Currently, on the TRIP Database you do a search and the results are returned hierarchically. Therefore, you need an additional click to view results in, say, ‘Evidence-based synopses’. Perhaps a better way would be to return a page of results straight-away and then if people want to select only a single category – let them do that. Some thought needed but perhaps merge all the results into one and devise a weighting mechanism to ensure the ‘better’ material is at the top. But what might the attributes of ‘better’ be? Type of publication, year of publication….
One of my regular blogs is Dean Giustini’s Google Scholar Blog. It was seeing Dean’s editorial in the BMJ (http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/331/7531/1487) that got me thinking about where the TRIP Database might fit in. Behind a subscription login/firewall is no place. As one of my colleagues said ‘no-one pays for search’. Not technically true as we have reasonable subscription levels – but I get the point. Do we continue to stay in our niche getting searched 50,000 times per month? Ordo we change to being free-access? The subscription allowed us to grow significantly in the 2-3 years we’ve been charging. However, our latest upgrade (Dec 2005) has increased my frustration of it ‘hiding’ behind a firewall. Biased though I may be – it’s just too good to hide….
So thank you to Dean for getting me thinking.
More stats to celebrate the new blog! The top search terms used in TRIP are:
- asthma
- diabetes
- hypertension
- cancer
- osteoporosis
- otitis media
- stroke
These terms are so broad and return lots of results – arguably too many to sift through. It makes the decision to add a prominent ‘refine search’ box appear sensible.
Mis-spelling. One of the new features on the TRIP Database was not a mis-spelling feature (we’ve had one for years) but a counter to accurately measure how often people use it. So we feel it’s a pretty good proxy for number of searches mis-spelt. For the first 3 weeks of February nearly 5% of all searches were mis-spelt.
Recent Comments