Cited by 174Information Retrieval and Search BehaviorLibrary Science and Information Literacyscientometrics and bibliometrics research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Day in the Life of PubMed: Analysis of a Typical Day's Query Log

Open access
Herskovic, J. R., Tanaka, L. Y., Hersh, W., Bernstam, E. V.·2007·Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To characterize PubMed usage over a typical day and compare it to previous studies of user behavior on Web search engines. DESIGN: We performed a lexical and semantic analysis of 2,689,166 queries issued on PubMed over 24 consecutive hours on a typical day. MEASUREMENTS: We measured the number of queries, number of distinct users, queries per user, terms per query, common terms, Boolean operator use, common phrases, result set size, MeSH categories, used semantic measurements to group queries into sessions, and studied the addition and removal of terms from consecutive queries to gauge search strategies. RESULTS: The size of the result sets from a sample of queries showed a bimodal distribution, with peaks at approximately 3 and 100 results, suggesting that a large group of queries was tightly focused and another was broad. Like Web search engine sessions, most PubMed sessions consisted of a single query. However, PubMed queries contained more terms. CONCLUSION: PubMed's usage profile should be considered when educating users, building user interfaces, and developing future biomedical information retrieval systems.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1197/jamia.m2191

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 15 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. 2001, PROG PROC AM SOC CLIN ONCOL, 20, 244a

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Herskovic, J. R., Tanaka, L. Y., Hersh, W., & Bernstam, E. V.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
Corresponding author
Bernstam, E. V.
Venue
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Published
2007-03-01
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
212-220
ISSN
  • 1067-5027 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-974X
OpenAlex
W2098146716
Cited by
170
References
15
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 12
FWCI
34.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons-TMC (Texas Medical Center) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • W. M. Keck Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (5k22lm008306-03)
  • U.S. National Library of Medicine (5K22LM008306, K22 LM008306)
  • National Center for Research Resources (UL1RR024148)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Information Retrieval and Search Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › scientometrics and bibliometrics research
Keywords
PubMed, query log analysis, user search behavior, search sessions, Boolean operators, search strategies, biomedical information retrieval
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Information Storage and Retrieval, Internet, PubMed, Medical Subject Headings

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review