ScholarLens Back to search
1995•JAMARequires access

Understanding MeSH for Literature Searches

Edgar Fremer

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

To the Editor. —In their recent article, Drs Lowe and Barnett1give a comprehensive and instructive overview of how to use the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) vocabulary when searching the MEDLINE database. The authors believe that successful MEDLINE searches require the use and knowledge of MeSH. This is, of course, true. On the other hand, they mention the problem with "free-text" searching for words in titles or abstracts, stating that this method is often an important reason why MEDLINE searches fail. In my experience, MeSH alone is not sufficient when creating powerful and comprehensive MEDLINE searches. I believe that both the MeSH vocabulary and free-text searching must be used. The MeSH vocabulary is an excellent tool, but the depth and quality of indexing vary, and there is no doubt that MEDLINE—as well as most databases—suffers from incomplete indexing.2 A basic principle in indexing ought

About this research paper

What this paper is about

To the Editor. —In their recent article, Drs Lowe and Barnett1give a comprehensive and instructive overview of how to use the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) vocabulary when searching the MEDLINE database. The authors believe that successful MEDLINE searches require the use and knowledge of MeSH. This is, of course, true. On the other hand, they mention the problem with "free-text" searching for words in titles or abstracts, stating that this method is often an important reason why MEDLINE searches fail. In my experience, MeSH alone is not sufficient when creating powerful and comprehensive MEDLINE searches. I believe that both the MeSH vocabulary and free-text searching must be used. The MeSH vocabulary is an excellent tool, but the depth and quality of indexing vary, and there is no doubt that MEDLINE—as well as most databases—suffers from incomplete indexing.2 A basic principle in indexing ought

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

To the Editor. —In their recent article, Drs Lowe and Barnett1give a comprehensive and instructive overview of how to use the National Library of Medicine's Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) vocabulary when searching the MEDLINE database. The authors believe that successful MEDLINE searches require the use and knowledge of MeSH. This is, of course, true. On the other hand, they mention the problem with "free-text" searching for words in titles or abstracts, stating that this method is often an important reason why MEDLINE searches fail. In my experience, MeSH alone is not sufficient when creating powerful and comprehensive MEDLINE searches. I believe that both the MeSH vocabulary and free-text searching must be used. The MeSH vocabulary is an excellent tool, but the depth and quality of indexing vary, and there is no doubt that MEDLINE—as well as most databases—suffers from incomplete indexing.2 A basic principle in indexing ought

Key concepts: MEDLINE, Search engine indexing, Controlled vocabulary, Vocabulary, National library, Information retrieval, Medicine, Subject (documents)

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Understanding MeSH for Literature Searches — Research Paper | ScholarLens