• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Evidence Based Library and Information Practice >The Quality of Canadian and U.S. Government Health Documents Remains Unchallenged Until Better Research Can Be Undertaken
【24h】

The Quality of Canadian and U.S. Government Health Documents Remains Unchallenged Until Better Research Can Be Undertaken

机译：在可以进行更好的研究之前，加拿大和美国政府卫生文件的质量一直没有受到挑战。

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

A review of: Lambert, Frank. “Assessing the Authoritativeness of Canadian and American Health Documents: A Comparative Analysis Using Informetric Methodologies.” Government Information Quarterly 22.2 (2005): 277-96. Objective - To assess by means of citation analysis whether the public trust afforded health documents published by the Canadian and U.S. governments is appropriate, and to ascertain whether differences in the respective health care systems influence how publications are produced. Design – Comparative study. Setting – The Canadian Depository Service Program (DSP) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) web sites. Subjects – One hundred sixty-six electronic documents sourced from the DSP website, and 284 electronic documents sourced from the DHHS website. Methods – Subjects were randomly selected from repositories offering the most comprehensive collections. Documents with evidence of references to other works used in preparation were separated from those without such characteristics. Data variables were collected from documents with evidence of references. Statistical analysis of the data was undertaken. Main results – Of the respective samples, 89 (53%) from the DSP and 109 (38.4%) from the DHHS contained references. Personal authors were identified in 46 (51.7%) and 63 (58%) of the respective subsets. Handbooks and guidebooks accounted for the largest portion of the DSP subset (29; 32.6%) and government periodicals were the largest constituent of the DHHS subset (41; 37.6%). Scholarly journals were the most common reference type for both the DSP (44%) and the DHHS (58.5%) subsets. The number of references per document was widely dispersed for both subsets; the DSP mean was approximately 64 (SD=114.68) and the DHHS was 73.71 (SD=168.85). Kruskal-Wallis subset analysis of median number of references by document type found differences generalizable to the entire DSP and DHHS populations. Health Canada Reports, handbooks, and guidebooks contained significantly more references than periodical articles or fact sheets. Certain DHSS documents, classified as “other,” contained more references than periodical articles. Canadian documents were more likely to contain references than U.S. documents. Comparison of documents to determine whether one country employs more rigorous citation practices did not produce statistically significant results. U.S. Federal Government documents are more likely to be referenced in other U.S. government health documents, compared to Canadian publications. The presence of references in documents from either country significantly affected likelihood of being cited by web authors. Conclusion – Significant differences in reference use frequencies between DSP and DHHS documents challenges Foskett’s stance that documents of value contain references (Foskett). Use of peer-reviewed scholarly journals for both DSP and DHHS publications was reassuring, suggesting a fairly rigorous publication standard. Reliance of DHHS publications upon federal government documents remains unclear. Referencing of DSP documents, irrespective of reference usage suggests a level of trust towards Canadian government health publications. Web authors appear more comfortable citing referenced DHHS documents. Further study could involve the examination of reference frequency by journal compared against journal impact factors.
机译：评论：兰伯特，弗兰克。 “评估加拿大和美国卫生文件的权威性：使用信息计量学方法进行的比较分析。”政府信息季刊22.2（2005）：277-96。目的-通过引文分析评估由加拿大和美国政府发布的公众信任提供的健康文件是否适当，并确定各个卫生保健系统之间的差异是否影响出版物的制作方式。设计–比较研究。设置-加拿大存托服务计划（DSP）和美国卫生与公共服务部（DHHS）网站。主题–来自DSP网站的166个电子文档和来自DHHS网站的284个电子文档。方法–从提供最全面馆藏的资料库中随机选择受试者。具有准备工作中使用的其他作品的参考文献与那些没有此类特征的文献分开。从具有参考证据的文件中收集数据变量。对数据进行统计分析。主要结果–在各个样本中，来自DSP的89个（53％）和来自DHHS的109个（38.4％）包含参考。分别在46个（51.7％）和63个（58％）的子集中确定了个人作者。手册和指南占DSP子集的最大部分（29; 32.6％），而政府期刊是DHHS子集的最大组成部分（41; 37.6％）。学术期刊是DSP（44％）和DHHS（58.5％）子集的最常见参考类型。每个文档的参考文献数量对于这两个子集而言分布广泛。 DSP平均值约为64（SD = 114.68），DHHS为73.71（SD = 168.85）。 Kruskal-Wallis通过文档类型对参考文献中位数进行的子集分析发现，差异可以普遍适用于整个DSP和DHHS人群。加拿大卫生部的报告，手册和指南所包含的参考文献远远多于期刊文章或情况说明书。某些被分类为“其他”的DHSS文件所包含的参考文献比期刊文章多。加拿大文件比美国文件更有可能包含参考。比较文件以确定一个国家是否采用更严格的引用惯例并没有产生统计学上的显着结果。与加拿大出版物相比，美国联邦政府其他文件更可能引用美国联邦政府文件。来自任何一个国家的文档中都有参考文献，这极大地影响了网络作者被引用的可能性。结论– DSP和DHHS文件之间参考使用频率的显着差异挑战了Foskett的观点，即有价文件包含参考（Foskett）。 DSP和DHHS出版物均使用经过同行评审的学术期刊，这令人放心，这表明出版标准相当严格。 DHHS出版物是否依赖联邦政府文件仍不清楚。参考DSP文档，无论参考引用如何，都表明对加拿大政府卫生出版物的信任程度较高。网络作者更喜欢引用DHHS文档。进一步的研究可能涉及将期刊参考频率与期刊影响因素进行比较。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号