Here is a summary of the responses I received in regards to the question I asked last week about Quertle:
It's free, and seems to be a good addition to my list of places to search.
___________________________________________________________________________
I haven't used it much, but I stopped at their booth at the MLA annual
meeting, and it looks very promising. I believe it is a free resource
organized / managed by a few librarians. I'm trying to remember what
they said to me in describing it....
I think they assign keywords to resources, so that their search feature
will find things in a "smart" fashion, much as google does. They did
this among themselves, on their own time, to make work more manageable,
and recently decided to share it with the rest of us. Please don't quote
me, because I'm pulling from memory, not from notes, and the meeting was
last May / June.
____________________________________________________________________________
Yes I tried it a few times when it first came out but it only seemed to work with topics about which there was a lot of literature -- that's my guess as to the difference between when it got results and when it didn't, but I could be wrong...
__________________________________________________________________________
Yes, I saw them at NLM - DC. Gave it a try, but does not hold any water compared to Medline. Even with their coaster on my desk, I never seem to go to their site.
________________________________________________________________________________
was introduced to it at mla'10 last year. it is similar to clusty.com one of them (I cannot remember which one) now has a religious bias to it and won't "find" items that disagree with their beliefs (I wish I could remember which one
___________________________________________________________________________________________
Since I sent this question last week, I ran some experimental searches on it. In one search it missed a couple of articles from a four article series when I chose limit the search terms that I had used to the "Key Concept" of "occupational. It also missed one of the articles in that same series when I added a title word common to all of them to limit the results rather than using key concept. I can see how it might be useful for an inexperienced searcher since it would help them narrow their focus. It does link to PubMed so you can view the record there if you are interested in viewing MeSH headings, related articles etc. There are links to the entire article on PubMed Central if the article is available there. It also links to PubGet as a resource to download or purchase the article. I still prefer PubMed but that is based on years of experience using it and other NLM databases. If I spent a lot of time using Quertle and learning the ins and outs of how it works, I might find it useful but I think I'll stick with PubMed for now.
Auburn Steward, MLIS, AHIP
Center for Toxicology & Environmental Health
Library
5120 North Shore Drive
North Little Rock, AR 72118
501-801-8614
501-801-8615 (fax)
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: Medical Libraries Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Auburn Steward
Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2011 12:54 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: ?: Have you used Quertle?
One of the toxicologists here just sent me a link to Quertle which describes itself as "relationship driven biomedical research". I hadn't seen this before and wondered if anyone else has used it. I'd be interested in hearing your comments and will summarize for the list.
http://www.quertle.info/v2/?cmp=ts1
Auburn Steward, MLIS, AHIP
Center for Toxicology & Environmental Health
Library
5120 North Shore Drive
North Little Rock, AR 72118
501-801-8614
501-801-8615 (fax)
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
|
