Increasingly, scholarly articles contain URI references to “web at large” resources including project web sites, scholarly wikis, ontologies, online debates, presentations, blogs, and videos. Authors reference such resources to provide essential context for the research they report on. A reader who visits a web at large resource by following a URI reference in an article, some time after its publication, is led to believe that the resource’s content is representative of what the author originally referenced. However, due to the dynamic nature of the web, that may very well not be the case. We reuse a dataset from a previous study in which several authors of this paper were involved, and investigate to what extent the textual content of web at large resources referenced in a vast collection of Science, Technology, and Medicine (STM) articles published between 1997 and 2012 has remained stable since the publication of the referencing article. We do so in a two-step approach that relies on various well-established similarity measures to compare textual content. In a first step, we use 19 web archives to find snapshots of referenced web at large resources that have textual content that is representative of the state of the resource around the time of publication of the referencing paper. We find that representative snapshots exist for about 30% of all URI references. In a second step, we compare the textual content of representative snapshots with that of their live web counterparts. We find that for over 75% of references the content has drifted away from what it was when referenced. These results raise significant concerns regarding the long term integrity of the web-based scholarly record and call for the deployment of techniques to combat these problems.

We quantify the extent to which references to papers in scholarly literature use persistent HTTP URIs that leverage the Digital Object Identifier infrastructure. We find a significant number of references that do not, speculate why authors would use brittle URIs when persistent ones are available, and propose an approach to alleviate the problem.

Used by a variety of researchers, web archive collections have become invaluable sources of evidence. If a researcher is presented with a web archive collection that they did not create, how do they know what is inside so that they can use it for their own research? Search engine results and social media links are represented as surrogates, small easily digestible summaries of the underlying page. Search engines and social media have a different focus, and hence produce different surrogates than web archives. Search engine surrogates help a user answer the question "Will this link meet my information need?" Social media surrogates help a user decide "Should I click on this?" Our use case is subtly different. We hypothesize that groups of surrogates together are useful for summarizing a collection. We want to help users answer the question of "What does the underlying collection contain?" But which surrogate should we use? With Mechanical Turk participants, we evaluate six different surrogate types against each other. We find that the type of surrogate does not influence the time to complete the task we presented the participants. Of particular interest are social cards, surrogates typically found on social media, and browser thumbnails, screen captures of web pages rendered in a browser. At p = 0.0569, and p = 0.0770, respectively, we find that social cards and social cards paired side-by-side with browser thumbnails probably provide better collection understanding than the surrogates currently used by the popular Archive-It web archiving platform. We measure user interactions with each surrogate and find that users interact with social cards less than other types. The results of this study have implications for our web archive summarization work, live web curation platforms, social media, and more. CCS CONCEPTS• Information systems → Digital libraries and archives; World Wide Web; Web searching and information discovery; • Applied computing → Digital libraries and archives.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction Smoking and smoke exposure among pregnant women remain persistent public health issues. Recent estimates suggest that approximately one out of four nonsmokers have measurable levels of cotinine, a marker indicating regular exposure to secondhand smoke. Epidemiological research has attempted to pinpoint individual-level and neighborhood-level factors for smoking during pregnancy. However, most of these studies have relied upon self-reported measures of smoking. Aims and Methods To more accurately assess smoke exposure resulting from both smoking and secondhand exposure in mothers during pregnancy, we used Bayesian regression models to estimate the association of cotinine levels with tobacco retail outlet (TRO) exposure and a neighborhood deprivation index (NDI) in six counties in North Carolina centered on Durham County. Results Results showed a significant positive association between TRO exposure (β = 0.008, 95% credible interval (CI) = [0.003, 0.013]) and log cotinine after adjusting for individual covariates (eg, age, race/ethnicity, education, marital status). TRO exposure was not significant after including the NDI, which was significantly associated with log cotinine (β = 0.143, 95% CI = [0.030, 0.267]). However, in a low cotinine stratum (indicating secondhand smoke exposure), TRO exposure was significantly associated with log cotinine (β = 0.005, 95% CI = [0.001, 0.009]), while in a high cotinine stratum (indicating active smoking), the NDI was significantly associated with log cotinine (β = 0.176, 95% CI = [0.005, 0.372]). Conclusions In summary, our findings add to the evidence that contextual factors are important for active smoking during pregnancy. Implications In this study, we found several significant associations that suggest a more nuanced understanding of the potential influence of environmental- and individual-level factors for levels of prenatal smoke exposure. Results suggested a significant positive association between TRO exposure and cotinine levels, after adjusting for the individual factors such as race, education, and marital status. Individually, NDI was similarly positively associated with cotinine levels as well. However, when combining TRO exposure alongside NDI in the same model, TROs were no longer significantly associated with overall cotinine levels.