Evaluation of subject gateways: a methodological proposal and longitudinal analysis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2015.2.1187Keywords:
Subject gateway, quality, evaluation, methodologyAbstract
In this paper a quality assessment of 30 subject gateways was carried out using data from 2007 and 2012, with the aim of shedding light on their strengths, weaknesses and evolution over time. For this purpose, we designed and implemented a 30-item questionnaire divided into three main categories: access to information, management, and value-added elements. We find substantial differences across the subject gateways analyzed and see that the average quality is quite good in the first two categories but not in the last one. Regarding their evolution over time, we observed improvements only with valued added services, though they are not significant.
Downloads
References
Abad García, M. F.; González Teruel, A.; Calduch, P. B.; De Ramón Frías, R.; Blasco, L. C. (2005). A comparative study of six European databases of medically oriented Web resources. Journal of the Medical Library Association, vol. 93 (4), 467-479. PMid:16239943 PMCid:PMC1250323
Abadal, E.; Codina, L. (2008). Función de los portales temáticos en la era de la búsqueda posmoderna. Anuario ThinkEPI, vol. 1, 89-95.
Abels, E. G. (2011). Transforming the Internet Public Library into the ipl2 Virtual Learning Laboratory. The Reference Librarian, vol. 52, 284-290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2011.586922
Bargheer, M. (2003). Quality control and evaluation of scientific web resources. Bibliothek, vol. 27 (3), 153-169. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/bfup.2003.153
Belcher, M.; Place, E.; Conole, G. (2000). Quality assurance in subject gateways: creating high quality portals on the Internet. Quality Assurance in Education, vol. 8 (1), 38-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09684880010312686
Cattadori, M.; Bianchi, C.; Macario, M.; Masiello, L. (2014). Small, Subject-Oriented Educational Resource Gateways: What Are Their Roles in Geoscience Education?. In Vincent C.H. Tong (ed.), Geoscience Research and Outreach, p. 121-142. Springer Netherlands. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6943-4_9
Chao, H. (2002). Assessing the quality of academic libraries on the web: the development and testing of criteria. Library and Information Science Research, vol. 24 (2), 169-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0740-8188(02)00111-1
Clark, N.; Frost, D. (2002). User-centred evaluation and design: A subject gateway perspective. www.vala.org.au/vala2002/2002pdf/38ClaFro.pdf [consultado 30 de abril de 2014].
Codina, L. (2007). Motores de búsqueda para usos académicos: ¿Cambio de Paradigma? Anuario ThinkEPI, vol. 1, 98-100.
De-Juanas, A.; Pardo, R.; Diestro, A.; Ferro, A.; Sampedro, J. (2012). Construcción de un instrumento de verificación de la calidad de portales y redes de investigación de carácter científico en Internet. Revista Espa-ola de Documentación Científica, vol. 35 (4), 555-572. http://dx.doi.org/10.3989/redc.2012.4.900
Dempsey, L. (2000). The subject gateway: Experiences and issues based on the emergence of the Resource Discovery Network. Online Information Review, vol. 24 (1), 8-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520010323029
DESIRE (1999). DESIRE Information Gateways Handbook. http://cuc.carnet.hr/cuc2000/handbook/index.html [consultado 30 de abril de 2014]
Estivill, A.; Abadal, E. (2000). Acceso a los recursos web gratuitos desde las bibliotecas. El Profesional de la Información, vol. 9 (11), 4-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1076/epri.9.11.4.6799
Fernández Ramos, A. (2013). Subject gateways: herramientas para el filtrado de contenidos en la world wide web. Propuesta metodológica para su evaluación. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Granada.
Fernández-Ramos, A. (2014). El papel de las bibliotecas en el acceso a recursos web de calidad. Perspectivas em Ciência da Informação, vol. 19 (1), 115-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-99362014000100008
García Mateu, M. J.; Sánchez Sanz, T. (2001). Internet subject gateways knowledge organisation systems evaluation. EAHIL Workshop – 2001 Cyberspace Odyssey. http://www.eahil.eu/conferences/2001Alghero/056.htm [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Giglia, E. (2009). Orthogate and Orthopaedia: orthopedic information on the web. European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, vol. 45 (3), 443-446. PMid:19779396
Gold, N. (2011). Less is more: essential web resources that eliminate clutter and enhance service. Reference Reviews, vol. 25 (4), 4-11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09504121111140361
Hill, H.; Bossaller, J. (2013). Public library use of free e-resources. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, vol. 45 (2), 103-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0961000611435253
Hofman. P.; Worsfold, E.; Hiom, D.; Day, M.; Oehler, A. (1999). Selection criteria for quality controlled information gateways, Work Package 3 of Telematics for Research project DESIRE. http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/desire/quality/quality.pdf [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Huang, R.; Liu, C. (2007). An Investigation and Analysis of e-Services in Major Subject Based Information Gateways in the World. En Wang, W.; Li, Y.; Duan, Z.; Yan, L.; Li, H.; Yang, X. (editores), Integration and Innovation Orient to E-Society (pp. 209-217). Boston: Springer.
