Limits...
Analysis of PubMed User Sessions Using a Full-Day PubMed Query Log: A Comparison of Experienced and Nonexperienced PubMed Users.

Yoo I, Mosa AS - JMIR Med Inform (2015)

Bottom Line: Previous studies examined the effects of domain expertise/knowledge on search performance using PubMed.To test our hypotheses, we measured how successful information retrieval was (at retrieving relevant documents), represented as the decrease rates of experienced and nonexperienced users from a session length of 1 to 2, 3, 4, and 5.The decrease rate (from a session length of 1 to 2) of the experienced users was significantly larger than that of the nonexperienced groups.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Health Management and Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, United States. yooil@health.missouri.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: PubMed is the largest biomedical bibliographic information source on the Internet. PubMed has been considered one of the most important and reliable sources of up-to-date health care evidence. Previous studies examined the effects of domain expertise/knowledge on search performance using PubMed. However, very little is known about PubMed users' knowledge of information retrieval (IR) functions and their usage in query formulation.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to shed light on how experienced/nonexperienced PubMed users perform their search queries by analyzing a full-day query log. Our hypotheses were that (1) experienced PubMed users who use system functions quickly retrieve relevant documents and (2) nonexperienced PubMed users who do not use them have longer search sessions than experienced users.

Methods: To test these hypotheses, we analyzed PubMed query log data containing nearly 3 million queries. User sessions were divided into two categories: experienced and nonexperienced. We compared experienced and nonexperienced users per number of sessions, and experienced and nonexperienced user sessions per session length, with a focus on how fast they completed their sessions.

Results: To test our hypotheses, we measured how successful information retrieval was (at retrieving relevant documents), represented as the decrease rates of experienced and nonexperienced users from a session length of 1 to 2, 3, 4, and 5. The decrease rate (from a session length of 1 to 2) of the experienced users was significantly larger than that of the nonexperienced groups.

Conclusions: Experienced PubMed users retrieve relevant documents more quickly than nonexperienced PubMed users in terms of session length.

No MeSH data available.


Query types and session types.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4526974&req=5

figure4: Query types and session types.

Mentions: PubMed users may perform multiple IR sessions to fulfill their various information needs. In order to identify the purpose of each IR session, we categorized the queries in the log dataset as shown in Figure 2. Figure 4 presents the percentages of different query types. A total of 2,012,466 (69%) queries were identified as informational, 753,827 (26%) queries navigational, and 148,510 (5%) queries mixed. A total of 742,602 user sessions were identified from the informational queries. Because we compared experienced and nonexperienced search sessions, we further identified experienced and nonexperienced search sessions based on their system function usage from the user sessions (that are identified from the informational queries only, see Figure 4).


Analysis of PubMed User Sessions Using a Full-Day PubMed Query Log: A Comparison of Experienced and Nonexperienced PubMed Users.

Yoo I, Mosa AS - JMIR Med Inform (2015)

Query types and session types.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4526974&req=5

figure4: Query types and session types.
Mentions: PubMed users may perform multiple IR sessions to fulfill their various information needs. In order to identify the purpose of each IR session, we categorized the queries in the log dataset as shown in Figure 2. Figure 4 presents the percentages of different query types. A total of 2,012,466 (69%) queries were identified as informational, 753,827 (26%) queries navigational, and 148,510 (5%) queries mixed. A total of 742,602 user sessions were identified from the informational queries. Because we compared experienced and nonexperienced search sessions, we further identified experienced and nonexperienced search sessions based on their system function usage from the user sessions (that are identified from the informational queries only, see Figure 4).

Bottom Line: Previous studies examined the effects of domain expertise/knowledge on search performance using PubMed.To test our hypotheses, we measured how successful information retrieval was (at retrieving relevant documents), represented as the decrease rates of experienced and nonexperienced users from a session length of 1 to 2, 3, 4, and 5.The decrease rate (from a session length of 1 to 2) of the experienced users was significantly larger than that of the nonexperienced groups.

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Health Management and Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, United States. yooil@health.missouri.edu.

ABSTRACT

Background: PubMed is the largest biomedical bibliographic information source on the Internet. PubMed has been considered one of the most important and reliable sources of up-to-date health care evidence. Previous studies examined the effects of domain expertise/knowledge on search performance using PubMed. However, very little is known about PubMed users' knowledge of information retrieval (IR) functions and their usage in query formulation.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to shed light on how experienced/nonexperienced PubMed users perform their search queries by analyzing a full-day query log. Our hypotheses were that (1) experienced PubMed users who use system functions quickly retrieve relevant documents and (2) nonexperienced PubMed users who do not use them have longer search sessions than experienced users.

Methods: To test these hypotheses, we analyzed PubMed query log data containing nearly 3 million queries. User sessions were divided into two categories: experienced and nonexperienced. We compared experienced and nonexperienced users per number of sessions, and experienced and nonexperienced user sessions per session length, with a focus on how fast they completed their sessions.

Results: To test our hypotheses, we measured how successful information retrieval was (at retrieving relevant documents), represented as the decrease rates of experienced and nonexperienced users from a session length of 1 to 2, 3, 4, and 5. The decrease rate (from a session length of 1 to 2) of the experienced users was significantly larger than that of the nonexperienced groups.

Conclusions: Experienced PubMed users retrieve relevant documents more quickly than nonexperienced PubMed users in terms of session length.

No MeSH data available.