...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Reference reviews >Beyond Wikipedia: how good a reference source are medical wikis?
【24h】

Beyond Wikipedia: how good a reference source are medical wikis?

机译：维基百科之外：医学维基的参考资源有多好？

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to examine the case for using subject (medical) wikis as a reference tool. Design/methodology/approach - The paper summarises content of ganfyd and WikiMD, comparing their ethos and approach to information. It describes some other medical and health wikis in brief. Findings - As their audience is somewhat more specialised, medical wikis, currently in their infancy, cover topics in more depth than Wikipedia but coverage remains patchy. They may be of particular use for those without access to expensive resources such as UpToDate requiring a short literature review or overview of a topic. Wikis at present are best used as a signpost to other resources with tighter editorial control.rnResearch limitations/implications - The assessment of the subject wikis is brief and the analysis of wikis as a reference tool is largely drawn from general literature, not medical. Practical implications - This assessment provides exposure of subject wikis as a potential reference tool. Originality/value - The paper highlights the existence of subject wikis as a potential more in-depth tool than Wikipedia.
机译：目的-本文的目的是研究使用主题（医学）维基作为参考工具的案例。设计/方法/方法-本文总结了Ganfyd和WikiMD的内容，比较了它们的精神和信息获取方法。它简要介绍了其他一些医学和健康维基。发现-由于其访问者的专业程度更高，目前处于初级阶段的医学Wiki比Wikipedia覆盖的主题更深入，但覆盖范围仍然很小。对于可能无法访问昂贵资源（例如UpToDate，需要简短文献回顾或主题概述）的用户，它们可能特别有用。目前，最好将Wiki用作对其他资源进行更严格控制的路标。研究限制/启示-对主题Wiki的评估是简短的，而对Wiki作为参考工具的分析则主要来自一般文献，而非医学文献。实际意义-此评估提供了主题Wiki作为潜在参考工具的曝光率。原创性/价值-该论文强调了主题Wiki的存在，它是比Wikipedia潜在的更深入的工具。

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