For pageview analysis
editThis is all going to be added to: User:Mcbrarian/sandbox/page-analysis
Signs and symptoms
editDigital clubbing with cyanotic nail beds in an adult with tetralogy of Fallot
Edit a sentence. Tetralogy of Fallot results in low oxygenation of blood. This is due to a mixing of oxygenated and deoxygenated blood in the left ventricle via the ventricular septal defect (VSD) and preferential flow of the mixed blood from both ventricles through the aorta because of the obstruction to flow through the pulmonary valve. The latter is known as a right-to-left shunt.
Infants with TOF - a cyanotic heart disease - have low blood oxygen saturation. Blood oxygenation varies greatly from one patient to another depending on the severity of the anatomic defects. Typical ranges vary from 60% to around 90%. Depending on the degree of obstruction, symptoms vary from no cyanosis or mild cyanosis to profound cyanosis at birth. If the baby is not cyanotic then it is sometimes referred to as a "pink tet". Other symptoms include a heart murmur which may range from almost imperceptible to very loud, difficulty in feeding, failure to gain weight, retarded growth and physical development, labored breathing (dyspnea) on exertion, clubbing of the fingers and toes, and polycythemia. The baby may turn blue with breast feeding or crying.
Those born with tetralogy of Fallot are more likely to experience psychiatric disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in later life, potentially due to underlying genetic changes that predispose to both conditions.
Tet spells[edit]
editInfants and children with unrepaired tetralogy of Fallot may develop "tet spells". These are acute hypoxia spells, characterized by shortness of breath, cyanosis, agitation, and loss of consciousness. This may be initiated by any event - such as anxiety, pain, dehydration, or fever - leading to decreased oxygen saturation or that causes decreased systemic vascular resistance, which in turn leads to increased shunting through the ventricular septal defect.
Clinically, tet spells are characterized by a sudden, marked increase in cyanosis followed by syncope.
Older children will often squat instinctively during a tet spell. This increases systemic vascular resistance and allows for a temporary reversal of the shunt. It increases pressure on the left side of the heart, decreasing the right to left shunt thus decreasing the amount of deoxygenated blood entering the systemic circulation.
| Information science |
|---|
| General aspects |
| Related fields and subfields |
Draft response to reviewers comments
editDear David, Thank you for taking the time to review our submission and provide helpful feedback. Below you will find our responses to your two comments:
- Minor
This typo has been resolved. Thank you for your keen eye.
- Major
You're absolutely right to point out that it is unclear whether years of experience and/or discipline will be taken into account in the analysis of outcomes. This was certainly the intention behind the collection of information about participants' experience in the pre-participation survey. We have made the following revisions to the protocol:
- Added an additional secondary outcome to measure:
Secondary Outcome Measures
- The academic backgrounds and expertise of our participants may result in previous knowledge or familiarity with articles used in this study. Chances of this occurrence can not be eliminated and must be considered in analysis of the study data. Therefore, our secondary outcome will address the potential unblinding of participants by using a short questionnaire (Appendix B) to determine whether subjects recognized one or both of the articles from previous readings. We will also determine whether the order of reading of the modified articles impacted grading by participants.T
- The academic backgrounds and expertise of our participants could potentially influence the scores recorded with the DISCERN tool. Chances of this cannot be eliminated. We will analyze the study data to determine whether there is a relationship between participants' expertise (level of practice) and the score they assign to their articles with the DISCERN tool.
Secondary assessment
- Study subject questionnaire (see: Appendix C): Descriptive statistics using SPSS
- Does the order in which articles are assess affect the outcome?
- Study subject questionnaire (see: Appendix B): Inferential statistics using SPSS
- Is there a relationship between the participants level of practice and the score they assign to each article using the DISCERN tool?
Concepts of information behavior
editINFORMATION RECEIVING: The digital world is changing human information behavior and process. Focused almost exclusively on information seeking and using, information receiving, a central modality of the process is generally overlooked. As information seeking continues to migrate to the Internet, and artificial intelligence continues to advance the analysis of user behavior on the Internet across a range of user interactions, information receiving moves to the heart of the process, as systems "learn" what users like, want and need, as well as their search habits[1].
