bims-librar 2022-01-02 papers

Issue of 2022‒01‒02
five papers selected by
Thomas Krichel
Open Library Society

Scientometrics. 2021 Dec 20. 1-32

Why does library holding format really matter for book impact assessment?: Modelling the relationship between citations and altmetrics with print and electronic holdings.

Ashraf Maleki.

Scholarly books are important outputs in some fields and their many publishing formats seem to introduce opportunities to scrutinize their impact. As there is a growing interest in the publisher-enforced massive collection of ebooks in libraries in the past decade, this study examined how this influences the relationship that library print holdings (LPH), library electronic holdings (LEH) and total library holdings (TLH) have with other metrics. As a follow up study to a previous research on OCLC library holdings, the relationship between library holdings and twelve other metrics including Scopus Citations, Google Books (GB) Citations, Goodreads engagements, and Altmetric indicators were examined for 119,794 Scopus-indexed book titles across 26 fields. Present study confirms the weak correlation levels observed between TLH and other indicators in previous studies and contributes additional evidence that print holdings can moderately reflect research, educational and online impact of books consistently more efficient than eholdings and total holdings across fields and over time, except for Mendeley for which eholdings slightly prevailed. Regression models indicated that along with other dimensions, Google Books Citations frequently best explained LPH (in 14 out of 26 fields), whereas Goodreads User counts were weak, but the best predictor of both LEH and TLH (in 15 fields out of 26), suggesting significant association of eholdings with online uptake of books. Overall, findings suggest that inclusion of eholdings overrides the more impactful counts of print holdings in Total Library Holdings metric and therefore undermines the statistical results, whilst print holdings has both statistically and theoretically promising underlying assumptions for prediction of impact of books and shows greater promise than the general Library Holding metric for book impact assessment. Thus, there is a need for a distinction between print and electronic holding counts to be made, otherwise total library holding data need to be interpreted with caution.Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-021-04239-9.

Keywords: Altmetric; Blog pages; Book impact; Citation analysis; Facebook; Google books; Library eholding; Library electronic holding; Library holding; Library print holding; Mendeley readership; News posts; OCLC; Scholarly books; Syllabus mentions; Twitter; Wikipedia; WorldCat

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04239-9

Res Synth Methods. 2021 Dec 30.

Identifying unreported links between ClinicalTrials.gov trial registrations and their published results.

Shifeng Liu, Florence T Bourgeois, Adam G Dunn.

A substantial proportion of trial registrations are not linked to corresponding published articles, limiting analyses and new tools. Our aim was to develop a method for finding articles reporting the results of trials that are registered on ClinicalTrials.gov when they do not include metadata links. We used a set of 27,280 trial registration and article pairs to train and evaluate methods for identifying missing links in both directions-from articles to registrations and from registrations to articles. We trained a classifier with 6 distance metrics as feature representations to rank the correct article or registration, using recall@K to evaluate performance and compare to baseline methods. When identifying links from registrations to published articles, the classifier ranked the correct article first (recall@1) among 378,048 articles in 80.8% of evaluation cases and 34.9% in the baseline method. Recall@10 was 85.1% compared to 60.7% in the baseline. When predicting links from articles to registrations, recall@1 was 83.4% for the classifier and 39.8% in the baseline. Recall@10 was 89.5% compared to 65.8% in the baseline. The proposed method improves on our baseline document similarity method to be feasible for identifying missing links in practice. Given a ClinicalTrials.gov registration, a user checking 10 ranked articles can expect to identify the matching article in at least 85% of cases, if the trial has been published. The proposed method can be used to improve the coupling of ClinicalTrials.gov and PubMed, with applications related to automating systematic review and evidence synthesis processes. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Clinical trials; information retrieval; trial registration

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1545

Midwifery. 2021 Dec 21. pii: S0266-6138(21)00311-9. [Epub ahead of print]105 103236

Sources of information during pregnancy and the early parenting period: Exploring the views of women and their partners.

S J Hay, H L McLachlan, M Newton, D A Forster, T Shafiei.

