Health Information Management

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Archive policy and data storage

Author Guidelines

forms

Publication Fee

Reviewers Guide

Comparative Evaluation of Websites of United States National Library of Medicine and Iranian National Library of Medicine

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Assistant Professor, Library and Information Sciences, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Medical Library and Information Sciences, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Introduction: Nowadays and with the increasing role of the worldwide web as one of the most important sources of information on the one hand, and the enhancement of its usability on the other, it is necessary for the web designers and developers to be familiar with the criteria that make a web portal usable. Therefore, the present study aimed to provide knowledge about the criteria of usability in United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) in comparison to Iranian National Library of Medicine (INLM). Methods: Taking a critical approach, this article examined web portal of NLM in comparison to INLM, in order to conduct a reliable assessment. The tools for data collection was an explanatory checklist, developed by the researchers based on the review of the literatures consisted of 159 components. Desired portals were measured by it. In order to analyze research findings, descriptive statistics (frequency and percentage) used. Results: In general, the results showed that the evaluation of usability in NLM portal, compared to the overall assessment in accordance with all the sub-criteria, in index portal, (with 676 points), was 96%, and it was 48% in INLM. Conclusion: Considering the increase of expansion for web portals and their roles, web portal usability evaluation ensures web designers about the usability of their websites for satisfying their general users. According to the value place of national library as the golden gateway to access quick easy and unlimited medical information, considering its web usability can be useful. Obviously, each information service exists for the sole purpose of satisfying its users, and all its activities, services and products are geared towards this purpose. How well this purpose is served is a measure of the usefulness of that information service. Keywords: Evaluation; Libraries, Digital; United States National Library of Medicine; Iranian National Library of Medicine