ITALICIZED = REVISE THIS CONTENT BEFORE ADDING TO THE ARTICLE.
Information behavior is a field of information science research that seeks to understand the way people search for and use information[2] in various contexts. It can include Information seeking and information retrieval, but it also aims to understand why people seek information and how they use it. The term 'information behaviour' was coined by Thomas D. Wilson in 1981[3] and sparked controversy upon its introduction.[4] The term has now been adopted and Wilson's model of information behavior is widely cited in information behavior literature.[5] In 2000, Wilson defined information behavior as “the totality of human behavior in relation to sources and channels of information".[6]
A variety of theories of information behavior seek to understand the processes that surround information seeking.[7] An analysis of the most cited publications on information behavior during the early 21st century shows its theoretical nature.[8] Information behavior research can employ various research methodologies grounded in broader research paradigms from pyschology, sociology and education.[9]
In 2003, a framework for information seeking studies was introduced that aims to guide the production of clear, structured descriptions of research objects and positions information-seeking as a concept within information behavior.[10]
Information need
editInformation need is a concept introduced by Wilson. Understanding the information need of an individual involved three elements:
- Why the individual decides to look for information,
- What purpose the information they find will serve, and
- How the information is used once it is retrieved [3]
Information seeking behavior
editInformation seeking behavior is a more specific concept of information behavior. It specifically focuses on searching, finding, and retrieving information. Information seeking behavior research can focus on improving information systems or, if it includes information need, can also focus on why the user behaves the way they do.
Information use
editUser studies vs. usage studies
Information poverty and barriers
editRoma Harris, Dewdney
Metatheories
editIn LIS, a metatheory is described "a set of assumptions that orient and direct theorizing about a given phenomenon". [11] Library and information science researchers have adopted a number of different metatheories in their research. A common concern among LIS researchers, and a prominent discussion in the field, is the broad spectrum of theories that inform the study of information behavior, information users, or information use. This variation has been noted as a cause of concern because it makes individual studies difficult to compare or synthesize if they are not guided by the same theory. This sentiment has been expressed in studies of information behavior literature from the early 1980s [12] and more recent literature reviews have declared it necessary to refine their reviews to specific contexts or situations due to the sheer breadth of information behavior research available. [13]
Below are descriptions of some, but not all, metatheories that have guided LIS research.
Cognitivist approach
editA cognitive approach to understanding information behavior is grounded in psychology. It holds the assumption that a person's thinking influences how they seek, retrieve, and use information. Researchers that approach information behavior with the assumption that it is a influenced by cognition, seek to understand what someone is thinking while they engage in information behaviour and how those thoughts influence their behavior.[14]
Wilsons attempt to understand information seeking behavior by defining information need includes a cognitive approach. Wilson theorizes that information behavior is influenced by the cognitive need of an individual. By understanding the cognitive information need of an individual, we may gain insight into their information behavior.[3]
Nigel Ford takes a cognitive approach to information seeking, focusing on the intellectual processes of information seeking. In 2004, Ford proposed an information seeking model using a cognitive approach that focuses on how to improve information retrieval systems and serves to establish information seeking and information behaviour as concepts in and of themselves, rather than synonymous terms. [15]
Constructionist approach
editThe constructionist approach to information behavior has roots in the humanities and social sciences. It relies on social constructionism, which assumes that a person's information behavior is influenced by their experiences in society.[14] In order to understand information behavior, constuctionist researchers must first understand the social discourse that surrounds the behavior. The most popular thinker referenced in constructionist information behavior research is Michel Foucault, who famously rejected the concept of a universal human nature. The constructionist approach to information behavior research creates space for contextualizing the behavior based on the social experiences of the individual.
