Mavila9 Week 12 - Revision history

Mavila9 at 04:06, 19 November 2019

2019-11-19T04:06:07Z

Mavila9: reflection

2019-11-19T04:05:53Z

reflection

Mavila9: rest of answers

2019-11-17T20:15:54Z

rest of answers

Mavila9: more answers

2019-11-17T20:07:28Z

Mavila9: /* Database Searches */ answers

2019-11-17T19:58:37Z

‎Database Searches: answers

Mavila9: answers

2019-11-16T08:49:41Z

answers

Mavila9: questions

2019-11-16T06:43:19Z

questions

Mavila9: citation fix

2019-11-16T06:35:36Z

citation fix

Mavila9: citation 2 fix

2019-11-16T06:33:45Z

citation 2 fix

Mavila9: /* Annotated Bibliography */ fix

2019-11-16T06:33:11Z

‎Annotated Bibliography: fix

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:06, 19 November 2019
Line 103:		Line 103:
	# What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three databases (Pubmed, Google Scholar, Web of Science)?		# What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three databases (Pubmed, Google Scholar, Web of Science)?
	#* The advantage of Pubmed is that there is a text availability filter, and the disadvantage is that filtering out articles that aren't fully available can remove some more informative articles out of your search. The advantage of Google Scholar is that it shows you just about every article on the internet, but this is also the downfall to Google Scholar because some of the results aren't related to the search terms. Finally, the advantage of Wed of Science is that it has extensive filter options that help narrow down the search. Wed of Science seemed to be the most complete search engine and I had trouble finding disadvantages, but I would say one is that the citation isn't as available as on Google Scholar.		#* The advantage of Pubmed is that there is a text availability filter, and the disadvantage is that filtering out articles that aren't fully available can remove some more informative articles out of your search. The advantage of Google Scholar is that it shows you just about every article on the internet, but this is also the downfall to Google Scholar because some of the results aren't related to the search terms. Finally, the advantage of Wed of Science is that it has extensive filter options that help narrow down the search. Wed of Science seemed to be the most complete search engine and I had trouble finding disadvantages, but I would say one is that the citation isn't as available as on Google Scholar.
		+
		+
		+	[[User:Mavila9\|Mavila9]] ([[User talk:Mavila9\|talk]]) 20:06, 18 November 2019 (PST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:05, 19 November 2019
Line 97:		Line 97:
	#* How many articles cite this article?		#* How many articles cite this article?
	#** 11 articles		#** 11 articles
		+
		+	==Reflection==
		+	# What impact does the choice of keywords have on your results?
		+	#* The keywords allow the search engine to find other papers that have the keywords in either the title or content of the article. Also the order of the keywords are important when looking up expressions or particular organisms. In some cases, like that of yeast, the organism is referred to in its species name (S. cerevisiae) or common name (budding yeast, baker's yeast, etc.) so it would be important to try several searches with the different organism names.
		+	# What are the advantages and disadvantages of each of the three databases (Pubmed, Google Scholar, Web of Science)?
		+	#* The advantage of Pubmed is that there is a text availability filter, and the disadvantage is that filtering out articles that aren't fully available can remove some more informative articles out of your search. The advantage of Google Scholar is that it shows you just about every article on the internet, but this is also the downfall to Google Scholar because some of the results aren't related to the search terms. Finally, the advantage of Wed of Science is that it has extensive filter options that help narrow down the search. Wed of Science seemed to be the most complete search engine and I had trouble finding disadvantages, but I would say one is that the citation isn't as available as on Google Scholar.

@@ Line 78: / Line 78: @@
 # Web of Science
 #* What original keyword(s) did you use?  How many results did you get?
 #* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
 * Use the advanced search functions for each of these three databases/tools and answer the following:
 # PubMed
@@ Line 88: / Line 90: @@
 # Web of Science
 #* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get?
 # Perform a prospective search on your article in the Web of Science and answer the following:
 #* How many articles does this article cite?
 #* How many articles cite this article?

@@ Line 70: / Line 70: @@
 #** I first searched "glutothione biosynthesis" and got 118,158 results.
 #* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
-#* Next I added "in Saccharomyces cerevisiae" to the search and selected the "5-years" publication date restriction to narrow down the search and got 240 results.
+#** Next I added "in Saccharomyces cerevisiae" to the search and selected the "5-years" publication date restriction to narrow down the search and got 240 results.
 # Google Scholar
 #* What original keyword(s) did you use?  How many results did you get?
@@ Line 82: / Line 82: @@
 # PubMed
 #* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get?
 # Google Scholar
 #* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get?

