Searching the Internet for Good Quality, Reliable Information

1
Searching the Internet for Good Quality, Reliable
Information

• 1st Year Biology Zoology, November 2007
• Tutor Ric Paul,
• Biomedical Sciences Library

2
Introduction

• There is a lot of very useful information on the
  Internet
• There is also a lot of very misleading
  information on the Internet
• Some of it is just old
• Some of it is deliberately misleading
• Some of it is well intentioned, but is biased
• For your University studies, and your medical
  career, it is critical that you use only good
  quality, reliable information

3
This Presentation

• You will try some searches of Google and Intute
  this is an alternative search engine that you
  have probably not encountered before
• You will look critically at the websites we find,
  and attempt to determine how reliable they may or
  may not be
• You will then discover some ways to find good
  quality information, using Google and other
  resources

4
A Basic Search

• For most people, the starting point of an
  Internet search is Google
• Try searching Google for mad cow
• www.google.co.uk
• How many hits did you get?
• How many of the results on the first page would
  be useful in researching mad cow disease?

5
A Closer Look at a Page

• It is likely that one of the first few hits you
  retrieved was for the Official Mad Cow Disease
  Home Page
• www.mad-cow.org
• Have a closer look at this page and think
  carefully about the following questions before
  you continue
• How useful is it?
• How reliable is the information?
• (This is not a trick question once youve got a
  feel for the page, continue to the next slide)

6
Reviewing the Website

• Now consider the following questions
• Who wrote the page?
• Are they biased?
• How old is the information?
• When was it last updated?
• Given your responses to those questions
• How reliable is this resource?
• Could you use it confidently to help research an
  essay about mad cow disease?

7
Background to the Website

• Towards the top of the page youll see that it
  was last updated 17 Apr 2001
• Youll notice that the news items are rather old
• There is no claim of authorship on the page
• so whilst it claims to be the official mad cow
  disease home page, we have no idea who has
  awarded it this official title
• At the top of the news section there is a link
• News 2001 has moved

8
The OCA

• The link takes you to the Organic Consumers
  Association
• Now we can see that, as well as being quite old,
  the page has also been written by a pressure
  group and is therefore far from an unbiased
  source
• The important thing is not whether you agree with
  the OCA or not
• The important thing is that they will have a
  particular point of view, which will have an
  inherent bias

9
Another Example

• Lets try another example
• A search for the chemical dihydrogen monoxide is
  likely to retrieve the following page
• www.dhmo.org/facts.html
• Look at the page and decide how reliable this
  information may or may not be
• Who wrote the page?
• Are they biased or not?
• When it was last updated?
• Again, spend some time on this before continuing

10
Analysing the Website Pros

• There is a lot of good, detailed information
• It is backed by the US Environmental Assessment
  Center sounds like a good source
• We have the name of the author

11
Analysing the Website Cons

• We dont know the background or qualifications of
  the author
• We dont know when it was last updated
• It has the tone of scaremongering
• It also has a .org URL, used for not for
  profit organisations, commonly association with
  pressure groups and the like
• Now think again about dihydrogen monoxide

12
Dihydrogen Monoxide

• Dihydrogen monoxide is two hydrogen molecules and
  one oxygen the chemical formula of which is
  H2O water!
• Everything on the site is true the website has
  been deliberate written to show how facts can be
  distorted, and how easy it is for a website to be
  misleading
• It is a good demonstration of how careful you
  have to be when using the Internet for your
  research

13
Improving Our Google Search

• Returning to our mad cow disease search, consider
  how you might improve it
• (Which may also get you thinking what would I
  consider being an improvement?)
• Try out an improved search
• www.google.co.uk

14
Google has lots of useful tools in the Advanced
Search section
15
Look for an exact phrase
Restrict your search to pages updated recently
Look for pages only from certain domains
16
Domain Types

• The domain (the last part of the URL) can tell
  you a lot about the resource you are looking at
• Roughly speaking
• .com Commercial organisation
• .co.uk UK commercial organisation, or private
  site
• .net Commercial organisation, or private site
• .ac.uk UK academic website
• .edu US academic website
• .gov Government website
• .nhs.uk NHS website
• .org Not-for-profit organisation (could be a
  pressure group, a NGO, QUANGO, or similar)

17
Alternatively

• Perhaps the most straightforward way to improve
  your search results is to look at your search
  terms
• The quality of the result you get out are
  directly related to the quality of search terms
  you put in
• A search for mad cow gets you lots of
  irrelevant material
• Why? Because the term is now used in so many
  other contexts

18
Better Terminology

• A search using more scientific terminology will
  yield far better results
• BSE
• Bovine spongiform encephalopathy
• CJD (or vCJD, nvCJD)
• Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease
• These terms will find websites specifically
  discussing BSE and/or CJD
• They are also more likely to have scientific
  information, since they are using scientific
  terminology (more likely is important, though!)

