Searching for health information for academic and clinical purposes: possibilities and challenges
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v11i3.26726Keywords:
Access to information; Information seeking behavior; Evidence-based practice; Information retrieval; Information service; Teaching.Abstract
Studies in different countries indicate that students and health professionals have difficulties in seeking scientific information for academic and clinical use. This article aims to present the main intellectual stages of information search for clinical and academic purposes, as well as the possibilities and challenges that arise in each of the stages. We used a descriptive qualitative design based on a selective literature review, presentation of practical examples and some solutions to doubts related to health information seeking. The following stages of information search were presented: defining what the researcher wants to know; transforming the PICO research question into a database search strategy; defining where to search for the information; sources used in the health field for clinical and/or academic purposes. The process of information search demands specific intellectual decisions for each clinical or research situation. Therefore, just following information search manuals may not be enough to achieve a satisfactory result. It is necessary to bring to the level of consciousness the objectives of the search, the choice of sources, and the selection of the best information to answer the initial research question.
References
Abdekhoda, M., Dehnad, A. &Yousefi, M. (2016). Effectiveness of training intervention to improve medical student's information literacy skills. Korean J Med Educ, 28(4), 391-395. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2016.44
Belkin, N. J. (1980). Anomalous states of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval. Canadian Journal of Information Science, 5(1), 133-143.
Botelho, R. G. & Oliveira C. C. (2015) Literaturas branca e cinzenta: uma revisão conceitual. Ciência da Informação, 44(3), 501-513.
Brown, D. (2020). A review of the PubMed PICO tool: using evidence-based practice in health education. Health Promotion Practice, 21(4), 496–498. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839919893361
Cunha, M. B. (2001). Para saber mais: fontes de informação em ciência e tecnologia. Briquet de Lemos.
Eriksen, M. B. & Frandsen, T. F. (2018). The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 106(4), 420-431. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2018.345
Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde. (2022). Descritores em ciências da saúde (DeCS). https://decs.bvsalud.org
Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde. (2022a). Portal Regional da BVS. https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/advanced/
Fachin, J. & Araujo, N. C. (2018). Fontes de informação especializadas de acesso aberto. Informação & Sociedade: Estudos, 28(3), 35-52. https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/ies/article/view/38421
Galvão, M. C. B. (2021). Classificações, terminologias e ontologias no campo da saúde. Asklepion: Informação em Saúde, 1(2), 41–54. https://asklepionrevista.info/asklepion/article/view/26
Garcia, L. P. & Boing, A. F. (2021) Desafios para a sustentabilidade dos periódicos científicos brasileiros e do Programa SciELO. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva 26 (suppl 3), 5183-5186. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-812320212611.3.10652021
Gusenbauer, M. & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 2020 (11),181-217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Hotta, N. (2020). A new era for research publication: will open access become the norm? J Diabetes Investig. 11(1), 3-4. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13174
Huang, K. et l. (2019). Attitudes of Chinese health sciences postgraduate students' to the use of information and communication technology in global health research. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-019-1785-6
Kim, H., Sefcik, J. S., & Bradway, C. (2017). Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: a systematic review. Research in Nursing & Health, 40(1), 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.21768
Loda, T., Erschens, R., Junne, F., Stengel, A., Zipfel, S., & Herrmann-Werner, A. (2020). Undergraduate Medical Students' Search for Health Information Online: Explanatory Cross-Sectional Study. JMIR Medical Informatics, 8(3), e16279. https://doi.org/10.2196/16279
Loscalzo, J. (2016). The future of medical journal publishing: the journal editor's perspective: looking back, looking forward. Circulation.; 133(16), 1621-1624. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.116.022519
McGarrigle, S. A., Hanhauser, Y. P., Mockler, D., Gallagher, D. J., Kennedy, M. J., Bennett, K., & Connolly, E. M. (2018). Risk prediction models for familial breast cancer. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2018(12), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013185
National Library of Medicine. (2022). Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). https://meshb.nlm.nih.gov/search.
Panahi, S., Mirzaei, A. & Bazrafshan, A. (2020). Disciplinary-based information literacy skills among medical students. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 9(Jul), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_139_20
Rodríguez-Ríos, A., Espinoza-Téllez, G., Martínez-Ezquerro, J.D. & Rendón-Macías, M.E. (2020). Information and communication technology, mobile devices, and medical education. Journal of Medical Systems, 44(4), 90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-020-01559-w
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B. & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ, 312(7023), 71-2. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71
Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in Nursing & Health, 23(4), 334–340. https://doi.org/10.1002/1098-240x(200008)23:4<334::aid-nur9>3.0.co;2-g
Ullah, M. & Ameen, K. (2019). Teaching information literacy skills to medical students: perceptions of health sciences librarians. Health Info Libr J, 36(4), 357-366. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12279.
Vernooij, L. M., van Klei, W. A., Moons, K. G., Takada, T., van Waes, J., & Damen, J. A. (2021). The comparative and added prognostic value of biomarkers to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index for preoperative prediction of major adverse cardiac events and all-cause mortality in patients who undergo noncardiac surgery. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 12(12), 1-439. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD013139.pub2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Luane Marques de Mello; Maria Cristiane Barbosa Galvão
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