@@ Line 68: / Line 68: @@
 # PubMed
 #* What original keyword(s) did you use?  How many results did you get?
 #* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search?  How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
 # Google Scholar
 #* What original keyword(s) did you use?  How many results did you get?

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:43, 16 November 2019
Line 63:		Line 63:
	# Are the data associated with this article available? If so, provide a link to the dataset.		# Are the data associated with this article available? If so, provide a link to the dataset.
	#* The dataset is not available.		#* The dataset is not available.
		+
		+	==Database Searches==
		+	* You must use these three databases/tools to find the references that you include in your bibliography: PubMed, GoogleScholar, and Web of Science.
		+	# PubMed
		+	#* What original keyword(s) did you use? How many results did you get?
		+	#* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
		+	# Google Scholar
		+	#* What original keyword(s) did you use? How many results did you get?
		+	#* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
		+	# Web of Science
		+	#* What original keyword(s) did you use? How many results did you get?
		+	#* Which terms in which combinations were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get after narrowing the search?
		+	* Use the advanced search functions for each of these three databases/tools and answer the following:
		+	# PubMed
		+	#* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get?
		+	# Google Scholar
		+	#* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get?
		+	# Web of Science
		+	#* Which advanced search functions were most useful to narrow down the search? How many results did you get?
		+	# Perform a prospective search on your article in the Web of Science and answer the following:
		+	#* How many articles does this article cite?
		+	#* How many articles cite this article?

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 ==Annotated Bibliography==
-===1. Parrish, A. R., Zheng, X. H., Turney, K. D., Younis, H. S., & Gandolfi, A. J. (1999). Enhanced transcription factor DNA binding and gene expression induced by arsenite or arsenate in renal slices. Toxicological sciences: an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 50(1), 98-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/50.1.98===
+===Parrish, A. R., Zheng, X. H., Turney, K. D., Younis, H. S., & Gandolfi, A. J. (1999). Enhanced transcription factor DNA binding and gene expression induced by arsenite or arsenate in renal slices. Toxicological sciences: an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 50(1), 98-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/50.1.98===
 # The link to the abstract from PubMed.
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 #* The dataset is not available.
-===2. Tang, L., Wang, W., Zhou, W., Cheng, K., Yang, Y., Liu, M., ... & Wang, W. (2015). Three-pathway combination for glutathione biosynthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbial cell factories, 14(1), 139. https://doi.org/139.10.1186/s12934-015-0327-0===
+===Tang, L., Wang, W., Zhou, W., Cheng, K., Yang, Y., Liu, M., ... & Wang, W. (2015). Three-pathway combination for glutathione biosynthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbial cell factories, 14(1), 139. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-015-0327-0===
 # The link to the abstract from PubMed.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 ==Annotated Bibliography==
-Parrish, A. R., Zheng, X. H., Turney, K. D., Younis, H. S., & Gandolfi, A. J. (1999). Enhanced transcription factor DNA binding and gene expression induced by arsenite or arsenate in renal slices. Toxicological sciences: an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 50(1), 98-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/50.1.98
+===1. Parrish, A. R., Zheng, X. H., Turney, K. D., Younis, H. S., & Gandolfi, A. J. (1999). Enhanced transcription factor DNA binding and gene expression induced by arsenite or arsenate in renal slices. Toxicological sciences: an official journal of the Society of Toxicology, 50(1), 98-105. https://doi.org/10.1093/toxsci/50.1.98===
 # The link to the abstract from PubMed.
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 #* 4.081
 # Is the article a review or primary research article?
-# This article is a primary research article.
+#* This article is a primary research article.
 # Are the data associated with this article available?  If so, provide a link to the dataset.
 #* The dataset is not available.
-. Tang, L., Wang, W., Zhou, W., Cheng, K., Yang, Y., Liu, M., ... & Wang, W. (2015). Three-pathway combination for glutathione biosynthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbial cell factories, 14(1), 139. https://doi.org/139. 10.1186/s12934-015-0327-0
+===2. Tang, L., Wang, W., Zhou, W., Cheng, K., Yang, Y., Liu, M., ... & Wang, W. (2015). Three-pathway combination for glutathione biosynthesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbial cell factories, 14(1), 139. https://doi.org/139. 10.1186/s12934-015-0327-0===
 # The link to the abstract from PubMed.
@@ Line 60: / Line 60: @@
 #* 4.402 2-year impact factor and 4.669 impact factor.
 # Is the article a review or primary research article?
-# This article is a primary research article.
+#* This article is a primary research article.
 # Are the data associated with this article available?  If so, provide a link to the dataset.
 #* The dataset is not available.