Why the number of abstract retrieved by CoPub 5.0 is lower that PubMed?
I used CoPub 5.0 as my text mining tool in my research. However, I found that the number of abstract related to Alzheimer's disease and lipid metabolism retrieved by CoPub 5.0 are much more lower than PubMed. Could anyone tell me the reason ?
Thank you very much.
• 1,757 views
•
link
updated
by
Ram
•
written
by
xi.nyi94 •
•
written
by
xi.nyi94 •
0 answers
No answers yet.
Log in to answer this question.
More posts like this
-
Performe gene co-expression analysis network on my own genes of interest scRNA-seq dataset
written by Fiefn •
-
MG-RAST abundance values and filtering with SEEDs subsystem issue metagenome
written by mefeeney1552 •
-
Tool: Super easy to use free paper retrieval artifact: PyPubMed
written by Novogene •
-
Focused pathway analysis
written by cwwong13 •
-
Is it theoretically possible to text mine symptoms following chemical exposure?
written by nsnamhan •
-
How to convert an abstract retrieved from pubmed (NCBI) into NlProt format?
written by olima.marx •
-
Forum: Hot topic for Bioinformatics project!
written by misbah_pak10 •
-
What information about VARIANTS are found in biomedical literature rather than diseases?
written by davehresearch •
-
Local Copy Of Pubmed
written by Smandape
-
Text Mining - Sentiment Mining & Business Category Identification
written by Avsuresh •
Since they are different tools and do different things, is there a reason that the numbers of abstracts should be the same?
Aren't they search articles using keyword entered by users? Both of them access to Medline database,so I thought that their results should be the same. Based on reply, sir, do you mean that they are using different algorithm so their results returned are sure different?