References
  1. Asqari Poudeh, Ahmad-Reza.” Review of Elements and Features Involved in Design of University Libraries Websites”, MA thesis in Librarianship and Information, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology, Mashhad Ferdowsi University.2001
  2. Alexander, Janet, Web knowledge: How to Assess Existing Information on the Web and Develop such Pages. Translated by Sedighe Mohamadesmaeil. Tehran: Dabizesh.2004
  3. Alexander JE , Tate MA, Web Wisdom: who to evaluate and create information quality on the web. London, Mahwah, NewJersey.LEA: (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates).1999
  4. Back SE:Evaluation criteria: the good, The Bad and The Ugly: Or, Why It’s a Good Idea to Evaluate Web Sources.1997. Available at: www.lib.nmsu.edu/instruction/evalcrit.html.
  5. Barker J:Finding Information on the Internet: A Tutorial University of California .2004. Available at: www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/Evaluate.html.
  6. Barker J:Evaluating Web Pages: Techniques to Apply & Questions to Ask.” VC Berkeley – Teaching Library Internet Workshops, 12sep.2003.2003Available at: www.Lib.berkeley.edu/Teaching Lib/Guides/Internet/Evaluated.html.
  7. Berger P:Web Evaluation Guide: Tramline, Incorporated.1999. Available at: www.infosearcher.com/cybertours/tours/touro4/-tourlaunch1.html.
  8. Bertot JC. et al. Functionality, usability and accessibility: Interactive user-centered evaluation strategies for digital libraries, Performance Management and Metrics, 2006; Vol. 7 No. 1. 17-28.
  9. Braynik G: Automatic Web Usability Evaluation: What need to be done? (29jan.2003): 1-16. 2003. Available at: www.usable.binghamton.edu.atomatic Thesis.html.
  10. Clay ES. Content management and library web site. Public Library. 42(5). Sep/Oct, 2003. 278-279.
  11. Doubleday A, Ryan M ,Springett M and Sutcliffe A. “A comparison of usability techniques for evaluating design”, Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods and Techniques, Amsterdam.1997
  12. Engle M: Evaluating Websites: Criteria and Tools. New York Library Association Conference, Saratoga Springs, NY. (October 1996): 1-3. Available at: www.Library.Cornel.edu/Okuref/research/Webeval.html.
  13. The Essential Web Site Usability Checklist. 2007. Available at: www.dailybits.com.
  14. Fogg BJ.et al. What Makes Websites Credible? A report on a large quantitative study. CHI, 2001,vol.3, no.1
  15. Haji Zeinolabedini Mohsen, Leila Maktabifard and Farida Osara . Analysis of World National Libraries Websites' Links. Journal of Educational Sciences and Psychology,2005; Vol. 7, No. 1.p.173-193
  16. Hassanzadeh Mohammad, Navidi Fatemeh .Web site accessibility evaluation methods in action: A comparative approach for ministerial web sites in Iran .Journal of the Electronic Library,2010;vol. 28, No.6.p.789-803.
  17. Hupp J: Test Your Web Site: A 57- Point Checklist for Maximum Usability.2007. Available at: www.virtualhosting.com.
  18. Jafari A. Optimizing Campus Web Sites. EDUCASE QUARTERLY, 2000;No.2.p.56-58.
  19. Johnson Steve , Pages for Offer and Reception of Library Resources Materials on the Web. Translated by Sediqhe Mohamadesmaeil. Ettela' Shenasi, 2003;autumn(1): 169-187.
  20. Khansari Jiran, Development of Successful Websites for Small University Libraries. San'at-e Barq,2002; Nov(54):24-28.
  21. Kirkpatrick CH., “Getting two for the price of one: accessibility and usability”, Computers in Libraries, 2003; 23(1): 26-9, available at: www.ebscohost.com (accessed 4 October 2008).
  22. Law L and Hvannberg ET, “Complementarity and convergence of heuristic evaluation and usability test: a case study of universal brokerage platform”, Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Human-computer Interaction, October 19-23, Aarhus.2002
  23. Leggett D, Quick Usability Checklist.2009. Available at: www.uxbooth.com.
  24. Mazinani Ali, Library and Librarianship. Tehran: Organization of Study and Development of university Textbooks in Humanities (SAMT).2002
  25. Meyers PJ, 25-Point Web Site Usability Checklist, 2008. Available at: www.usereffect.com.
  26. Mohamadesmaeil Sediqheh.“Assessment of Usability of Websites of Industrial Universities”. Doctoral thesis in Library and Information Sciences. Tehran: Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch of Tehran.2004
  27. Mohamadesmaeil Sediqheh, Assessment of Usability of Websites of Industrial Universities. Book Quarterly,2005; 16(1)
  28. Mohamadesmael S, Kazemikouhbonani S. National Libraries Website Access ability in the Middle East Countries. Book Quarterly 2011; 22(1): 57.
  29. Moradi Gh, Ahmadi M , Zohoor A, Ebadifardazar F, Saberi M. Evaluation of structure and content of websites of the educational hospitals in Iran-2007. Health Information Management2007;4(2):184.
  30. Nadler DM, Furman VM, Access board issues final standards for disabled access under Section 508 of Rehabilitation Act, Government Contract Litigation Reporter, 2001;14(19):14.
  31. National Science Foundation (NSF), Universal Design of College Algebra.2004. Available at: www.usablealgebra.landmark.edu.
  32. Navidi Fatema.” Assessment of Accessibility of Websites of Ministries of the IRI Government”. MA Thesis in Librarianship and Information, Tarbi'at-e Modarres University. 2007
  33. Nielsen J, Designing Web Usability, New Riders Publishing, Indianapolis, IN.2000
  34. Nielsen J, Coyne K, Tahir Marie, Make It Usable - Web Site Usability Magazine, (6 feb.2001): 1-5.2001.Available: http://www.Pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,33821,00.asp,23jan.2003.
  35. Nowrouzi Ali-Reza, Review of Participation of Iran in Web. Book Quarterly, winter 2006.
  36. Osara Farida , Moradmand Ali, Identification of Major Feature in Design of Websites of World National Libraries with a View to Presenting an Appropriate Model for Quality promotion of Website of IRI's National Library. Information Quarterly,2006; autumn and winter(1,2):170-190.
  37. Osara Farida, Criteria s for Assessment of Internet Sources. Book Quarterly, 2002; summer13(2): 61-73.
  38. Providenti M III , Zai R . “Web accessibility at Kentucky’s academic libraries”, Library Hi Tech, 2007;25(4): 478-93.
  39. Reza'I Sharifabadi Saeed , Foroudi Noushin, Assessment of Web Pages of Iran's University Libraries with a Model Presented. Book Quarterly, 2002; winter 13(4):12-19.
  40. Sandberg Robert, Assessment and Usability Test of Company Specific Hardware Configuration Tool. University essay from link Öpings Universitet/Instituation fÖr datavetenskap.2009
  41. The SEO File: Usability Checklist.2009. Available at: www.theseofiles.co.uk.
  42. Sloan John Rampo, College Web Design Standards. Rampo College of New yersey Statements and policies.2001.[on-line].Available: http://www.guide.rampo.edu 1/content/Webstandards.html.
  43. Stueart RD, Library and Information Center management .fifth edition. Endewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited; INC.1998
  44. Sullivan T, Matson R, Barriers to use: Usability and Content Accessibility on the Web’s Most Popular Sites. Interdisciplinary Ph.D. program in information Science, University of North Texas, Denton.2000
  45. Tran LA, “Evaluation of community web sites: a case study of the Community Social.2000
  46. Planning Council of Toronto web site”, Online Information Review,33(1): 96-116.
  47. Tungar MN, Heuristic Evaluation.2002. Available at: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~manas/cs8803a/Heuristic.pdf.
  48. Usability Guidelines Information Science & Technology.2004. Available at: www.web.mit.edu.
  49. Web Usability Checklist, The College of New Jersey.2008. Available at: www.tcng.edu.
  50. Weibel SL, the World Wide Web and Emerging Internet Resource Discovery Standards for Scholarly Literature. Library Trends,1995;43(4): 627-664.
  51. Wilson S, World Wide Web Design Guide. Indianapolis. IN: Hayden Books, 1995.
  52. Wixon D., “Evaluating usability methods”, Interactions, July/August.2003
  53. Zaphiris P, Darin Ellis R, Website Usability and Content Accessibility of The Top USA Universities. Dertoit, MI: Institute of Gerontology and Dept of Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Wayne State University.2001
  54. 50 Web Usability Tips to Attract and Retain Web Visitors.2009. Available at: www.doshdosh.com.
Health Information Management
Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 3
September 2013
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics