Indexação da pesquisa científica: uma proposta para o uso adequado dos termos finalizadores dos resumos

• Ano de defesa: 2017
• Autor(a) principal: Rocha, Lidianne Mércia Barbosa Malta
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Alagoas; Brasil; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ensino na Saúde; UFAL
• Palavras-chave em Português: Indexação como assunto; Cabeçalho de assunto; Nomenclatura; Linguagem documentária; Recuperação da informação; Indexing as topic; Subject headings; Nomenclature; Cataloging; CNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE
• Link de acesso: http://www.repositorio.ufal.br/handle/riufal/1678

This scholarly work of conclusion of course (TACC), consisting of a scientific paper and a product of speech, discusses words representing the content (keywords and descriptors) used in abstracts of academic papers defended in 2013 and 2014, the professional master's in Health Education (MEPS), identifying them as terms finalizers and indexers of research. The method adopted was of documentary nature, exploratory and descriptive, with quantitative perspective, investigating 37 research through semi-structured, electronic questionnaire containing a total of 17 questions, with the first five draw the General profile of all jobs and the following 12 identify each of the terms that are described in their respective summaries. The interrogative instrument was developed by the researcher in the own masters through the platform Google drive, to support the documentary analysis, being validated through an Electronic Validation Panel during the discipline technology applied in teaching and research in health (TAEPS), from the same institution. The variables analyzed were: (a) amount of keywords, (b) finalizer Nomenclature of summary: keywords or descriptors, (c) characterization of keywords: free and structured terms, (d) frequency of keywords, (and) Terminology of input keywords, (f) capture of key words in the titles and (g) score used between the keywords. The amount of keywords used pointed out that the summaries of the TACC did not follow an internal standardization of MEPS, but it was necessary to fit the journals chosen for submission, after the defence of academic papers, following the requirements presuppose the possibility of publication. Various terms used as keywords summaries were not found in the main terminology banks (MeSH, DeCS and Thesaurus), but had strength so the construction of the indexing representative academic work as the terms present in the bases of access, being possible to suggest new terms are included in the recovery of information portals. Finally, the authors of the TACC used encoded descriptors. However, do not have cited in their methodologies, registry numbers, or the portal in which they were obtained, leading to complete lack of practice when accessing the databases available, where the distinction between free or structured terms could contribute better with the correct choice of words post-production of their abstracts. Points out that various terminologies used by them, had great relevance in cohesion and coherence in summaries in which they found, showing strong potential for indexing the portal DeCS, which highlights the need for even more dynamic and constant supply of new terms, enabling more research grants, from the enrichment of databases available, and taking into account the existing records. In order to target students, teachers and researchers, more thorough management of the finalizer of nomenclature summaries, which will represent the content of scholarly works, from graduations and post-graduate degrees and academic professionals, was created, as a product of intervention, an educational blog titled ‘Key words in Scientific Production of MEPS’, which guides you through the proper use of the words representative of abstracts (keywords and descriptors).