One study that approaches information behavior research through the social constructionist approach is a study of the information behavior of a public library knitting group.[16] The authors use a collectivist theory to frame their research, which denies the universality of information behavior and focuses on "understanding the ways that discourse communities collectively construct information needs, seeking, sources, and uses".[16]
Constructivist approach
editThe constructivist approach is born out of education and sociology in which, "individuals are seen as actively constructing an understanding of their worlds, heavily influenced by the social world(s) in which they are operating".[14] Constructivist approaches to information behavior research generally treat the individual's reality as constructed within their own mind rather than built by the society in which they live.[17]
The constructivist metatheory makes space for the influence of society and culture with social constructivism, "which argues that, while the mind constructs reality in its relationship to the world, this mental process is significantly informed by influences received from societal conventions, history and interaction with significant others".[17]
Cartesian approach
editCartesian mind-body dualism.... Hepworth, Mark, Philipp Grunewald and Geoff Walton. 2014. “Research and practice: A critical reflection on approaches that underpin research into people's information behavior.” Journal of Documentation 70 (6): 1039- 1053.
Theories
editA common concern among LIS researchers, and a prominent discussion in the field, is the broad spectrum of theories that inform LIS research. This variation has been noted as a cause of concern because it makes individual studies difficult to compare if they are not guided by the same theory. LIS researchers have applied concepts and theories from many disciplines, including sociology, psychology, communication, organizational behavior, and computer science.[18] Fisher, Karen and Heidi Julien, 2009. “Information Behavior.” Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, vol. 43: 293-328). Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc.
Wilson's theory of information behavior (1981)
editThe term was coined by Thomas D. Wilson in his 1981 paper, on the grounds that the current term, 'information needs' was unhelpful since 'need' could not be directly observed, while how people behaved in seeking information could be observed and investigated.[3] However, there is increasing work in the information searching field that is relating behaviors to underlying needs.[19] In 2000, Wilson described information behavior as the totality of human behavior in relation to sources and channels of information, including both active and passive information-seeking, and information use.[6] He described information seeking behavior as purposive seeking of information as a consequence of a need to satisfy some goal. Information seeking behavior is the micro-level of behavior employed by the searcher in interacting with information systems of all kinds, be it between the seeker and the system, or the pure method of creating and following up on a search.
Thomas Wilson proposed that information behavior covers all aspects of human information behavior, whether active or passive. Information seeking behavior is the act of actively seeking information in order to answer a specific query. Information searching behavior is the behavior which stems from the searcher interacting with the system in question. Information use behavior pertains to the searcher adopting the knowledge they sought.
Small words and life in the round
editElfreda Chatman developed the theory of life in the round, which she defines las a world of tolerated approximation. It acknowledges reality at its most routine, predictable enough that unless an initial problem should arise, there is no point in seeking information.[20] Chatman examined this principle within a small world: a world which imposes on its participants similar concerns and awareness of who is important; which ideas are relevant and whom to trust. Participants in this world are considered insiders.[20] Chatman focused her study on women at a maximum security prison. She learned that over time, prisoner's private views were assimilated to a communal acceptance of life in the round: a small world perceived in accordance with agreed upon standards and communal perspective. Members who live in the round will not cross the boundaries of their world to seek information unless it is critical; there is a collective expectation that information is relevant; or life lived in the round no longer functions. The world outside prison has secondary importance to inmates who are absent from this reality which is changing with time.[20]
Navigators and explorers
editThis compares the internet search methods of experienced information seekers (navigators) and inexperienced information seekers (explorers). Navigators revisit domains; follow sequential searches and have few deviations or regressions within their search patterns and interactions. Explorers visit many domains; submit many questions and their search trails branch frequently.[21]
Sensemaking
editBrenda Dervin developed the concept of sensemaking. Sensemaking considers how we (attempt to) make sense of uncertain situations.[22] Her description of Sensemaking consisted of the definition of how we interpret information to use for our own information related decisions.
Brenda Dervin described sensemaking as a method through which people make sense of their worlds in their own language
Anomalous state of knowledge (ASK)
editASK was also developed by Nicholas J. Belkin.
An anomalous state of knowledge is one in which the searcher recognises a gap in the state of knowledge. This, his further hypothesis, is influential in studying why people start to search.[23]
Models
editEveryday life information seeking
editMcKenzie's two-dimensional model
editMcKenzie's model proposes that the information-seeking in everyday life of individuals occurs on a "continuum of information practices... from actively seeking out a known source... to being given un-asked for advice."[24] This model crosses the threshold in information-seeking studies from information behavior research to information practices research. Information practices research creates space fot understanding encounters with information that may not be a result of the individual's behavior.[citation needed]
McKenzie's two-dimensional model includes four modes of information practices (active seeking, active scanning, non-directed monitoring, by proxy) over two phases of the information process (connecting and interacting).[24]
| Phase -->
Mode (below) |
Connecting | Interacting |
|---|---|---|
| Active-seeking | Actively seeking contact with an identified source in a specific information groung | Asking a pre-planned question; active questioning strategies, e.g. list-making |
| Active-scanning | Identifying a likely source; browsing in a likely information ground | Identifying an opportunity to ask a question; actively observing or listening |
| Non-directed monitoring | Serendipitous encounters in unexpected places | Observing or overhearing in unexpected settings, chatting with acquaintances |
| By proxy | Being identified as an information seeker; being referred to a source through a gatekeeper | Being told |
Information search process (ISP)
editISP was proposed and developed by Carol Kuhlthau and represents a tighter focus on information-seeking behavior. Kuhlthau's framework was based on research into high school students, but extended over time to include a diverse range of people, including those in the workplace. It examined the role of emotions, specifically uncertainty, in the information seeking process, concluding that many searches are abandoned due to an overwhelmingly high level of uncertainty.[25] ISP is a 6-stage process, with each stage each encompassing 4 aspects:
- Thoughts (cognitive): what is to be accomplished
- Feelings (affective): what the searcher was feeling
- Actions: what the searcher did
- Strategies: what the searcher was trying to achieve [25]
| Stage | Task | Thoughts | Feelings | Actions | Strategies |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Task initiation | Contemplating assignment, comprehending task, relating prior experience and knowledge, considering possible topics | Apprehension of work ahead, uncertainty | Talking with others, browsing library | Brainstorming, discussing, contemplating possibilities, tolerating uncertainty |
| 2 | Topic selection | Weighing topics against criteria such as personal interest, project requirements, information available, time available; predicting outcome of possible choices, choosing topic with potential for success | Confusion, sometimes anxiety, brief elation (after selection), anticipation of task | Consulting informal mediators, using reference collections, preliminary searches | Discussing possible topics, predicting outcomes of choices, gaining general overview of topic |
| 3 | Pre-focus exploration | Becoming informed about general topic, seeking focus in general information found, identifying possible foci, inability to express precise information needed | Confusion, doubt, sometimes threat, uncertainty | Locating relevant information, reading to become informed, taking notes, making bibliographic citations | Reading to learn about topic, tolerating inconsistency and incompatibility of information encountered, intentionally seeking possible focus, listing descriptors |
| 4 | Focus formation | Predicting outcome of possible foci, using stage 2 task criteria, identifying ideas in information to form focus, sometimes characterised by a sudden moment of insight | Optimism, confidence of ability to complete task | Reading notes for themes | Making a survey of notes, listing possible foci, choosing a focus while rejecting others OR combining several themes to form one focus |
| 5 | Information collection | Seeking information to support focus, defining and extending focus through information, gathering pertinent information, organising information in notes | Realisation of extensive work to be done, confidence in ability to complete task, increased interest | Using library to collect pertinent information, requesting specific sources, taking detailed notes with bibliographic citations | Using descriptors to search out pertinent information, making comprehensive search of various types of materials i.e. reference, periodicals, non-fiction and biography, using indexes, requesting assistance of librarian |
| 6 | Search closure | Identify need for any additional information, considering time limit, diminishing relevance, increasing redundancy, exhausting resources | Sense of relief, sometimes satisfaction, sometimes disappointment | Re-checking information for information initially overlooked, confirming information and bibliographic citations | Returning to library to make summary search, keeping books until completion of writing to re-check information |
Kuhlthau's work is constructivist and explores information seeking beyond the user’s cognitive experience into their emotional experience while seeking information. She finds that the process of information searching begins with feelings of uncertainty, navigates through feelings of anxiety, confusion, or doubt, and ultimately completes their information seeking with feelings of relief or satisfaction, or disappointment. The consideration of an information seeker's affect has been replicated more recently in Keilty and Leazer's study which focuses on physical affect and esthetics instead of emotional affect [27].
