期刊文献+

MEDLINE和EMBASE数据库在我国高校使用情况分析 被引量:2

Analysis of the Usage of MEDLINE and EMBASE in Chinese Universities
下载PDF
导出
摘要 MEDLINE(PubMed)和EMBASE数据库是世界上公认的最重要和最常用的数据库,但EMBASE数据库在我国高校的使用率远远低于MEDLINE数据库,主要有三方面的原因,①获取文献方面MEDLINE比EMBASE更加容易;②对EMBASE的宣传与培训远远低于MEDLINE;③文检课中很少涉及EMBASE。如要改变EMBASE数据库在我国高校利用率低下的现状,唯一途径就是不断地宣传和培训,尤其要注意对高校图书馆员的培训,另外还可以通过循证医学对最佳证据的研究,提高EM-BASE使用率。 MEDLINE (PubMed) and EMBASE are the most important biomedical databases. But the usage of EMBASE is quite lower than that of MEDLINE in our country's universities. There are three causes: ①obtaining foreign documents from MEDLINE is easier than that from EMBASE.② Propaganda and training in EMBASE is less than that in MEDLINE. ③EMBASE is seldom taught in the Document Retrieval Course. Continuously propaganda and training is the only way to enhance the usage of EMBASE, especial in enhancing the librarian training and the research of best evidence in evidence-based medicine.
作者 沈霞
出处 《医学信息(西安上半月)》 2007年第11期1932-1934,共3页 Medical Information
关键词 数据库 MEDLINE EMBASE 使用分析 高校 Databases: MEDLINE: EMBASE: Usage: Universities
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

  • 1Gray,Muir.唐金陵.循证医学.循证医疗卫生决策[M].北京:北京大学医学出版社,2004.103-115.
  • 2周晓政.EMBASE.com的检索特色[J].图书情报工作,2005,49(9):136-139. 被引量:5

二级参考文献10

  • 1于双成,逢大欣,李占兵.MEDLARS与EMBASE所用词表的比较研究[J].情报理论与实践,1996,19(2):38-40. 被引量:4
  • 2Maria E et al. Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases : MEDLINE alone is not enough. Controlled Clinical Trials, 2000,21 (5) :476 - 487.
  • 3.[EB/OL].http://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/entrez/query.fcgi db =PubMeditool =toolbar,[2004-11-20].
  • 4.[EB].Http ://www. embase. com,[2004-11-20].
  • 5EMBASE. com Launched. Advanced Technology Libraries,2000;29(1):7.
  • 6Woods D, Trewheellar, K. Letters - Medline and Embase complement each other in literature searches. British Medical Journal,1998,316(7138) : 1166.
  • 7Leigh - Ann T et al. Comparison of literature searches on quality and costs for health technology assessment using the medline and embase databases. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1999,15 ( 2 ) : 297 - 303.
  • 8Watson R. Identifying randomized controlled trials of cognitive therapy for depression: Comparing the efficiency of Embase, Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic databases. British Journal of Medical Psychology, 1999,72 (4) : 535 - 542.
  • 9Mcdonald S et al. Searching the right database : A comparison of four databases for psychiatry journals. Health Libraries Review, 1999, 16(3) :151 -156.
  • 10林佩蓉.荷兰《医学文摘》光盘与美国医学光盘对比[J].医学图书馆通讯,1997,6(1):46-46. 被引量:3

共引文献4

同被引文献20

引证文献2

二级引证文献9

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部