The Use of a Medical Dictionary or Encyclopedia in Order to Get an Understanding of the Field of Medicine - Research Paper Example

Start by going through the main topic so as to fully understand the thesis of the dissertation. This will help me understand what I ought to search for before starting to search information. 1. Find unfamiliar words or concepts in the dissertation question by consulting a medical dictionary or encyclopedia. Perform a simple search on Google. Begin the search for literature by reading a journal article in the encyclopedia in order to get a better understanding of the subject (Seal et al. 2007). 2. Decide what sort of information I will need in my research. At this stage, I may look for a specific title in a journal, factual information, and theoretical information and so on. I will then choose sources of information which will be relevant to me (Sharma, 1989). The sources of information may be journal articles, books, and case studies. 3. Identifying keywords in my research topic will be the next step. I will look at keywords and key phrases in my dissertation topic (Bendick, 1947). Make a list of keywords and phrases List synonyms or related words to my keywords and key phrases. The use of these synonyms will help in finding relevant information (Seal et al. 2007). Consider other variations of words such as spelling variations, singular and plural forms, variations of root words, and acronyms (Richman, et al. 1984). Add variations in my list of keywords. 4. Start my search using databases such as Google scholar, Pubmed, SINAHIL, Medline, and Scopus. These are easily accessible in my University, and they are both specific and general to the subject under consideration (Perquin, Dörr, De Craen & Helmerhorst, 2006). Click the search link for Google scholar. Click the button for Find Databases. Select my subject from the menu. 5. Identify the Boolean operators to use. These will help me link the keywords to target my search and find specific information that is needed. These can also help me broaden my search if I am not getting sufficient information. Boolean operators include words such as OR, AND, VERSUS, and NOT. Each keyword will be typed in a separate box and enclose key phrases in inverted commas. 6. The next thing I will do will be building on what I would have found. Here, I will treat every useful journal article, book, or database record as an introduction to new information. Then, I will look at the bibliography in every book or article I come across. 7. Then I will evaluate the reliability and authority of what I would have found in the databases. The evaluation will mainly focus on the following: Whether subject headings sound relevant to the topic of study. Whether the date of publication is recent or old since, it is important to work with information that is up-to-date. Find out whether there is a bibliography since this authenticates the information. Find out whether the authors are known experts in this particular field (Radiography / Ultrasound) and other works done by the same authors elsewhere (Madhuri, 2009; Deichert, 2000). Find out whether the chapters are relevant to the topic of dissertation. Find out whether the coverage is relevant, and Find out to who the book is aimed at. 8. After assessing the potential usefulness of the information, I will re-evaluate the information when I read it to find out whether the information will help me write my dissertation, and tackle the question thoroughly and accurately. I will use the following criteria when reading: Scope-I will use detailed and specialized information in an academic journal. When reading these sources of information (articles, books, and other information) I will check whether they provide the required details or have more addition to the information I already have. Accuracy-assess the accuracy and credibility of the information. In this case, I will check the sources of facts and spellings (Sharma, 1989). Objectivity-Check whether the information has addressed different aspects of the question (Kore et al, 2000); Boudghène et al. 2001). 9. Finally, I will cite all sources that I will consult during the process of writing my dissertation. These will cover, books, articles from journals, and websites. This will help me from committing plagiarism, prove the research that I will have done, and the factual basis of my work, and give room to my readers to access the references for their own use (Randolph, et al. 1986). Results I found out that there were some words which were unfamiliar to me. I used Google search to access the dictionary of medicine. It was also clear that I needed illustrative material with factual information that is recent and falls in the field of medicine. I needed journal articles in order to carry out my study (Tanahatoe, Hompes & Lambalk, 2003). The keywords and phrases that I found in my topic were (Nannini et al, 1981; Marchino et al, 2001): Hysterosalpingography Sonosalpingography Fallopian tubes Tubal patency Evaluation Synonyms or related words to my keywords and key phrases included, Sono, Hystero, Salpingo, Uterus tubes, Hysteroscopy, Uterosalpingography, X-rays, Infertility, Ovary, Ovum, SSG, HSG, Radiography, Ultrasound, Patenency, Pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, tubular patency, conception, and Blockages (Malhotra, Malhotra, Mittal & Singh, 2006; Kalogirou et al, 1997) The search system displayed a list of databases and resources for the resources that I had chosen. The databases could only be opened by clicking the title link and the show information link. When I typed the keywords in the separate box the results, I got depended on Boolean operators I had chosen. Selection of AND and VERSUS meant searching information within a narrow range. The results included all the words I entered. On most databases, AND is usually a default