Information seeking process
editDavid Ellis investigated the behavior of researchers in the physical and social sciences,[28] and engineers and research scientists[29] through semi-structured interviews using a grounded theory approach, with a focus on describing the activities associated with information seeking rather than describing a process. Ellis' initial investigations produced six key activities within the information seeking process:
- Starting (activities that form the information search)
- Chaining (following references)
- Browsing (semi-directed search)
- Differentiating (filtering and selecting sources based on judgement of quality and relevance)
- Monitoring (keeping track of developments in an area)
- Extracting (systematic extraction of material of interest from sources
Later studies by Ellis (focusing on academic researchers in other disciplines) resulted in the addition of two more activities [citation needed]:
- Verifying (checking accuracy)
- Ending (a final search, checking all material covered)
Choo, Detlor and Turnbull elaborated on Ellis' model by applying it to information searching on the web. Choo identified the key activities associated with Ellis in online searching episodes and connected them with four types of searching (undirected viewing, conditioned viewing, information search, and formal search).[30]
Information foraging
editDeveloped by Stuart Card, Ed H. Chi and Peter Pirolli, this model is derived from anthropological theories and is comparable to foraging for food. Information seekers use clues (or information scents) such as links, summaries and images to estimate how close they are to target information. A scent must be obvious as users often browse aimlessly or look for specific information. Information foraging is descriptive of why people search in particular ways rather than how they search.[31]
Non-linear information behavior model
editFoster and Urquhart provide a rich understanding of their model for nonlinear information behavior. This model takes into consideration varying contexts and personalities when researching information behavior. The authors of this article are themselves cautious of this new model since it still requires more development.[32]
Information behavior v. information practices debate
editThe future of information behavior research
editReferences
edit- ^ (1998 October) Giannini, Tula. ASIS Annual Conference, Pittsburgh, PA. "Information Receiving, a Primary Mode of the Information Process.
- ^ Fairer–Wessels, 1990, page 361.
- ^ a b c d Wilson, T.D. (1981). "On user studies and information needs". Journal of Documentation. 37 (1): 3–15. doi:10.1108/eb026702.
- ^ JESSE, discussion list http://listserv.utk.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9912&L=JESSE&D=0&P=3346
- ^ "Google Scholar". scholar.google.ca. Retrieved 2020-02-09.
- ^ a b Wilson, T.D. (2000). "Human Information Behaviour". Informing Science. 3 (2): 49–55. doi:10.28945/576.
- ^ Case, DO (2012). Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior. Emerald. ISBN 9781780526546.
- ^ Gonzalez-Teruel, A; González-Alcaide, G; Barrios, M; Abad-García, MF. (2015). "Mapping recent information behavior research: an analysis of co-authorship and co-citation networks". Scientometrics. 103 (2): 687–705. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1548-z. hdl:2445/100263.
- ^ Waller, Vivienne, author. Qualitative social research : contemporary methods for the digital age. ISBN 978-1-4462-5883-5. OCLC 948834592.
{{cite book}}:|last=has generic name (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Kalervo Jarvelin, T. D. Wilson. "On conceptual models for information seeking and retrieval research". informationr.net. Retrieved 2020-03-19.
- ^ Rioux, Kevin (2010). "Metatheory in Library and Information Science: A Nascent Social Justice Approach". Journal of Education for Library and Information Science. 51 (1): 9–17. ISSN 0748-5786.
- ^ Krikelas, James (1983). "Information-seeking behavior: Patterns and concepts". Drexel Library Quarterly. 19(2): 5–20.
- ^ Fisher, Karen E.; Julien, Heidi (2009). "Information behavior". Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 43 (1): 1–73. doi:10.1002/aris.2009.1440430114.
