Abstract
Three MEDLINE-on-CD-ROM interfaces are compared: SPIRS (version 3.11) and WinSPIRS (version 1.0) from SilverPlatter and OVID (version 3.0, DOS and Windows interfaces) from CD Plus Technologies. Though the database is the same, there are substantial differences among the interfaces in the way these data are presented and can be searched. These different approaches are discussed, and a detailed comparative table is included. It is obvious that all three interfaces are quite good yet none of them is perfect; each has desirable and unfortunate features. Together, they offer an enormous range of possibilities. Users would benefit if most of the better features (e.g., easy menu, free-text retrieval, pre-exploded thesaurus terms) were implemented in future versions of these interfaces and if system operators were given greater latitude to determine the system defaults appropriate to their specific situations and customers.
Full text
PDF
Selected References
These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.
- Bonham M. D., Nelson L. L. An evaluation of four end-user systems for searching MEDLINE. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1988 Apr;76(2):171–180. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Capodagli J. A., Mardikian J., Uva P. A. MEDLINE on compact disc: end-user searching on Compact Cambridge. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1988 Apr;76(2):181–183. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Dalrymple P. W. CD-ROM MEDLINE use and users: information transfer in the clinical setting. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 1990 Jul;78(3):224–232. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Glitz B. Testing the new technology: MEDLINE on CD-ROM in an academic health sciences library. Spec Libr. 1988 Winter;79(1):28–33. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lowe H. J., Barnett G. O. Understanding and using the medical subject headings (MeSH) vocabulary to perform literature searches. JAMA. 1994 Apr 13;271(14):1103–1108. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]