it will cause mental discomfort or dissonance. Cancer information in general and genetic screening for cancer in particular are discussed as examples to illustrate this pattern. Conclusion: That some patients avoid knowledge of imminent disease makes avoidance behavior an important area for social and psychological research, particularly with regard to genetic testing.

Impact factor: a valid measure of journal quality?

Abstract: Objectives: Impact factor, an index based on the frequency with which a journal's articles are cited in scientific publications, is a putative marker of journal quality However, empiric studies on impact factor's validity as an indicator of quality are lacking The authors assessed the validity of impact factor as a measure of quality for general medical journals by testing its association with journal quality as rated by clinical practitioners and researchers Methods: We surveyed physicians specializing in internal medicine in the United States, randomly sampled from the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile (practitioner group, n = 113) and from a list of graduates from a national postdoctoral training program in clinical and health services research (research group, n = 151) Respondents rated the quality of nine general medical journals, and we assessed the correlation between these ratings and the journals' impact factors Results: The correlation between impact factor and physicians' ratings of journal quality was strong (r2 = 082, P = 0001) The correlation was higher for the research group (r2 = 083, P = 0001) than for the practitioner group (r2 = 062, P = 001) Conclusions: Impact factor may be a reasonable indicator of quality for general medical journals

How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on

Abstract: PMCID: PMC1435857 This article has been corrected. See J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 July; 94(3): 354. http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC1525311/