- ^ a b c Bates, Marcia. 2005. “An introduction to theories, metatheories, and models” in Theories of Information Behavior. Karen E. Fisher, Sanda Erdelez and Lynne (E.F.) McKechnie, eds. Medford, NJ: Information Today. 1-24.
- ^ Ford, Nigel (2004). "Modeling cognitive processes in information seeking: From Popper to Pask". Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 55 (9): 769–782. doi:10.1002/asi.20021. ISSN 1532-2882.
- ^ a b Prigoda, Elena; McKenzie, Pamela J. (2007-01-23). Spink, Amanda (ed.). "Purls of wisdom: A collectivist study of human information behaviour in a public library knitting group". Journal of Documentation. 63 (1): 90–114. doi:10.1108/00220410710723902. ISSN 0022-0418.
- ^ a b Talja, Sanna; Tuominen, Kimmo; Savolainen, Reijo (2005). Hjørland, Birger (ed.). ""Isms" in information science: constructivism, collectivism and constructionism". Journal of Documentation. 61 (1): 79–101. doi:10.1108/00220410510578023. ISSN 0022-0418.
- ^ Case, Donald O. (2007-09-28). "Information behavior". Annual Review of Information Science and Technology. 40 (1): 293–327. doi:10.1002/aris.1440400114. ISSN 0066-4200.
- ^ BJ Jansen, D Booth, B Smith (2009) Using the taxonomy of cognitive learning to model online searching. Information Processing & Management. 45 (6), 643-663.
- ^ a b c Chatman, Elfreda (1999). "A theory of life in the round". Journal of the American Society for Information Science. 50 (3): 207–217. doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(1999)50:3<207::aid-asi3>3.0.co;2-8.
- ^ White, Ryen W and Drucker, Steven M "Investigating behavioural variability in web search," 16th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW 2007)
- ^ Klein, G.; Moon, B.; Hoffman, R.F. (2006). "Making sense of sensemaking I: alternative perspectives". IEEE Intelligent Systems. 21 (4): 70–73. doi:10.1109/mis.2006.75.
- ^ Belkin, Nicholas J. "Anomalous states of knowledge as a basis for information retrieval". Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science. 5: 133–143.
- ^ a b c McKenzie, Pamela J. (2003-01-01). "A model of information practices in accounts of everyday‐life information seeking". Journal of Documentation. 59 (1): 19–40. doi:10.1108/00220410310457993. ISSN 0022-0418.
- ^ a b Kuhlthau, Carol. "Carol Kuhlthau". Retrieved 2017-12-05.
- ^ "Kuhlthau's Model of the Stages of the Information Process". Retrieved 2011-03-30.
- ^ Kuhlthau, Carol (1991). "Inside the Search Process: Information Seeking from the User's Perspective". Inside the Search Process: Information Seeking from the User's Perspective. 42(5): 361.
- ^ Ellis, David; Cox, Deborah, Hall, Katherine (1993). "A Comparison of the Information Seeking Patterns of Researchers in the Physical and Social Sciences". Journal of Documentation. 49 (4): 356–369. doi:10.1108/eb026919.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ David, Ellis; Haugan, Merete (1997). "Modelling the information seeking patterns of engineers and research scientists in an industrial environment". Journal of Documentation. 53 (4): 384–403. doi:10.1108/eum0000000007204.
- ^ "View of Information seeking on the Web: An integrated model of browsing and searching | First Monday". firstmonday.org. Retrieved 2020-03-01.
- ^ Chi, E.H; Pirolli, P; Chen, K; Pitkow, J. "Using information scent to model user information needs and actions and the web". In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 2001: 490–497.
- ^ Foster, Allen; Urquhart, Christine (2012-10-12). "Modelling nonlinear information behaviour: transferability and progression". Journal of Documentation. 68 (6): 784–805. doi:10.1108/00220411211277046. ISSN 0022-0418.
