Tell us what you think of the new MedInfoNow

Since we introduced the major upgrade to MedInfoNow in mid-March, we have published and issued more than 1.4 million Weekly Literature Updates customized to the personal interests of each of our users. And users have visited the website more than 1 million times. The upgrade was the result of direct input we had from our users, resulting in significant changes to the interface, content, features and functionality. We asked our users to adapt to a lot of change. Now it’s your turn to tell us what you like and what you don’t like.

We have been pleased with the comments we have received, some of which are posted on the testimonials page of this blog. And we are grateful to the handful of users who have pointed out things that didn’t work in the way they expected, so we had an opportunity to make appropriate adjustments. For example:

One user reported that he was getting weekly reports showing far too many new books than what he expected. It turns out that in our eagerness to add a new feature reporting on just published eBooks, we were reporting on all eBooks added to the database, not just the new releases of 2011 titles. Without the perceptive comment of our reader, we may not have had the insight to change our programming to report new eBooks accurately.

So please fill out the comment form below and let us know what you think of the new MedInfoNow. We look forward to getting your views and learning how we can continue our efforts to make MedInfoNow the most time-efficient and valuable way for you to access and stay current with the literature.

6 Comments to “Tell us what you think of the new MedInfoNow”

Jeff Moss 29 July 2011 at 4:38 pm #

While there was some adjustment involved, I am finding the new format to be a big improvement. It is easy to navigate and contains all the information I have come to expect. You provide a wonderful service.

I think a mobile phone/ipad app is a great idea!!
Frank Claps 29 July 2011 at 5:19 pm #

I like the new format. I also appreciate the fact that I now have fewer abstracts to view – makes time go quicker. I am primarily interested in strength training, so as much of that as you can provide would be appreciated.

I really don’t know if this can be adapted to a smart phone – I don’t use them anyway.
Michael Copeland 29 July 2011 at 5:31 pm #

I wasn’t quite sure at first about the new design, especially as the number of references was drastically reduced. But having used it now for some months:

• the focus on articles for my profile is much clearer and I don’t have to work my way through pieces of little or peripheral interest;
• use is very easy;
• downloads are more responsive than they sometimes were in the old format;
• it gives me the opportunity to look elsewhere if I wish to.

No negatives at all.
Scott Owens 29 July 2011 at 7:57 pm #

Two comments. 1) The new Weekly Literature Update is easier to navigate than the old system. 2) The number of articles seems to be less than before, however. Has the search mechanism changed?
Dan Doody 5 August 2011 at 10:20 pm #

Yes, we did change the search mechanism.

Formerly, the Weekly Literature Update delivered all articles that were indexed by Medline® in the last seven days in each of your topic areas regardless of the age of the article. (It was not uncommon to be showing you articles that were a year old, but just added to Medline’s index in the last 7 days.) In the upgraded version, the Weekly Literature Update isolates all articles that were added to Medline’s index in the last seven days in each of your topic areas that have been published in the last three months. The result is that the Weekly Literature Update concentrates on the most recently published articles added to Medline®, emphasizing the update nature of the e-mail.

Which result do you prefer, the reduced number of articles currently shown or the broader sweep that we previously provided?
Elijah O Kehinde 8 August 2011 at 11:25 pm #

I always look forward to receiving every Friday in my e-mail the latest articles published online as made available by MedInfoNow. As a researcher, I find the weekly update very valuable.

I am happy with the way you are sending the articles. Right now, I am not sure if I can suggest areas of your service requiring improvement. If I have any ideas for you I will forward them.

Prof Elijah O Kehinde
Professor of Urological Surgery
Department of Surgery (Division of Urology)
Faculty of Medicine
Kuwait University