
A random sample of fifty nursing articles indexed in both MEDLINE and CINAHL (NURSING & ALLIED HEALTH) during 1986 was used for comparing indexing practices. Indexing was analyzed by counting the number of major descriptors, the number of major and minor descriptors, the number of indexing access points, the number of common indexing access points, and the number and type of unique indexing access points. The study results indicate: there are few differences in the number of major descriptors used, MEDLINE uses almost twice as many descriptors, MEDLINE has almost twice as many indexing access points, and MEDLINE and CINAHL provide few common access points.
Subject Headings, Abstracting and Indexing, Nursing, MEDLARS, Online Systems, United States
Subject Headings, Abstracting and Indexing, Nursing, MEDLARS, Online Systems, United States
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 9 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
