Answer

Database Search and Comparison of Database Directories

Comparison of Database Search from PubMed and Google Scholar Directories.

Students and practitioners in nursing and other medical fields use different database directories to access resources necessary for enhancing their knowledge in the field. Two databases commonly used are Google Scholar and PubMed. In contrast to PubMed that features an advanced and complex search interface, Google Scholar has an intuitive interface consisting of a simple query box that allows searchers to access a resource by simply inputting its title. Additionally, PubMed allows searchers to access well-defined set of journals due to its advanced filtering features, while a search on Google Scholar retrieves journals, articles among other resources that can be beyond the coverage scope due to the absence of limiting features and controlled vocabulary searching mechanisms (Shultz, 2007). The absence of these special searching features, however, offers Google Scholar several advantages over PubMed. For instance, it allows searchers to access old resources and gray literature since it retrieves institutional repositories, preprint archives among other resources rather than just journal articles as Shultz (2007) notes. This literature may have far-reaching implications in improving public health.       

How I managed to narrow down the number of Articles Hits to Few Relevant Articles

A search of the selected illness, Type II Diabetes, on Google Scholar database returned more than 250 journal articles. However, I narrowed down the articles to less than twenty by using inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria involved using certain special search features to filter out irrelevant, old and out-of-context articles. The first criterion was date. To ensure only current resources are retrieved, I limited their publication years to 2008 and later. This means all resources were required to have been published within not more than ten years to qualify for inclusion. The criterion reduced retrieved resources to approximately fifty. To narrow the resources even further, I increased the number of key search words from three (Type II Diabetes) to more than five. The new search phrase was “Effectiveness of Diabetes Self-Management Education among Elderly Patients with Type II Diabetes”.     

Summary of the Credible Article Chosen as my Resource.

Based on resources retrieved from Google Scholar, the article I chose as credible resource is “Effectiveness of a diabetes education and self-management programme (DESMOND) for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus.”

In their article, Khunti et al. (2012) sought to determine whether the benefits of a single self-management structured or education for patients diagnosed with Type II diabetes can be sustained for three years. Research design involved a three-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial in thirteen primary care facilities in the UK. Sample size included 824 respondents of which of 604 provided biomedical data and 513 provided questionnaire. The rest were not eligible for follow-up. Treatment intervention was a six-hour structured group education program which was delivered by two healthcare educators in the community. The main outcomes measured were glycated hemoglobin levels, weight, blood pressure, physical activity, depression and blood lipid levels. Research results indicated a significant decrease in glycated hemoglobin levels in three years across all groups. However, improvement in depression scores, level of physical activity and quality of life and general lifestyle outcomes was insignificant in both groups during the study period.

Article’s Credibility

This article is credible because its findings are based on primary data collected from 13 primary care facilities and 824 participants, which is evidently a larger study sample to obtain reliable results. This reliability is reinforced with forty secondary sources as shown in the bibliography section, which suggests extensive scholarly research, and hence credibility of the article.

I prefer Google Scholar as a database directory over PubMed and other directories because it offers an intuitive search interface and allows for retrieval of other resources other than journal articles. Minimal filtering features also make Google Scholar easier and quicker to use, and thus the preferred database directory.

Importance of Database Search. 

Database search is necessary at all levels of one’s career development. In scholarly work, for example, it provides access to resources and literature required to inform, qualify and support findings in ongoing and future research studies. In nursing practice, it offers access to information and knowledge required to enhance evidence-based practice while improving knowledge in emerging health issues and their possible interventions.