Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Associate Professor, knowledge and Information Sciences, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran
2 Lecturer, Medical Library and Information Sciences, Faculty of Allied Medical Sciences, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
Abstract
Introduction: The huge volume of information and images on the Internet and its increasing growth has made the optimized search performance difficult for users. Among search tools, search engines are mostly used by users. This research was aimed to determine and compare the precision of general and specialized search engines in medical images retrieval. Methods: This applied, comparative approach survey was conducted in 2011. The research sample included 2 general search engines, i.e. Yahoo and Google, and 2 specialized medical search engines, i.e. OmniMedicalSearch and Trip Database. In order to determine and compare the precision of image retrieval in the four search engines, 10 medical keywords were chosen after consulting medical specialists and were searched in the mentioned search engines. Then the first 10 results retrieved by each search engine were extracted and the opinions of medical specialists about relevance of results were received. Descriptive statistics, Independent t-test were used to analyze the data with SPSS. Results: It was found that Google search engine has the most precision (90) in retrieving of relevant medical images and then OmniMedicalSearch search engine has precision to be equal 86/8. Among general search engines and specialized medical search engines there aren’t meaningful differences in retrieval of medical images. Conclusion: Despite of some overlap between search engines results, each search engine also was retrieved unique results. This matter indicate that the indexing algorithm of resources on the web different in the various search engines; and it is suggested to use several general and specialized search engines simultaneously to search medical images. Keywords: Internet; Medical Information Storage and Retrieval; Medical Illustration; Precision; Search Engine
Keywords
- Flanagan D. Search Englines. 1999. Available from: URL: http://www.home.sprintmail.com/~debflanagan/engines.htm. [Cited 2011 Dec 20]
- Rezaei Sharifabadi S. Effects of the Internet on Research Activities. Tehran: Ketabdar; 1999. [Book in Persian]
- Garency M. What distance learners should know about information retrieval on the World Wide Web? Translator, Ghasem Azadi. Faslname-ketab 2004; 14 (4):169-178. [Article in Persian].
- Ze Wang J, et al. Content based image indexing and searching using Daubechies wavelets. International Journal of Digital Libraries 1997; 1(4).
- Hassan I, Zhang J. Image search engine feature analysis. Online Information Review 2001; 25(2): 103-114. Available from: URL: http://www.emerald-library-com/ft.
- Kherfi M.L, Ziou D, Bernardi A. Image retrieval from the World Wide Web: Issues, Techniques and Systems. ACM Computing Survey 2004; 36(1):35-67.
- King D. Specialized search engine: alternative to the big Guys. ONLINE 2000. Available from: URL: http://www.infotoday.com/ online/OL2000/.[Cited 2011 Nov 5]
- Kousha K. evaluation criteria of Internet search engines. Informology 2003; (1): 79-104.
- Ilic D, et al. Specialized medical search-engines are not better than general search-engines in sourcing consumer information about androgen deficiency. Human Reproduction 2003; 18(3): 557- 561. Available from: URL: http://humrep. oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/ full/18/3/557.
- Shafi S.M, Rather R.A. Precision and recall of five search engines for retrieval of scholarly information in the field of biotechnology. Webology 2005; 2. Available from: URL: http://www.webology.ir/2005/v2n2/toc.html.
- Veronis J. A comparative study of six search engines. 2006. Available from: URL: http://www.up.univ-mrs. fr/veronis/pdf/2006-comparative-study.pdf. [Cited 2011 Dec 12]
- Vanhecke T.E, et al. PubMed vs. high wire press: a head-to head comparison of two medical literature search engines. Comput Biol Med 2006. Available from: URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com. [Cited 2011 Oct 2]
- Azadi G. The scale of web search engines precision in information retrieval of library and information science discipline. Faslname-ketab 2005; 16 (3):111-122. [Article in Persian].
- Ghazi-Mirsaeed J, Haghani H, Akbari A. A comparative study of search engines and metasearch engines in retrieving physiotherapy information from WWW and determining their overlapping. Health Information Management 2007; 4(1): 11-21. [Article in Persian].
- Alijani R, Nikkar M, Dehghani L. Comparison of search engines and meta-search engines in answering ready- reference questions. Faslname-ketab 2008; 19 (2):171-188. [Article in Persian].
- Mohammadesmaeil S, Lafzighazi E, Gilvari A. Comparing Search Engines and Meta-search Engines in Pharmaceutics Information Retrieval. Health Information Management 2008; 5(2): 129. [Article in Persian].
- Serati Shirazi M. A Comparative study of the accuracy of general and specialized medical search engines in retrieving documents related to children diseases. Faslname-ketab 2009; 20 (1):77-94. [Article in Persian].
- Dastghaib M. A survey on textual, content-based, and Fuzzy indexing images: digital image retrieval. Faslname-ketab 2006; 16 (4):111-116. [Article in Persian].
- Hariri N. An investigation on effectiveness of the “similar pages” feature of Google. Online Information Review 2008; 32(3): 370-378.
- Hariri N. Relevance ranking on Google: Are top ranked results really considered more relevant by the users?. Online Information Review 2011; 35(4): 598-610.
- Lopes C.T, Ribeiro C. Comparative evaluation of web search engines in health information retrieval. Online Information Review 2011; 35(6):869.
)