For Non-Expert Clinical Searches, Google Scholar Results Are Older With Higher Impact While PubMed Results Offer More Breadth

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice - Canada
doi 10.18438/b88609
Full Text
Abstract

Available in full text

Date
Authors
Publisher

University of Alberta Libraries

Related search

An Experimental Search Strategy Retrieves More Precise Results Than PubMed and Google for Questions About Medical Interventions

PeerJ
GeneticsMolecular BiologyBiochemistryBiological SciencesMedicineAgriculturalNeuroscience
2015English

Figure 2: Searches on PubMed and Google Trends.

English

Variation in Number of Hits for Complex Searches in Google Scholar

Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA
MedicineInformation SciencesLibraryHealth Informatics
2016English

Residents and Medical Students Correctly Answer Clinical Questions More Often With Google and UpToDate Than With PubMed or Ovid MEDLINE

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice
LibraryInformation Sciences
2011English

Google Scholar as an Instrument for Monitoring Professional Development of Higher Education Institute

OPEN EDUCATIONAL E-ENVIRONMENT OF MODERN UNIVERSITY
2018English

Google Scholar: A Source for Clinicians?

CMAJ
Medicine
2005English

Introduction to Google Scholar

2013English

Cross-Examining Google Scholar

Reference and User Services Quarterly
Information SystemsLibraryInformation Sciences
2013English

Are Results From Clinical Trials Reliable?

The Lancet Oncology
Oncology
2019English

Amanote Research

Note-taking for researchers

Follow Amanote

© 2024 Amaplex Software S.P.R.L. All rights reserved.

Privacy PolicyRefund Policy