Search (2 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × author_ss:"Jascó, P."
  1. Tenopir, C.; Jascó, P.: Quality of abstracts (1993) 0.09
    0.088019766 = product of:
      0.35207906 = sum of:
        0.35207906 = weight(_text_:judge in 5025) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.35207906 = score(doc=5025,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.5152282 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
              0.06664293 = queryNorm
            0.68334585 = fieldWeight in 5025, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
              0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5025)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    Abstracts enable users to judge the relevance of articles, provide a summary and may be a substitute for the original document. Defines abstracts and considers who they are written be according to the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and other sources. Distinguishes between indicative and informative abstracts. Informative abstracts are preferred by ANSI and ERIC. Discusses the content and procedures for abstracting, writing style, tests of quality and readability and informativeness. Presents statistics analyzing abstracts from 3 general interest databases and on abstract length and type
  2. Jascó, P.: Content evaluation of databases (1997) 0.07
    0.06601483 = product of:
      0.2640593 = sum of:
        0.2640593 = weight(_text_:judge in 3299) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.2640593 = score(doc=3299,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.5152282 = queryWeight, product of:
              7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
              0.06664293 = queryNorm
            0.5125094 = fieldWeight in 3299, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              7.731176 = idf(docFreq=52, maxDocs=44421)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3299)
      0.25 = coord(1/4)
    
    Abstract
    State of the art review of the criteria used to judge and evaluate the quality of databases, including: content, ease of use, accessibility, customer support, documentation, and value to cost ratio. Concludes that the principle factor governing quality is content, defined by the scope and the coverage of the database and its currency, accuracy, consistency and completeness. Scope is determined by its composition and coverage, including time period, number of periodicals and other primary sources, number of articles and geographic and language distribution. Currency is measured by the time lag between publication of the primary source and availability of the corresponding records in the database. Accuracy is governed by the extent to which the records are free from errors of all types. Consistency depends on the extent to which records within the database follow the same rules. Completeness is measured by the consistency with which applicable data elements are assigned to all the records in the database. Reviews the major contributions to the literature in the field and summarizes the background of milestone studies