Grand Rounds

12:46 AM

@JoeW No, I suppose someone would need to go to a library if they wanted to find a textbook. Google books often has previews. I wasn't aware that there was a rule on SE that only references to free online resources were allowed.

I spend most of my time on the hermeneutics site where we focus on texts that are in Greek and Hebrew. There is some degree of consensus about what the best lexicons are for both languages, and neither of them is free. Yet, it seems to me an absurdity to think that we wouldn't allow people to cite them (including quotes where appropriate, of course). Or any other...books? It would worsen the quality significantly. Textbooks in science are similar.

Joe W

As a general rule is a refernce any good if the people that need it can't get access to it?

And I would guess that site has a much different audience then this site

Susan

I worry when people are googling things and reproducing what they find in the form of an answer + link on SE, and those references are considered ideal. It's hard to see how that's making the internet a better place. It's not that there aren't good resources that are free, but lots of the best ones aren't.

2

Joe W

Pay wall and text boook references will almost always get deleted on stack overflow for example

since people can't access them

Susan

@JoeW Oh, that's interesting. I see how we've come here with very different perspectives, then!

Joe W

If during public beta it appears this site has an audience that has access to the journals and text books then its a different story

but I have lived in places where the nearest library was 30 minutes away and it was a small town one

for a decent library I would have to travel over an hour

It's not that I don't think they can be useful, just that we need to have a better idea of the target audience for this site

just checked out the site you mentioed and I can 100% see textbook citations being used there

Susan

12:51 AM

@JoeW Agreed.

Joe W

Some of the questions I have seen on health so far indicate that the general public audience is bigger then the student/professional

Susan

@JoeW I've done it on bio here and there and nobody objected, but that doesn't mean they liked it. Honestly, I mostly cite textbooks for stuff I already know but I want to provide some assurance that it's not just me. Things that wouldn't require a reference in an academic setting. Most of that could be found in other textbooks if people prefer, or probably somewhere online. For references to less well established things, journals are usually better.

@JoeW I agree. IMO though, the site would benefit from having more professionals to answer.

3

Joe W

did you see my question on meta.stackexchange? bio and chemistery where two sites where it was mentioned that paywall sites where okay since it is likely that a large chunk of users would have the journal and textbook access

Susan

@JoeW Could you link it for me?

Joe W

yep

I see, thanks (retracted my vote for duplicate) — gnat 2 days ago

gah sorry

bad copy and past

7

Q: References and content behind a paywall

A question was brought up on a private beta that I am involved with on how to handle links to information that is behind a paywall (Link to image of thread). This is important for some sites as the information might be in an academic or professional journal that requires payment, either per pape...

Susan

12:59 AM

@anongoodnurse Health is much closer to a site targeted at the general public than a site for experts. In this case the latter half of my post applies. — Mad Scientist 12 hours ago

@MadScientist IMO, leaving it this way (targeted to the general public) leaves us with inadequate people to provide quality answers. You don't think that's an issue?

@JoeW Thanks. And thanks for writing it up on meta.SE.

Joe W

Well that is the catch 22, how to target this site to get the biggest possible audience without driving away to many people

Figured asking there would give a good network wide overview

Susan

> But, in these earliest days, we are DESIGNING a site for experts. To attract experts, you need a site where people are asking very interesting and challenging questions, not the basic questions found on every other Q&A site. Remember, the pro sites WILL attract the enthusiasts, but not the other way around!

Robert Cartaino on the SE blog

Joe W

right but if the enthusiasts find that they have to pay to get the suplemental information then it can just turn them off from the site

A lot of what makes a site like stackoverflow good is the fact that anyone can click on the links for more information outside of link rot they can get the information they need

and I am not sure how citing a journal to answer a question makes the questions any better

Susan

@JoeW Because programmers tend to publish things online for free, I suppose. Unfortunately, science is different.

Joe W

but is this site targeted at just scientists and doctors? The questions I have seen so far would say no

Susan

1:12 AM

@JoeW It affects the answer quality, not the question, but citing primary data (generally published in journals) or review articles (also usually in journals) is best (IMO!) for not well established stuff. Otherwise, I don't trust it.

Joe W

and for most cases unless the information is new is there really no free sources to get it?

JohnP

@JoeW No, they don't. But the journals are for the 5% that are interested enough to read and also understand. For the rest, well, if they want the information then they need to dig a little. I don't think the site should ban citing all studies that are behind paywalls, because that severely limits the number of studies that can actually be cited.

Susan

@JoeW Often not that's properly sourced, no.

