Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Booth, A."
  1. Booth, A.: How consistent is MEDLINE indexing? (1990) 0.03 
    0.02713491 = product of:
  0.05426982 = sum of:
    0.05426982 = sum of:
      0.010589487 = weight(_text_:a in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.010589487 = score(doc=3510,freq=10.0), product of:
          0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.19940455 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
            3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
              10.0 = termFreq=10.0
            1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
      0.043680333 = weight(_text_:22 in 3510) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
        0.043680333 = score(doc=3510,freq=2.0), product of:
          0.16128273 = queryWeight, product of:
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.046056706 = queryNorm
          0.2708308 = fieldWeight in 3510, product of:
            1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
              2.0 = termFreq=2.0
            3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
            0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=3510)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    A known-item search for abstracts to previously retrieved references revealed that 2 documents from the same annual volume had been indexed twice. Working from the premise that the whole volume may have been double-indexed, a search strategy was devised that limited the journal code to the year in question. 57 references were retrieved, comprising 28 pairs of duplicates plus a citation for the whole volume. Author, title, source and descriptors were requested off-line and the citations were paired with their duplicates. The 4 categories of descriptors-major descriptors, minor descriptors, subheadings and check-tags-were compared for depth and consistency of indexing and lessons that might be learnt from the study are discussed.
    Source
    Health libraries review. 7(1990) no.1, S.22-26
    Type
    a
  2. Booth, A.; O'Rouke, A.J.: ¬The value of structured abstracts in information retrieval from MEDLINE (1997) 0.00 
    0.0030255679 = product of:
  0.0060511357 = sum of:
    0.0060511357 = product of:
      0.012102271 = sum of:
        0.012102271 = weight(_text_:a in 764) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.012102271 = score(doc=764,freq=10.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.22789092 = fieldWeight in 764, product of:
              3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
                10.0 = termFreq=10.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=764)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Presents a structured abstract of the actual article. Outlines the debate on the value of structured abstracts and describes a research project into their use, which investigated records of cardiovascular disease downloaded from MEDLINE and tested against clinical questions derived from a survey of CD-ROM use in 3 health science libraries. It was found that structured abstracts improve precision at the expense of recall and place heavier demands on the skills of selecting fields to search within the abstract. Indicates directions for further research
    Type
    a
  3. Booth, A.: Qualitative evaluation of information technology in communication systems (1988) 0.00 
    0.0020506454 = product of:
  0.004101291 = sum of:
    0.004101291 = product of:
      0.008202582 = sum of:
        0.008202582 = weight(_text_:a in 1410) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.008202582 = score(doc=1410,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.053105544 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046056706 = queryNorm
            0.1544581 = fieldWeight in 1410, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              1.153047 = idf(docFreq=37942, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0546875 = fieldNorm(doc=1410)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)
    Abstract
    Reports the results of a preliminary investigation of techniques of evaluation applied to information technology based communication systems such as: electronic mail; facsimile transmission (fax); voice mail; and teleconferencing. The aim of the study was to develop a methodology for the consistent and systematic evaluation of such systems using qualitative factors as the basis for the evaluation framework. Concludes that: there is no reported framework within the literature surveyed that deals adequately with the evaluation of information technolgy based communications systems; it is possible the generate evaluation methodologies that can be used consistently and systematically in decision making about information technology based communication systems; and substantial further work is rrequired to validate and develop the recommended methodologies

Years

Types

Themes