[The use of bibliographic databases by Spanish-speaking Latin American biomedical researchers: a cross-sectional study].
OBJECTIVE
To describe how Spanish-speaking biomedical professionals in Latin America access and utilize bibliographic databases.


METHODS
Based on a MEDLINE search, 2 515 articles published between August 2002 and August 2003 were identified that dealt with and/or had authors from 16 countries: Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, and Venezuela. The search was limited to references to basic science, clinical science, or social medicine. A survey was sent by e-mail to researchers who lived in 15 of the 16 countries (the exception being Nicaragua). The survey asked about the researcher's area of work (basic science, clinical science, or public health), the level of skill in using databases, the frequency and type of access to the databases most utilized, the impact from not having access to the full text of articles when preparing a manuscript, and how the respondent usually obtained the full-text version of articles.


RESULTS
A total of 586 e-mail messages with the survey were sent out, and 185 responses were received (32%). The databases most utilized to obtain biomedical information were MEDLINE (34.1%), general search engines (Google, Yahoo!, and AltaVista) (15.9%), on-line journals (9.8%), BIREME-LILACS (6.0%), BioMedNet (5.4%), the databases of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of the United States of America (5.2%), and the Cochrane Library (4.9%). Of the respondents, 64% said they had average or advanced abilities in using MEDLINE. However, 71% of the respondents did not use or were not aware of the MEDLINE Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), a controlled vocabulary established by the National Library of Medicine of the United States of America for indexing articles. The frequency of accessing the databases was similar in all the countries studied, without significant differences in terms of the type of access (authorized access to commercial databases, unauthorized access to those databases, or access to databases available for free) or the level of abilities. Of the respondents, 87% said they had not included important references in the articles that they had published because they had not had access to the full text of those items, and 56% said they had cited articles that they had not read in full. In addition, 7.6% of the respondents admitted to unauthorized use of limited-access databases, such as through borrowed passwords or copied disks. More than two-thirds of the respondents said they obtained the full text of articles through photocopies or directly from the authors.


CONCLUSIONS
In order to encourage scientific output by Latin American researchers, more of them need to be trained in the use of the most frequently used databases, especially MEDLINE. Those researchers also need to have expanded access to the biomedical literature.
Ospina
Edgar Guillermo
EG
Clínica Reina Sofía, Santa Fe de Bogotá, Colombia. La correspondencia debe dirigirse a Edgar G. Ospina, Clínica Reina Sofía, Edif. Cons., Diagonal 127 A No. 31-48, Cons. 221, Bogotá, Colombia.
Reveiz Herault
Ludovic
L
Cardona
Andrés Felipe
AF
D035843:Biomedical Research / Q000379:methods; D003430:Cross-Sectional Studies; D016206:Databases, Bibliographic / Q000706:statistics & numerical data*; D007843:Latin America