批量查找全文:使用约克大学订阅的 EndNote 20 与 Zotero 6 的比较。

IF 2.9 4区 医学 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Journal of the Medical Library Association Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-29 DOI:10.5195/jmla.2024.1880
Helen A Fulbright, Connor Evans
{"title":"批量查找全文:使用约克大学订阅的 EndNote 20 与 Zotero 6 的比较。","authors":"Helen A Fulbright, Connor Evans","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2024.1880","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To understand the performance of EndNote 20 and Zotero 6's full text retrieval features.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the University of York's subscriptions, we tested and compared EndNote and Zotero's full text retrieval. 1,000 records from four evidence synthesis projects were tested for the number of: full texts retrieved; available full texts retrieved; unique full texts (found by one program only); and differences in versions of full texts for the same record. We also tested the time taken and accuracy of retrieved full texts. One dataset was tested multiple times to confirm if the number of full texts retrieved was consistent. We also investigated the available full texts missed by EndNote or Zotero by: reference type; whether full texts were available open access or via subscription; and the content provider.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EndNote retrieved 47% of available full texts versus 52% by Zotero. Zotero was faster by 2 minutes 15 seconds. Each program found unique full texts. There were differences in full text versions retrieved between programs. For both programs, 99% of the retrieved full texts were accurate. Zotero was less consistent in the number of full texts it retrieved.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EndNote and Zotero do not find all available full texts. Users should not assume full texts are correct; are the version of record; or that records without full texts cannot be retrieved manually. Repeating the full text retrieval process multiple times could yield additional full texts. Users with access to EndNote and Zotero could use both for full text retrieval.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11412117/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Finding full texts in bulk: a comparison of EndNote 20 versus Zotero 6 using the University of York's subscriptions.\",\"authors\":\"Helen A Fulbright, Connor Evans\",\"doi\":\"10.5195/jmla.2024.1880\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To understand the performance of EndNote 20 and Zotero 6's full text retrieval features.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the University of York's subscriptions, we tested and compared EndNote and Zotero's full text retrieval. 1,000 records from four evidence synthesis projects were tested for the number of: full texts retrieved; available full texts retrieved; unique full texts (found by one program only); and differences in versions of full texts for the same record. We also tested the time taken and accuracy of retrieved full texts. One dataset was tested multiple times to confirm if the number of full texts retrieved was consistent. We also investigated the available full texts missed by EndNote or Zotero by: reference type; whether full texts were available open access or via subscription; and the content provider.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>EndNote retrieved 47% of available full texts versus 52% by Zotero. Zotero was faster by 2 minutes 15 seconds. Each program found unique full texts. There were differences in full text versions retrieved between programs. For both programs, 99% of the retrieved full texts were accurate. Zotero was less consistent in the number of full texts it retrieved.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>EndNote and Zotero do not find all available full texts. Users should not assume full texts are correct; are the version of record; or that records without full texts cannot be retrieved manually. Repeating the full text retrieval process multiple times could yield additional full texts. Users with access to EndNote and Zotero could use both for full text retrieval.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11412117/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2024.1880\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2024.1880","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:了解 EndNote 20 和 Zotero 6 全文检索功能的性能:了解 EndNote 20 和 Zotero 6 的全文检索功能的性能:利用约克大学的订阅,我们测试并比较了 EndNote 和 Zotero 的全文检索功能。我们测试了来自四个证据综合项目的 1000 条记录的数量:检索到的全文;检索到的可用全文;唯一全文(仅由一个程序找到);以及同一记录的全文版本差异。我们还测试了检索全文所需的时间和准确性。我们对一个数据集进行了多次测试,以确认检索到的全文数量是否一致。我们还通过以下方面调查了 EndNote 或 Zotero 遗漏的可用全文:参考文献类型;全文是开放获取还是通过订阅获取;以及内容提供商:结果:EndNote检索到47%的可用全文,而Zotero检索到52%。Zotero的检索速度快2分15秒。每个程序都能找到独一无二的全文。不同程序检索到的全文版本存在差异。两种程序检索到的全文准确率均为 99%。结论:EndNote 和 Zotero 在检索全文数量上的一致性较差:结论:EndNote 和 Zotero 并不能找到所有可用的全文。用户不应认为全文是正确的;全文是记录的版本;或者认为没有全文的记录无法手动检索。多次重复全文检索过程可以获得更多全文。可访问 EndNote 和 Zotero 的用户可同时使用这两种软件进行全文检索。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Finding full texts in bulk: a comparison of EndNote 20 versus Zotero 6 using the University of York's subscriptions.

Objective: To understand the performance of EndNote 20 and Zotero 6's full text retrieval features.

Methods: Using the University of York's subscriptions, we tested and compared EndNote and Zotero's full text retrieval. 1,000 records from four evidence synthesis projects were tested for the number of: full texts retrieved; available full texts retrieved; unique full texts (found by one program only); and differences in versions of full texts for the same record. We also tested the time taken and accuracy of retrieved full texts. One dataset was tested multiple times to confirm if the number of full texts retrieved was consistent. We also investigated the available full texts missed by EndNote or Zotero by: reference type; whether full texts were available open access or via subscription; and the content provider.

Results: EndNote retrieved 47% of available full texts versus 52% by Zotero. Zotero was faster by 2 minutes 15 seconds. Each program found unique full texts. There were differences in full text versions retrieved between programs. For both programs, 99% of the retrieved full texts were accurate. Zotero was less consistent in the number of full texts it retrieved.

Conclusion: EndNote and Zotero do not find all available full texts. Users should not assume full texts are correct; are the version of record; or that records without full texts cannot be retrieved manually. Repeating the full text retrieval process multiple times could yield additional full texts. Users with access to EndNote and Zotero could use both for full text retrieval.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of the Medical Library Association
Journal of the Medical Library Association INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
10.00%
发文量
39
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) is an international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly that aims to advance the practice and research knowledgebase of health sciences librarianship. The most current impact factor for the JMLA (from the 2007 edition of Journal Citation Reports) is 1.392.
期刊最新文献
A community engagement program to improve awareness for credible online health information. Consulting with an embedded librarian: student perceptions on the value of required research meetings. Designing a framework for curriculum building in systematic review competencies for librarians: a case report. History in context: teaching the history of dentistry with rare materials. MLA Research Training Institute (RTI) 2018 and 2019: participant research confidence and program effectiveness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1