OBJECTIVE: There are a wide variety of information sources available during pregnancy and the early parenting period, but limited understanding of their usefulness, particularly for partners. We explored the views of both women and their partners regarding sources of information, their frequency of use, and their preferred formats.DESIGN AND SETTING: Data were collected as part of a large cluster randomised controlled trial at a tertiary maternity hospital in 2015-2016, in Melbourne, Australia. The overall evaluation was of a parenting kit ('Growing Together'), an evidence-based information source for prospective and new parents covering the period from conception until one year postpartum. This paper uses data collected from women when their baby was two months of age, and women's partners when the baby was six months of age, via postal or online survey.
PARTICIPANTS: Women were eligible if they booked for pregnancy care at The Royal Women's Hospital during the recruitment period, were having their first baby, able to read and speak English without an interpreter, and <30 weeks pregnant at their first hospital appointment (n = 1034). All eligible women were included unless they opted out.
MEASUREMENTS AND FINDINGS: In total 92 women were excluded. Of the women sent the two-month survey, 42% (392/941) responded. Partner surveys were returned by 252/791 partners (32%). Respondents received information from a range of sources, most frequently face to face from health professionals through childbirth education or midwife discussion/education, followed by friends and family members. Information received from a health professional was also reported as being the most useful. For both women and their partners, the most important factor related to information was that it was from a trusted and reliable source.
KEY CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Women and their partners highlighted the importance of quality and access to evidence based resources and information. The internet is frequently favoured by women and their partners due to its convenience, accessibility, and timely access to information. Overall, women and their partners reported information directly from a health care professional to be the most useful and health services should ensure that women and their partners have adequate access to their health care professional.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2021.103236

BMC Womens Health. 2021 Dec 28. 21(1): 434

A study on women's health information needs in menopausal age.

Sadrieh Hajesmaeel-Gohari, Elaheh Shafiei, Fatemeh Ghasemi, Kambiz Bahaadinbeigy.

Menopause is a natural event experienced by women in middle age. To help women manage this event, it is important to identify their health information needs. A study specific questionnaire was used to identify menopausal women's health information needs and the resources and challenges related to finding information about menopause. A total of 301 women aged 48-55 years completed the questionnaire. Data were analysed using negative binomial regression and chi-square tests. The most frequently sought information was that related to breast cancer (n = 209, 69.5%), hot flushes (n = 200, 66.5%), cervical cancer (n = 194, 64.5%), non-hormonal therapies for menopausal symptoms (n = 192, 64%), laboratory tests (n = 189, 63%) and joint and muscle pain (n = 188, 62.5%). The main sources of information were audiovisual media (n = 171, 57%), obstetricians (n = 165, 55%), friends (n = 157, 52%), family (n = 157, 52%) and the internet (n = 153, 51%). The two main challenges were not knowing how to correctly access information (n = 115, 38%) and not being aware of reliable sources of information (n = 108, 36%). Therefore, it is essential for policymakers and decision-makers to provide reliable and accurate information to increase awareness and reduce anxiety of women experiencing menopause.

Keywords: Challenges; Health information needs; Information sources; Menopause

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12905-021-01582-0

ANZ J Surg. 2021 Dec 29.

Evaluation of readability and reliability of online patient information for intracranial aneurysms.

Cheerag Bharatbhai Patel, Neal Kerr, Omid Ahmadi, Thirayan Muthu.

INTRODUCTION: Intracranial aneurysms are common. Receiving this diagnosis can have a profound impact on patients and their families and this is compounded by the nuanced complexities around their management. An overwhelming majority of patients research health information using the internet. Patient-centred care and informed consent requires patients to have access to information that is readable and reliable. The aim of this study was to assess the readability and reliability of online health information about intracranial aneurysms.METHOD: A Google search was conducted using the terms 'brain aneurysm', 'cerebral aneurysm', and 'intracranial aneurysm' and the first 75 websites were screened for assessment. The readability of each website was assessed using the Flesch reading ease score (FRE), the Flesch-Kincaid grade level (FKGL), the gunning fog index (GFI) and the simple measure of gobbledygook (SMOG) indices. Reliability was assessed using the DISCERN instrument and the Journal of the American Medical Association benchmark criteria (JAMA).
RESULTS: Following exclusion, 36 websites were analyzed. The websites collectively scored as 'difficult' readability and 'poor' reliability on average. Statistically significant differences in readability were observed between websites categorized as patient health information and commercial compared with academic and physician. Differences in readability were also observed between search results of 'brain aneurysm' compared with 'intracranial aneurysm'.
CONCLUSION: The readability and reliability of online health information about intracranial aneurysms is suboptimal. Health professionals must ensure their patients are well informed which includes directing them to high quality resources which are readable and reliable and use layperson-oriented language during the consultation.

Keywords: comprehension; data accuracy; intracranial aneurysm; intracranial haemorrhages; reading

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.17441