Large expert-curated database for benchmarking document similarity detection in biomedical literature search

Document recommendation systems for locating relevant literature have mostly relied on methods developed a decade ago. This is largely due to the lack of a large offline gold-standard benchmark of relevant documents that cover a variety of research fields such that newly developed literature search techniques can be compared, improved and translated into practice. To overcome this bottleneck, we have established the RElevant LIterature SearcH consortium consisting of more than 1500 scientists from 84 countries, who have collectively annotated the relevance of over 180 000 PubMed-listed articles with regard to their respective seed (input) article/s. The majority of annotations were contributed by highly experienced, original authors of the seed articles. The collected data cover 76% of all unique PubMed Medical Subject Headings descriptors. No systematic biases were observed across different experience levels, research fields or time spent on annotations. More importantly, annotations of the same document pairs contributed by different scientists were highly concordant. We further show that the three representative baseline methods used to generate recommended articles for evaluation (Okapi Best Matching 25, Term Frequency–Inverse Document Frequency and PubMed Related Articles) had similar overall performances. Additionally, we found that these methods each tend to produce distinct collections of recommended articles, suggesting that a hybrid method may be required to completely capture all relevant articles. The established database server located at https://relishdb.ict.griffith.edu.au is freely available for the downloading of annotation data and the blind testing of new methods. We expect that this benchmark will be useful for stimulating the development of new powerful techniques for title and title/abstract-based search engines for relevant articles in biomedical research

Nurses' views and experiences of caring for malnourished patients in surgical settings in Saudi Arabia : a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: Although the occurrence of malnutrition in hospitals is a growing concern, little is known about how hospital staff understand the care that nurses provide to patients with malnutrition. The purpose of this study was to explore nurses' views and experiences of caring for malnourished patients in Saudi Arabia (KSA). METHODS: Using a qualitative explorative design, fifteen nurses were interviewed as part of a purposive sample hospital staff. The transcripts were analyzed using latent content analysis. RESULTS: The nurses spontaneously and consistently linked malnutrition with physical inactivity. The two main categories, which emerged, were: 'Potentials for nurses to provide good nutrition and physical activity', and 'Having the ability but not the power to promote proper nutrition and physical activity'. These arose from the subcategories: Good nursing implies providing appropriate health education; Acknowledging the Mourafiq (sitter) as a potential resource for the nursing, but also as a burden; Inadequate control and lack of influence; Cultural diversity and lack of dialog; and Views of women's weight gain in KSA society. CONCLUSIONS: The nurses felt they have the capacity and passion to further improve the nutrition and activity of their patients, but obstacles in the health care system are impeding these ambitions. The implications for nursing practice could be acknowledgement of the nurses' views in the clinical practice; culturally adjusted care, improved communication and enhanced language skills