19
An Alternative to Google

• Google is undoubtedly an excellent search engine
• (One reason Ive used the mad cow example is
  that it demonstrates so clearly the issues that
  Id like you to consider Id hoped that the more
  contemporary example of bird flu might work
  just as well but, annoyingly, Google gets very
  good results!)
• However, there is an alternative (and I dont
  mean Yahoo, Alta Vista, MSN Search, etc.)
• Try the mad cow search on Intute
• www.intute.ac.uk/healthandlifesciences

20
Intute

• You should notice
• You get far fewer results
• However, each one has a full description of the
  site
• They should all come from reasonably trustworthy
  sources
• Intute is a gateway, rather than a general
  search engine like Google
• It is aimed at the UK academic community (notice
  it has a .ac.uk URL)

21
Intute

• Google automatically indexes any and every site
  that its spiders encounter on their trawls
  through the Internet
• Intute only includes websites selected by its
  subject experts (its indexers)
• The indexers look for resources that fit the
  subject profile of Intute, and which pass a
  stringent quality control test
• Only the best, most reliable websites make it
  onto the Intute database

22
Improved Intute Search

• Return to Intute and run a search on bovine
  spongiform encephalopathy or bse
• www.intute.ac.uk/healthandlifesciences

23
Improved Search Results

• Unlike with Google, you should actually find more
  results with this change in terminology
• (Although neither search returns anywhere near as
  many results as Google does)
• Since Intute is aimed at the UK academic
  community, youll get far better results by using
  academic or scientific terminology

24
Google vs Intute

• So which is better? It sort of depends

• Google
• Covers far more of the Internet
• Will find you lots of useful information
• But will also find lots of irrelevant information
• You must assess each site that you find for its
  relevance and reliability

• Intute
• Has much smaller coverage of the Internet
• Will find you some really useful websites
• May also miss lots of useful information
• Although the websites have already been assessed,
  you should still look at them critically

25
Assessing Websites

• Weve already touched on how you would assess the
  reliability of a website that you find, but lets
  look at it in more detail
• Try to think of up to three things that youd
  look for in a website, to determine how reliable
  it is
• Once youve spent a couple of minutes thinking
  about that, move on

26
Who, When Where

• There are lots of specific things you can look
  for on a website, but it boils down to answering
  three simple questions Who? When? Where?
• Who wrote the website?
• Do they have any qualifications or expertise in
  the area?
• Are they presenting an unbiased and balanced
  point of view?
• Are they backing up their arguments with facts
  based on scientific research?

27
Who, When, Where

• When
• When was the page first written?
• When was it last updated or checked?
• Given the nature of the subject area, how
  out-of-date does this make the website?
• Where
• What type of website is it? Commercial?
  Governmental? Academic? Personal?
• Does the organisation it is representing have a
  balanced or biased point of view on the topic?

28
Assessing Websites

• You may not be able to answer all of those
  questions
• If so, dont worry
• the answers to the questions you can deal with
• plus knowing the questions you cannot deal with
• should give you an impression of the reliability
  of the website

29
Learning More

• To find out more about using the Internet to find
  reliable information, I would strongly recommend
  that you take one of the tutorials (whichever
  best fits your subject) from the menu of Health
  Life Sciences topics
• www.vts.intute.ac.uk
• This will introduce you to some useful starting
  points in your Internet searching and will look
  in more detail at how you can assess the quality
  and reliability of the sites that you find

30
Internet for Medicine

• It shouldnt take you too long to complete
• But even experienced Internet users are likely to
  discover some useful techniques and resources

31
Further Help Guidance

• If you would like help at any stage with
  literature or information searching, then contact
  me
• Ric Paul, R.M.Paul_at_soton.ac.uk
• I can give you detailed advice on searching for
  journal articles, using web resources,
  referencing and anything to do with Library
  resources

32
(No Transcript)