Introducing: PubMed Commons

Did you hear the news this morning? At 11:00 am on October 22, 2013, PubMed has released the all new PubMed Commons, by invitation only. It is a pilot program so we will see how it all goes.

“PubMed Commons is a system that enables researchers to share their opinions about scientific publications. Researchers can comment on any publication indexed by PubMed, and read the comments of others. PubMed Commons is a forum for open and constructive criticism and discussion of scientific issues. It will thrive with high quality interchange from the scientific community. PubMed Commons is currently in a closed pilot testing phase, which means that only invited participants can add and view comments in PubMed.”

I think this is a neat idea, but I just wonder if it is going to create more noise or help?

Will PubMed Commons have more appeal since it is being targeted at a limited audience? Or will it also be discontinued like Medpedia and Google Sidewiki? Medpedia was a place for approved clinicians/scientist to create a medical wikipedia. The site eventually shut down due to lack of interest. There was also little to show for how useful it was or if people were even using it. Google previously created a similar feature, Google Sidewiki but discontinued this product in December 2011.

In addition to the failure of Medpedia and Google Sidewiki, many journal vendors publish comments on their pages. There is even a new string of Journal Club apps that allow clinicians/scientist to publish comments. Or you could log into items such as QuantiaMD or Doximity to see what others are reading/commenting about.

Will PubMed commons be more successful since it is tied to PubMed? If PubMed Commons catches on it could be successful or it could just create more noise on the internet that no one reads. Then what happens to the comments published on say, NEJM’s website? How would those get tied back into PubMed Commons? Would it really create a place to bring together all the comments or just another place to add more reviews?

I am interested to see how this progresses. I think if PubMed works on creating some additional features to add to PubMed Commons it might be more successful. For instance: iPad app, magazine app (or integration into Flipboard), ability to tweet/facebook/share comments, ability to subscribe to comments on your article, ability to receive alerts when someone comments on an article you published (or any article), ability to confirm the person commenting identity, etc. These are just a couple of questions I have so far, and a couple of possible suggestions for PubMed Commons.

The last one is really a key point. If you cannot confirm who wrote the comment, then this could all just create more spam and noise. As I do not yet have an invitation to the pilot, I cannot say how they are confirming people’s identity. I also cannot comment on if there is a way to share or do the other items I listed above. Check out this post to see a great discussion on identity, possible need for anonymity, and other concerns.

Making it easy for people to add comments is also key. If it is too difficult or only accessible from a PC, and/or if it is not an easy to use/read interface then this might now catch on (and I am wondering if this will catch on) with many scientist which is vital for this to succeed. Again, just my initial thoughts before I have a chance to really see and review PubMed Commons. Have any of my #medlibs friends had a chance to review this new resource?

I do not currently have an invite to try the PubMed Commons Pilot. If someone wants to send me an invite… I would appreciate it! For now, please take a look at Hilda Bastian’s post for details about the new PubMed Commons Pilot.

 Other articles on PubMed Commons and Links:

1. Science buzz and criticism gets a powerful boost
2. Pubmed Commons – the new science water-cooler
3. PubMed now allows comments on abstracts — but only by a select few
4. News: PubMed Commons : a system that enables researchers to share their opinions about scientific publications
5. Join PubMed’s Revolution in Post Publication Peer Review
6. PubMed Commons: A New Forum for Scientific Discourse

The Ever Changing Information Highway

Recently my nephew was visiting and wanted to watch a movie. I must admit, I do have some kids movies but not many. He wanted to watch the lion movie (Lion King).

“Aunt Alisha what’s this?”

“It’s the movie, Lion King.”

“No. That’s not a movie. That’s a box.”

I stood for a minute shocked. My nephew has grown up in a world that primarily uses DVDs, and the Lion King I had was from when I was younger so it was on a VHS tape– something my nephew had never seen.

I shouldn’t have been shocked but I couldn’t help it. In libraries, we see how quickly information changes and how quickly the media for information changes. But it is still difficult for me to fathom someone who has grown up in an extremely connected world even though I am a child of the 80’s and have been fortunate to have a computer in my house for most of my life.

So if I have issues with fathoming someone not knowing what a VHS tape is, then how difficult is it for others not in the library, a technology field, or someone from an older generation.

Well, I experienced this recently during a presentation to physicians. I was discussing library tools and tools to organize data. I limited the organization tools to a select few, normally 5, and only tools I thought were applicable to physicians; however, I found it was still too much for some of the participants.  I thought I had simplified the presentation and tools, but it was still too much and I received this response:

“I’m overwhelmed by the tools to help me from being overwhelmed.”

The only suggestion I could make is to take it 1 tool at a time. Try 1 thing a time and see if it helps you. Everyone is different and everyone likes different tools (example: some like Delicious, others Google Bookmarks. some like Apple, I like Android).

Here are the items I always include in basic library presentations:

1. Library Resources: Books, journals, databases available through the library
2. PubMed
3. MedlinePlus
4. Google Reader
5. Mendeley (just started as it was previously blocked)
6. Google Bookmarks or another bookmarking site

These are the top 6 items I always discuss.  I also normally include information about access (onsite, off-site, mobile) and how to use these tools. I may mention other tools as options, but I try to keep it simple and I am finding people are still overwhelmed. Yes I could do separate presentations on each topic; however, it is normally difficult to do these presentations due to my limited time (keep in mind I’m a solo) and the participants time.

The only solution I have found is repetition. Eventually it begins to seek in with a few participants who then spread the word.

How have you addressed this issue of the ever changing information highway?

Long awaited PubMed preview finally here!

The long awaited PubMed preview is officially here!

http://preview.ncbI.bih.gov/sites/pubmed

A link to the preview is also on the current PubMed homepage.

I have already noticed a few items:
1. You can no longer skip from page 1 to 5.

2. The drop down menu for “Send To” is a little slow but awesome! I really like not having to open a new page to send articles via email.

3. Where is the old citation information? In previous meetings we were told the citation view was combining with the abstract view… but where are the MeSH terms for each article?

4. Single Citation Matcher is on the homepage and Advance Search page but there is no link anywhere else? Did I miss it? I tought it was going to be in the drop down menu for resources.

I have only done a quick overview since it was just ‘officially’ launched (read EagleDawg’s blog about the leak http://eagledawg.blogspot.com). If I have missed something please let me know.

A more detailed post will follow after I have time to review. Also I apologize for no images but I’m posting from my phone right now.

More review notes later…