option since it is commonly used. It uses all keywords to retrieve the most relevant results (Rimbach, Bastert & Wallwiener, 2001). The operator NOT also meant a narrow search. This meant that the results must include the first keyword and exclude the second word. This is important if you do not wish to view a certain word in your results. For a broad search, I used the operator OR. The results in this case included any or all of the keywords (Papaioannou, et al. 2002; Gordts, Puttemans, Gordts, Brosens & Campo, 2005). I discovered that OR should only be used to search words with similar meanings or else huge amount of data that is irrelevant is likely to be retrieved. When I used search fields and chose All Text the database searched my key words in everything. This retrieved a lot of results for me. On selecting Title in the search fields, all my keywords were found in the title of the article. The results you retrieve in this case will be highly relevant, but there is also the risk of missing out to access other articles that may be useful. The most relevant results for my topic were retrieved when I selected Abstract. The abstract contains a summary of the discussion such that the abstract becomes relevant to your topic of discussion when all your keywords are available in its contents (National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Fertility, 2004; Inki, Palo & la, 1998). When looking for databases for articles in the journals, I looked at subject terms (subject descriptors or keywords) which pointed to other articles published on the same subject. I was able to tell a lot about certain books by looking carefully at its records in the catalogue. To find the information in the catalogue, I clicked on the Title link. From this, I found that the subject headings were relevant to my topic of study, the articles had their dates of publications which had been updated, there were bibliographies at the end of each source, and the authors were recognized experts in the field as I could find other publications which they had authored. The subject headings and the keywords were relevant to my topic, I read the abstract and found out that the coverage were sound and suitable for my needs. The articles I used were those of literature review. I noted down the authors and the dates of publication of articles References Bendick, A. J., 1947. Present Status of Hysterosalpingography. Journal of the Mount Sinai Hospital, New York, 14(3), pp.739-742. Boudghène, F.P., et al., 2001. Assessment of fallopian tube patency by HyCoSy: Comparison of a positive contrast agent with saline solution. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol, 18, pp.525–30. Deichert, U., 2000. Evaluation of tubal patency by hysterosalpingocontrast sonography. (HYCOSY). In : Kupesie S. Ziegler D. (eds). Ultrasound and Infertility. New York The Parthenon publishing group, pp. 263-284. Gordts, S., Puttemans, P., Gordts, S., Brosens, I. & Campo, R., 2005. Transvaginal laparoscopy. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol, 19, pp.757–67. Inki, P., Palo, P. & la, L., 1998. Vaginal sonosalpingography in the evaluation of tubal patency. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica, 77, pp. 978–982. doi: 10.1034/j.1600- 0412.1998.771006.X. Kalogirou, D., et al., 1997. Is color Doppler necessary in the evaluation of tubal patency by hysterosalpingo-contrast sonography. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 24(2), pp.101–103. Kore, S., et al., 2000. Sonography for assessment of tubal potency: our experience. J Obstet and Gynecol India 2000, 50(2), pp.63-66. Marchino, G.L.,et al., 2001. Salpingoscopic and laparoscopic investigations in relation to fertility outcome. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc, 8, pp.218–21. Madhuri, P., 2009. Assessing tubal damage. J Hum Reprod Sci., 2(1), pp. 2–11. doi: 10.4103/0974-1208.51335: PMCID: Malhotra, N., Malhotra, J., Mittal, S., & Singh, A., 2006. Sonosalpingography. N. J. Obstet. Gynaecol, 1(2), pp. 71-73. Nannini, R. et al., 1981. Dynamic echohyteroscopy: A new diagnostic technique in the study of female infertility. Acta Eur Fertil, 12, pp.165-71. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Fertility, 2004. Assessment and treatment of people with fertility problems. London: RCOG Press. Papaioannou, S.,et al., 2002. The learning curve of selective salpingography and tubal catheterization. Fertil Steril, 77, pp.1049–52. Papaioannou, S., et al., 2002. The effect on pregnancy rates of tubal perfusion pressure reductions achieved by guide-wire tubal catheterization. Hum Reprod, 17, pp.2174–2179. Perquin, D.A., Dörr, P.J., De Craen, A.J. & Helmerhorst, F.M., 2006. Routine use of hysterosalpingography prior to laparoscopy in the fertility workup: A multicentre randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod, 21, pp.1227–1231. Randolph, J.R., et al., 1986. Comparison of real-time ultrasonography, hysterosalpingography and laparoscopy/ hysteroscopy in the evaluation of utetine abnormalities and tubal patency. Fertil Steril, 46, pp.828-832. Richman, T.S., et al., 1984. Fallopian tubal patency assessed by ultrasound fluid injection. Radiology, 152, pp.507-510. Rimbach, S., Bastert, G. & Wallwiener, D., 2001. Technical results of falloposcopy for infertility diagnosis in a large multicentre study. Hum Reprod., 16, pp.925–930. Seal, S.L., et al., 2007. Comparative evaluation of Sonosalpingography hysterosalpingography, and laparoscopy for determination of tubal patency. J Obstet Gynecol India, 57(2), pp. 158-161. Sharma, R.P., 1989. Fallopian tube patency by ultrasound scans. J Obstet Gynecol India 1989, 39, pp.700-701. Tanahatoe, S., Hompes, P.G. & Lambalk, C.B., 2003. Accuracy of diagnostic laparoscopy in the infertility work-up before intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril, 79, pp.361–366. Read More