Abstract
Background: Libraries provide access to databases with auto-cite features embedded into the services; however, the accuracy of these auto-cite buttons is not very high in humanities and social sciences databases. Case Presentation: This case compares two biomedical databases, Ovid MEDLINE and PubMed, to see if either is reliable enough to confidently recommend to students for use when writing papers. A total of 60 citations were assessed, 30 citations from each citation generator, based on the top 30 articles in PubMed from 2010 to 2020. Conclusions: Error rates were higher in Ovid MEDLINE than PubMed but neither database platform provided error-free references. The auto-cite tools were not reliable. Zero of the 60 citations examined were 100% correct. Librarians should continue to advise students not to rely solely upon citation generators in these biomedical databases.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 133-139 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | Journal of the Medical Library Association |
| Volume | 112 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 2024 |
Keywords
- Auto-citation generator
- Ovid MEDLINE
- PubMed
- biomedical databases
- citation on demand
- information literacy
- librarians
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'MEDLINE citation tool accuracy: an analysis in two platforms'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver