Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I, 2010. Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? PLoS Med 7(9): e1000326. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326

Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I, 2010. Seventy-Five Trials and Eleven Systematic Reviews a Day: How Will We Ever Keep Up? PLoS Med 7(9): e1000326. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326
The number of scholarly articles published every day has grown at an unmanageable rate. At the same time, scientists and clinicians are expected to evaluate and archive all relevant information for their respective areas of expertise. This task is nearly unmanageable for clinicians, researchers, and students alike. New tools are required to make this avalanche of information survivable. In order for these tools to be successful in their mission, they must achieve several goals.
 
  • Simple
  • Integrated
  • Consistent
  • Modern
  • Extensible
 
Features

Search

  • Search PubMed, Google Scholar, and others
  • Search as you type
  • Full text, by author, by journal, and more
Save
  • Articles present in search results tracked across computers
  • Full text articles saved and synced by Mendeley 

Track

  • Store favorite searches
  • Follow favorite journals
  • Track specific authors
Share
  • Social networking through Mendeley
  • Collaborate with others
  • Evaluate and measure hot topics in literature
Consistency
  • Search and gather primary literature in a consistent interface
  • EZproxy aware to fully use institutional access to full-text journal articles
Extensible
  • Community supported journal parsing engine to enable quick support for new publishers and search engines
Modern
  • Latest UI innovations and web service technologies
  • Forward-compatible with federated security technologies

 


      
Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.