Joe W

I have seen bad crap get published in well established journals also so that is not always a safe bet either

Susan

@JoeW Of course it's not guaranteed, but the peer review process means something.

JohnP

1:14 AM

Ok, then @JoeW, you seem to disagree with everything everyone else is saying. Do you have a solution?

Joe W

focus primarrly on providing access that is not behind a pay wall?

JohnP

So....livestrong should be our primary reference?

Joe W

and see how the site devlops as beta progesses

.....

JohnP

or dr. oz? the food babe?

Joe W

there are other sources out there that are reliable and free

JohnP

1:15 AM

I have no problem citing a study that provides an abstract that corroborates everything that I'm saying.

Even if the entire study is behind a paywall except for the abstract.

Joe W

I just think that might cause issues

JohnP

why?

I state something in an answer. I corroborate it with the abstract from a study. That's going to satisfy the vast majority of the people on the site.

Joe W

people running into road blocks trying to see information and get partial information from the answer and end up having to google the rest?

whats the point of corroborating it others can't access what you use?

JohnP

The...information...is...in...the...abstract.

Joe W

all of it? or is that just a summary of the paper?

If the abstract is free and easy to access and that is what you are linking to that is different then linking to the paper which may not be free and easy to access

I think it all comes down to is if you provide a link to more information will it pop up a screen saying you need to do soemthing to access it or will it show the information

JohnP

1:21 AM

I link to the paper. Almost all the papers publish the abstract for free and then methodology is paid content.

I won't link anything where you can't see the content I'm referencing.

Joe W

I can see people disagree with me but that doesn't mean I have to change my opinion

then why not link to the abstract?

Susan

@JoeW e.g. Randomized Trial of Primary PCI with or without Routine Manual Thrombectomy. The paywall page and the abstract page are generally the same one if you're linking directly to a journal.

JohnP

@Susan Exactly.

Joe W

Okay I will admit I didn't know that

If that is the case for most of the journal links then that takes away a lot of my concern

but I do think that the abstract could be missing the information that someone wants

Susan

@JoeW I would still prefer to link to the pubmed citation (different paper since the other one was brand new), mostly because the links are straightforward and also it makes it easy to search for related papers.

JohnP

1:26 AM

If the abstract is missing the information, then it's a poorly written abstract.

@Susan - Google scholar can bring up alternate links as well, I've found some paid content listed free that way.

Susan

@JohnP And if someone wants some piece that isn't there, asking the answerer is a reasonable first step. I went into other options on that meta post....

@JohnP Good point. Also academia.edu. Although I have to think that authors there are often violating copyright!

JohnP

Hrm. I hadn't come across academia. I'll have to take a look.

Susan

@JohnP They try to convince authors to upload their own published work (not just science - lots of humanities stuff too). My impression was that authors have to sign over the rights to that paper when the journal publishes it, but I guess not always.

Joe W

gah started a game in main moniter and it brought my computer to a standstill :/

also I always thought that they didn't give up the rights but had to agree not to publish it elsewhere without prior aproval

Franck Dernoncourt

3:48 AM

@JohnP I believe a concise question can be a good question.

michaelpri

4:02 AM

@FranckDernoncourt Sometimes they can, but I like questions that provide some background information. For example, take this question.

It has potential to be a good question, but it doesn't provide much information of what you have seen or read about white rice and whole-grain rice

You said, "Health benefits of eating whole-grain rice are often mentioned"

A higher quality question would mention what these benefits are

JohnP

@michaelpri Exactly. My answer to that question would be "Not really, no." which is no benefit to anyone. Additionally, now someone that is unfamiliar with rice has to go research why whole grain rice is better.

michaelpri

@JohnP Agreed. If the OP doesn't put any effort into the question, why put effort into the answer?

Feeds, M.D.

6:58 PM

0

Q: How can we prevent users from cherry-picking references?

A far larger number of answers than I expected use articles in scientific journals as references. And it turns out that there are several answers with a lot of references already that I consider very misleading, even more so as they look rather impressive due to the sheer number of references. ...

discussion

michaelpri

7:45 PM

Hey people of Health :)

Feeds, M.D.

10:22 PM

0

Q: Moderation on Health.SE - do we need a different model?

Usually (and with good reason), mods are not expected to decide if an answer is incorrect. On some sites, though, the mod will take an action if a trusted user raises a flag. This occurs on occasion on Biology.SE where a user dispenses bad medical advice in comments. The flag is deemed helpful a...

discussion

Transcript for