Joyce, A.; Kerr, L.; Machin, T.; Williams, C. (2010). Intute reflections at the end of an era. Ariadne, vol. 64. http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue64/joyce-et-al/ [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Kelly, B.; Closier, A.; Hiom, D. (2005). Gateway Standardization: A Quality Assurance Framework for Metadata. Library Trends, vol. 53 (4), 637-650.
Koch, T. (2000). Quality-controlled subject gateways: Definitions, typologies, empirical overview. Online Information Review, vol. 24 (1), 24-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14684520010320040
Larouk, O.; Dalhoumi, S.; Hassoun, M. (2006). Indexing and information retrieval in the SBIG: Evaluation of Websites Gateway. Proceedings of ICTTA'06, p. 1751-1756. Bangalore: IEEE. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ictta.2006.1684650
Maceli, M.; Wiedenbeck, S.; Abels, E. (2011). The internet public library (IPL): an exploratory case study on user perceptions. Information Technology and Libraries, vol. 30 (1), 16-23.
Mackie, M.; Burton, P. F. (1999). The use and effectiveness of the eLib subject gateways: a preliminary investigation. Program, vol. 33 (4), 327-337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/eum0000000006922
Maldonado Martínez, A.; Rodríguez Yunta, L. (2007). Directorios temáticos en Internet como herramienta de difusión de la ciencia. Análisis comparativo. IV Congreso Comunicación Social de la Ciencia: Cultura Científica y Cultura Democrática. http://digital.csic.es/bitstream/10261/4584/1/directorios.pdf
Martínez Santiago, M. D. (2010). Estudio de caso basado en los criterios de calidad de las pasarelas temáticas europeas en 2010. (Tesina de Master). Universitat Politècnica de València. http://riunet.upv.es/bitstream/handle/10251/13852/TESINA% 20DE%20MASTER.pdf?sequence=1 [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Monopoli, M.; Nicholas, D. (2000). A user-centred approach to the evaluation of Subject Based Information Gateways: Case study SOSIG. Aslib Proceedings, vol. 52 (6), 218-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007016
Monopoli, M.; Nicholas, D. (2001). A user evaluation of Subject Based Information Gateways: Case study ADAM. Aslib Proceedings, vol. 53 (1), 39-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007036
Patel, Y.; Patel, S. (2011). Subject Gateway: Knowledge Discovery Tool by INFLIBNET. 8th International CALIBER - 2011, p. 123-131. Goa: Goa University.
Pereira, S.; Névéol, A.; Kerdelhué, G.; Serrot, E.; Joubert, M.; Darmoni, S. J. (2008). Using multi-terminology indexing for the assignment of MeSH descriptors to health resources in a French online catalogue. AMIA Annual Symposium proceedings, p. 586-590. http:/ www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2656077/pdf/amia-0586-s2008.pdf [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Rodríguez Yunta, L. (2004). Pasarelas temáticas en internet: un modelo de directorio basado en la aplicación de técnicas documentales. Hipertext.net, vol. 2. http://www.upf.edu/hipertextnet/numero-2/directorio. html [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Roszkowski, M. (2011). Using taxonomies for knowledge exploration in subject gateways. INFORUM 2011: 17th Conference on Professional Information Resources, Prague. http://www.inforum.cz/pdf/2011/roszkowski-marcin-1.pdf [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014]
Salvador Oliván, J. A.; Angós Ullate, J. M. (2001). ¿Evaluar la calidad de los recursos web o simplemente filtrarlos? Documentación de las ciencias de la información, vol. 24, 105-126.
Shih, T. H.; Fan, X. (2009). Comparing response rates in e-mail and paper surveys: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, vol. 4 (1), 26-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.01.003
Singh, N. K.; Mahajan, P. (2010). Design and development of a chemistry subject portal at Panjab University Library, India. Program, vol. 44 (3), 252-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/00330331011064258
Sun, Z. M. (2012). Resource Organization of Subject Information Gateway Based on the Subject Domain Ontology. Fourth International Conference on Multimedia Information Networking and Security (MINES). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2476590 [consultado el 30 de abril de 2014] http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MINES.2012.192
Wang, L. (2011). A study of key techniques of subject information gateway service. En Seng, G.; Huang, X. (Eds.), Advanced Research on Computer Science and Information Engineering, p. 183-187. Berlin: Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21411-0_30
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2015 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
© CSIC. Manuscripts published in both the print and online versions of this journal are the property of the Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, and quoting this source is a requirement for any partial or full reproduction.
All contents of this electronic edition, except where otherwise noted, are distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. You may read the basic information and the legal text of the licence. The indication of the CC BY 4.0 licence must be expressly stated in this way when necessary.
Self-archiving in repositories, personal webpages or similar, of any version other than the final version of the work produced by the publisher, is not allowed.
