Abstract
The Internet provides access to large amounts of information quickly, provides a flexible learning platform, and is easily accessible from anywhere, especially with new technologies.
Web-based search engines and bibliographic databases have already become part of a doctor’s everyday life.
However, even well-published researchers often fail to appreciate the background knowledge required to conduct a good literature search on the Internet.
Using the right techniques can improve the ability to search for relevant information.
This chapter briefly outlines the Internet as an information resource such as Google, Google Scholar, PubMed, and Cochrane for orthopedic surgeons. Also the subsequent sections of the chapter offers combining search engine tips and tricks for a best search that orthopedic surgeons can use to improve their use of web-based information and learning resources.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barratt H (2009) Electronic bibliographical databases and their limitations HealthKnowledge http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk/public-health-textbook/research-methods/1a-epidemiology/electronic-bibliographies
Begg CB, Berlin JA (1989) Publication bias and dissemination of clinical research. J Natl Cancer Inst 81:107–115. doi:10.1093/jnci/81.2.107
Conn VS, Valentine JC, Cooper HM, Rantz MJ (2003) Grey literature in meta-analyses. Nurs Res 52(4):256–261
Dapra D (2012) Indexing repository content in Google Scholar. Digit Commons digitalcommons.bepress.com/webinars/24
Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL (1992) Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow-up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 267:374–378. doi:10.1001/jama.267.3.374
Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR (1991) Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet 337:867–876. doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)90201-Y
EBSCOhost. CINAHL Complete. http://www.ebscohost.com/nursing/products/cinahl-databases/cinahl-complete
Elsevier Life Science Solutions. EMBASE. http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase
Elsevier Life Science Solutions. Scopus. http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/scopus
Embase FAQs (2014). http://www.elsevier.com/online-tools/embase/training-and-support
Falagas ME, Ntziora F, Makris GC, Malietzis GA, Rafailidis PI (2009) Do PubMed and Google searches help medical students and young doctors reach the correct diagnosis? A pilot study. Eur J Intern Med 20(8):788–790. doi:10.1016/j.ejim.2009.07.014, Elsevier B.V
Grey Literature (1999) In: The fourth international conference on grey literature, Washington, DC
Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org.
Küçükdurmaz F, Aytekin MN, Tuncay I, Şen C (2013) A pilot study about quality of knowledge in Turkish web sites on health: meniscus tear. Nobel Med 9(2):114–117
Mallett S, Hopewell S, Clarke M (2002) Grey literature in systematic reviews: the first 1000 Cochrane systematic reviews. Fourth symposium on systematic reviews: pushing the boundaries. Oxford, UK
National Center for Biotechnology Information. National Library of Medicine. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/pubmed.html
Nourbakhsh E, Nugent R, Wang H, Cevik C, Nugent K (2012) Medical literature searches: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar. Health Inf Libr J 29:214–222. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00992.x
Number of Titles Currently Indexed for Index Medicus® and MEDLINE® on PubMed® (2014). http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/num_titles.html
Ovid Technologies (2014) “Embase” http://www.ovid.com/site/catalog/databases/903.jsp
Riva JJ, Malik KMP, Burnie SJ, Endicott AR, Busse JW (2012) What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians. J Can Chiropr Assoc 56(3):167–172
Rosenbaum WL, Sterling TD, Weinkam JJ (1995) Correcting standardized rate ratios for imprecise classification of a polychotomous exposure variable with limited data. Am J Epidemiol 142:442–445
Sarli CC (2010) Beyond citation analysis: a model for assessment of research impact. J Med Libr Assoc 98(1):17–23
Shariff SZ, Bejaimal SAD, Sontrop JM, Iansavichus AV, Haynes RB, Weir MA, Garg AX (2013) Retrieving clinical evidence: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar for quick clinical searches. J Med Internet Res 15:e164. doi:10.2196/jmir.2624
Sinkov VA, Andres BM, Wheeless CR, Frassica FJ (2004) Internet-based learning. Clin Orthop Relat Res 421(421):99–106. doi:10.1097/01.blo.0000126944.23557.5c
Slobogean GP, Verma A, Giustini D, Slobogean BL, Mulpuri K (2009) MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane index most primary studies but not abstracts included in orthopedic meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol 62(12):1261–1267. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.01.013, Elsevier
Sollenberger JF, Holloway RG (2013) The evolving role and value of libraries and librarians in health care. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 310(12):1231–1232. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.277050
Thomson Reuters. Web of Science. http://thomsonreuters.com/thomson-reuters-web-of-science/
U.S. National Library of Medicine (2012) Branching out: the MeSH® Vocabulary (viedo) http://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/disted/video/
Wikipedia. CINAHL. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CINAHL
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this entry
Cite this entry
Küçükdurmaz, F., Whipple, T.L., Bozkurt, M., Kipnis, D.G. (2014). Strategies for Searching the Internet for Orthopedic Surgeons: Tips and Tricks. In: Doral, M., Karlsson, J. (eds) Sports Injuries. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36801-1_248-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36801-1_248-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-36801-1
eBook Packages: Springer Reference MedicineReference Module Medicine