External links and further reading
edit- Donald O. Case, Looking for information: a survey of research on information seeking, needs and behavior, Academic Press (2002) 370 pages ISBN 012150381-X
- Hepworth, Mark, Philipp Grunewald and Geoff Walton. 2014. “Research and practice: A critical reflection on approaches that underpin research into people's information behavior.” Journal of Documentation 70 (6): 1039- 1053. 10.1108/JD-02-2014-0040
- Savolainen, Reijo. 2018. “Pioneering models for information interaction in the context of information seeking and retrieval.” Journal of Documentation 74(5): 966-986. 10.1108/JD-11-2017-0154.
- Julien, Heidi and O’Brien, M. 2014. “Information behavior research: Where have we been, where are we going?” Canadian Journal of Information & Library Science 38(4): 239-250.
Reference for protocol
editSmith[1]
Heilman and West[2]
Azzam[3]
Maggio et al[4]
Murray et al[5]
Weiner et al[6]
Shafee et al[7]
Waller[8]
Bodie and Dutta[9]
- ^ Smith, Denise A. (2020-02-18). "Situating Wikipedia as a health information resource in various contexts: A scoping review". PLOS ONE. 15 (2): e0228786. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0228786. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 7028268. PMID 32069322.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Heilman, James M.; West, Andrew G. (2015-03-04). "Wikipedia and Medicine: Quantifying Readership, Editors, and the Significance of Natural Language". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 17 (3): e4069. doi:10.2196/jmir.4069. PMC 4376174. PMID 25739399.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Azzam, Amin; Bresler, David; Leon, Armando; Maggio, Lauren; Whitaker, Evans; Heilman, James; Orlowitz, Jake; Swisher, Valerie; Rasberry, Lane; Otoide, Kingsley; Trotter, Fred (2017-02). "Why Medical Schools Should Embrace Wikipedia: Final-Year Medical Student Contributions to Wikipedia Articles for Academic Credit at One School". Academic Medicine. 92 (2): 194–200. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000001381. ISSN 1040-2446. PMC 5265689. PMID 27627633.
{{cite journal}}: Check date values in:|date=(help)CS1 maint: PMC format (link) - ^ Maggio, Lauren A.; Willinsky, John M.; Costello, Joseph A.; Skinner, Nadine A.; Martin, Paolo C.; Dawson, Jennifer E. (2020-12-01). "Integrating Wikipedia editing into health professions education: a curricular inventory and review of the literature". Perspectives on Medical Education. 9 (6): 333–342. doi:10.1007/s40037-020-00620-1. ISSN 2212-277X. PMC 7718341. PMID 33030643.
{{cite journal}}: no-break space character in|title=at position 67 (help)CS1 maint: PMC format (link) - ^ Murray, Heather; Walker, Melanie; Maggio, Lauren; Dawson, Jennifer (2018-06-01). "24 Wikipedia medical page editing as a platform to teach evidence-based medicine". BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 23 (Suppl 1): A12–A13. doi:10.1136/bmjebm-2018-111024.24. ISSN 2515-446X.
- ^ Weiner, Shira Schecter; Horbacewicz, Jill; Rasberry, Lane; Bensinger-Brody, Yocheved (2019-03-18). "Improving the Quality of Consumer Health Information on Wikipedia: Case Series". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 21 (3): e12450. doi:10.2196/12450. PMC 6441860. PMID 30882357.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link) - ^ Shafee, Thomas; Masukume, Gwinyai; Kipersztok, Lisa; Das, Diptanshu; Häggström, Mikael; Heilman, James (2017-11-01). "Evolution of Wikipedia's medical content: past, present and future". J Epidemiol Community Health. 71 (11): 1122–1129. doi:10.1136/jech-2016-208601. ISSN 0143-005X. PMC 5847101. PMID 28847845.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: PMC format (link) - ^ Waller, V; Farquharson, K; Dempsey, D (2016). Qualitative social research: Contemporary methods for the digital age. SAGE.
- ^ Bodie, Graham D.; Dutta, Mohan Jyoti (2008-07-02). "Understanding Health Literacy for Strategic Health Marketing: eHealth Literacy, Health Disparities, and the Digital Divide". Health Marketing Quarterly. 25 (1–2): 175–203. doi:10.1080/07359680802126301. ISSN 0735-9683. PMID 18935884.