Automatic evaluation of digital libraries with 5SQual

Moreira, Bárbara L.; Gonçalves, Marcos André; Laender, Alberto H. F.; Fox, Edward A.

doi:10.1016/j.joi.2008.12.003

Cited by 33 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As Figure suggests, the majority of studies were focused on evaluating the quality of digital libraries’ services from the perspective of the users (Ahmad & Abawajy, ; Amannollahi‐Nik, Alipoorhafezi & Matlabi, ; Amini, ; Garibay, Gutiérrez & Figueroa, ; Helena Vinagre, Gaspar Pinto & Ochôa, ; Jafar‐Begloo, Hamidi, Anvari & Rouhani, ; Kyrillidou & Giersch, ; Lai, Chiu, Huang, Chen & Huang, ; Moreira, Gonçalves, Laender & Fox, ; Naiej, Noroozi & Hamidi, ; Sohrabi, Farzaneh & Reisi, ; Yousefzadeh‐Najdi, ). The second most frequent focus of research was on digital libraries as a whole (including analysing the various aspects of digital libraries) (Al‐Dini, ; Cemal, Doğan, Özlem & Sacit, ; Fuhr et al., ; Górny, Catlow & Mazurek, ; Hoe‐Lian Goh et al., ; Jose, ; Masoudnia & Ali‐Ebadi, ; Tripathi & Jeevan, ; Xie, , ).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… review (all types of review articles) (Ahmad & Abawajy, ; Alipoorhafezi & Adabi, ; Cullen, , ; Esfandiyari‐moghadam & Bayat, ; Fuhr et al., ; Jose, ; Mehrabadi, ; Noroozi, , 2010a; Noroozi & Akbari, ; Saracevic, ; Tsakonas et al., ; Tsakonas & Papatheodorou, ) checklist (Evaluate and compare the information displayed on digital libraries of national content consortium, ; Evaluation of search capabilities of digital libraries applications in Iran, ; Evaluation of Simorgh Digital Library with emphasis on managerial perspective, ; Hoe‐Lian Goh et al., ; Nabavi, ; Noroozi, 2010b; Noroozi & Montazeri, ; Tripathi & Jeevan, ; Zolghadr & Momeni, ) content analysis (Azadi‐Ahmadabadi, ; Gkoumas & Lazarinis, ; Sohrabi et al., ) online questionnaire and interview (Lai et al., ; Madle et al., ; Zhang, ) Online questionnaire (Garibay et al., ; Tsakonas & Papatheodorou, ) library methods (Retrospective studies that include reviews of articles and books, and questions from expert people) (Hassanzadeh & Sohrabzadeh, ) questionnaire and interview (Moreira et al., ; Snead et al., ) researcher developer questionnaire and checklist (mixed tools) (Amini, ; Ghaebi, Baradar & Farnaghi, ) semiexperimental method (Quijano‐Solís & Novelo‐Peña, )See Figure for the frequency of the methods used. …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Figure 3 suggests, the majority of studies were focused on evaluating the quality of digital libraries' services from the perspective of the users (Ahmad & Abawajy, 2014;Amannollahi-Nik, Alipoorhafezi & Matlabi, 2014;Amini, 2014;Garibay, Guti errez & Figueroa, 2010;Helena Vinagre, Gaspar Pinto & Ochôa, 2011;Jafar-Begloo, Hamidi, Anvari & Rouhani, 2014;Kyrillidou & Giersch, 2005;Lai, Chiu, Huang, Chen & Huang, 2014;Moreira, Gonc ßalves, Laender & Fox, 2009;Naiej, Noroozi & Hamidi, 2012;Sohrabi, Farzaneh & Reisi, 2010;Yousefzadeh-Najdi, 2013 Goh et al, 2006;Jose, 2007;Masoudnia & Ali-Ebadi, 2013;Tripathi & Jeevan, 2011;Xie, 2006Xie, , 2008. Studies are conducted to: • analyse aspects and methods used in the evaluation of digital libraries (Azadi-Ahmadabadi, 2008;Cullen, 2003Cullen, , 2004Esfandiyari-moghadam & Bayat, 2008;Mehrabadi, 2011;Noroozi, 2012;Saracevic, 2005;Zhang, 2010) • analyse the user interface/usability of digital • efficacy (Buchanan & Salako, 2009) • information security (Hariri & Nazari, 2012) • task orientation (Meyyappan, Foo & Chowdhury, 2004) • electronic resources (Hariri, Nooshinfard & Radfar, 2014) • impact (Jabeen et al, 2017;Madle, Kostkova & Roudsari, 2008) • open sources (...…”

Section: Studied Aspects Of Digital Librariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluating digital libraries: a systematised review

Rahimi

Soleymani

Hashemian

et al. 2018

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Studied Aspects Of Digital Librariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluating digital libraries: a systematised review

Rahimi

Soleymani

Hashemian

et al. 2018

Health Info Libraries J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It developed framework and dulcet environment for employees and visitors. Moreira et al (2008) have implemented the 5S technique to maintain the complex and dynamic system of digital libraries. The authors developed 5SQual tool which perform automatic evaluation to remove the problems before they occur.…”

Section: Literature Surveymentioning

confidence: 99%

5S implementation methodologies: literature review and directions

Randhawa

Ahuja

2017

IJPQM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The objective of the paper is to investigate the process of 5S implementation across all the levels of organisations and highlight the significant contributions of 5S to the organisations. The paper is based on a methodical literature review that inspects how the implementation of 5S technique significantly contributed the progress of different organisations in the term of quality, productivity, effective utilisation of space, safety and employees morale values. The manuscript presents the systematic 5S implementation initiatives implementation methodologies suggested by various researchers and practitioners. The success factors that enrich 5S implementation in the organisation are also identified and discussed progressively. The study also highlights the manufacturing achievements through successful 5S initiatives and obstacles that create hindrance in the path of implementing 5S technique. The paper provides comprehensive outlook of 5S approach to the management for implementing it as way of attaining maintainable performance for their organisations.

show abstract

“…Moreira, Gonçalves, Laender, and Fox (2009) present a tool to perform automatic evaluation of a digital library. For the evaluation of metadata, completeness is defined according to the number of fields of the Dublin Core standard found in a record.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Quantifying and measuring metadata completeness

Margaritopoulos

Mavridis

et al. 2011

Acta Anaesthesiol Scand

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Completeness of metadata is one of the most essential characteristics of their quality. An incomplete metadata record is a record of degraded quality. Existing approaches to measure metadata completeness limit their scope in counting the existence of values in fields, regardless of the metadata hierarchy as defined in international standards. Such a traditional approach overlooks several issues that need to be taken into account. This paper presents a fine‐grained metrics system for measuring metadata completeness, based on field completeness. A metadata field is considered to be a container of multiple pieces of information. In this regard, the proposed system is capable of following the hierarchy of metadata as it is set by the metadata schema and admeasuring the effect of multiple values of multivalued fields. An application of the proposed metrics system, after being configured according to specific user requirements, to measure completeness of a real‐world set of metadata is demonstrated. The results prove its ability to assess the sufficiency of metadata to describe a resource and provide targeted measures of completeness throughout the metadata hierarchy.

show abstract

Automatic evaluation of digital libraries with 5SQual

Cited by 33 publications

References 14 publications

Evaluating digital libraries: a systematised review

Evaluating digital libraries: a systematised review

5S implementation methodologies: literature review and directions

Quantifying and measuring metadata completeness

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About