Speed, accuracy, and confidence in Google, Ovid, PubMed, and UpToDate: results of a randomised trial
- 1 August 2010
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Vol. 86 (1018), 459-465
- https://doi.org/10.1136/pgmj.2010.098053
Abstract
Background: The explosion of biomedical information has led to an ‘information paradox’—the volume of biomedical information available has made it increasingly difficult to find relevant information when needed. It is thus increasingly critical for physicians to acquire a working knowledge of biomedical informatics. Aim: To evaluate four search tools commonly used to answer clinical questions, in terms of accuracy, speed, and user confidence. Methods: From December 2008 to June 2009, medical students, resident physicians, and attending physicians at the authors' institution were asked to answer a set of four anaesthesia and/or critical care based clinical questions, within 5 min, using Google, Ovid, PubMed, or UpToDate (only one search tool per question). At the end of each search, participants rated their results on a four point confidence scale. One to 3 weeks after answering the initial four questions, users were randomised to one of the four search tools, and asked to answer eight questions, four of which were repeated. The primary outcome was defined as a correct answer with the highest level of confidence. Results: Google was the most popular search tool. Users of Google and UpToDate were more likely than users of PubMed to answer questions correctly. Subjects had the most confidence in UpToDate. Searches with Google and UpToDate were faster than searches with PubMed or Ovid. Conclusion: Non-Medline based search tools are not inferior to Medline based search tools for purposes of answering evidence based anaesthesia and critical care questions.Keywords
This publication has 18 references indexed in Scilit:
- The NIH Stimulus — The Recovery Act and Biomedical ResearchThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2009
- A Comparison of World Wide Web Resources for Identifying Medical InformationAcademic Radiology, 2008
- Of studies, syntheses, synopses, summaries, and systems: the "5S" evolution of information services for evidence-based healthcare decisionsEvidence-Based Nursing, 2007
- Googling for a diagnosis—use of Google as a diagnostic aid: internet based studyBMJ, 2006
- Assessment of internet use and effects among healthcare professionals: a cross sectional surveyHeart, 2006
- Judging the quality of internet‐based health informationPerformance Measurement and Metrics, 2005
- A Proposal for Electronic Medical Records in U.S. Primary CareJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 2003
- Where's the chief knowledge officer?BMJ, 1998
- Rating Health Information on the InternetJAMA, 1998
- Assessing, Controlling, and Assuring the Quality of Medical Information on the InternetJAMA, 1997