How do health care professionals select medical images they need?

Purpose – This paper aims to report the results of a study investigating the relevance criteria used by health care professionals when seeking medical images.Design/methodology/approach – Data were collected from 29 participants using a think‐aloud protocol and face‐to‐face interviews and analysed using the Straussian version of grounded theory (GT).Findings – The results show that participants made use of 15 relevance criteria, although they agreed on topicality being the most important. The findings suggest that users apply different criteria in different situations when evaluating the relevancy of medical images.Originality/value – To the best of the authors' knowledge, there have been few studies that investigate relevance judgments for visually orientated documents. Thus, this study helps to contribute to the understanding of medical image resources and the information needs of health care professionals. A clear understanding of the medical image information needs of health care professionals is also...

[1]  Peter Ingwersen,et al.  The Turn - Integration of Information Seeking and Retrieval in Context , 2005, The Kluwer International Series on Information Retrieval.

[2]  J. Rashbass,et al.  Legal and ethical issues in the use of anonymous images in pathology teaching and research , 2003, Histopathology.

[3]  Diane H. Sonnenwald,et al.  User perspectives on relevance criteria: A comparison among relevant, partially relevant, and not-relevant judgments , 2002, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Michael B. Eisenberg,et al.  A re-examination of relevance: toward a dynamic, situational definition , 1990, Inf. Process. Manag..

[5]  Anselm L. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research : techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory , 1998 .

[6]  Mark Sanderson,et al.  A study on the relevance criteria for medical images , 2008, Pattern Recognit. Lett..

[7]  William R. Hersh,et al.  Information Retrieval: A Health and Biomedical Perspective , 2002 .

[8]  Stefano Mizzaro.  Relevance: the whole history , 1997 .

[9]  Carol L. Barry,et al.  Users' Criteria for Relevance Evaluation: A Cross-situational Comparison , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[10]  A. Strauss.  Basics Of Qualitative Research , 1992 .

[11]  Pia Borlund,et al.  The concept of relevance in IR , 2003, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[12]  Paul Solomon,et al.  Toward an Understanding of the Dynamics of Relevance Judgment: An Analysis of One Person's Search Behavior , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[13]  Linda Schamber,et al.  Users' Criteria for Evaluation in a Multimedia Environment. , 1991 .

[14]  Jane Greenberg,et al.  Relevance criteria identified by health information users during Web searches , 2006, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[15]  Paul H. Lewis,et al.  Surveying the Reality of Semantic Image Retrieval , 2005, VISUAL.

[16]  Youngok Choi.  The characteristics of users' queries and users' relevance criteria in a image retrieval in American history , 2000 .

[17]  Amanda Spink,et al.  From Highly Relevant to Not Relevant: Examining Different Regions of Relevance , 1998, Inf. Process. Manag..

[18]  Linda Schamber,et al.  User Criteria in Relevance Evaluation: Toward Development of a Measurement Scale. , 1996 .

[19]  T. Park.  The Nature of Relevance in Information Retrieval: An Empirical Study , 1993, The Library Quarterly.

[20]  Michael D. Myers,et al.  Qualitative Research in Information Systems , 1997, MIS Q..

[21]  Brian C. O'Connor,et al.  Modelling what users see when they look at images: a cognitive viewpoint , 2002, J. Documentation.

[22]  Mark Sanderson,et al.  Medical image resources used by health care professionals , 2011, Aslib Proc..

[23]  Tefko Saracevic.  Relevance: A review of the literature and a framework for thinking on the notion in information science. Part III: Behavior and effects of relevance , 2007 .

[24]  Edie M. Rasmussen,et al.  Users' relevance criteria in image retrieval in American history , 2002, Inf. Process. Manag..

[25]  Nicholas J. Belkin,et al.  Characteristics of Texts Affecting Relevance Judgments , 1993 .

[26]  Tsai-Youn Hung,et al.  Relevance Judgments for Image Retrieval in the Field of Journalism: A Pilot Study , 2005, ICADL.

[27]  Taemin Kim Park.  Toward a theory of user-based relevance: a call for a new paradigm of inquiry , 1994 .

[28]  Judith Ann Bateman.  Modeling Changes in End-user Relevance Criteria : An Information Seeking Study , 1998 .

[29]  S. Hirsh.  Children's Relevance Criteria and Information Seeking on Electronic Resources , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[30]  Carol L. Barry.  User-defined relevance criteria: an exploratory study , 1994 .

[31]  Meng Yang.  An exploration of users' video relevance criteria , 2005 .

[32]  Peiling Wang,et al.  A Cognitive Model of Document Use During a Research Project. Study II. Decisions at the Reading and Citing Stages , 1999, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci..

[33]  G. Gilbert,et al.  Researching Social Life , 1994 .

[34]  R. Lewis,et al.  NVivo 2.0 and ATLAS.ti 5.0: A Comparative Review of Two Popular Qualitative Data-Analysis Programs , 2004 .