Skip to Main Content

Finding and Evaluating Articles in PubMed

NBB 270: Feeding and Metabolism

How to evaluate sources

Ask yourself these questions to examine your sources.

Authority The source of the information.	Who is supplying the information? What are their credentials and reputation? Do they have the qualifications to speak on this topic? Is the author an expert or researcher in the field? A journalist? A government agency? A commercial supplier? A non-profit organization? If an organization, are they reputable? Has the information been reviewed by experts or professional organizations?
Accuracy The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the information.	Is the information accurate? Can it be verified or supported by other sources? Is evidence given to support the information? Are sources of factual information cited? For websites, does the site appear to be carefully edited, or are there typographical errors or broken links?
Relevancy The importance of the information for your needs.	Who is the intended audience of this information? Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question? Is the information at an appropriate level? Have you looked at a variety of sources before determining this is the one you will use?
Objectivity The reason the information exists.	What is the purpose of this book, article, website, or other source? Does the source have a particular bias? Is the information objective/impartial? Is the information factual? Is the information assumptions or opinions? Does the source promote the ideas of stakes of a particular group—religious, political, corporate, nonpartisan, etc.?
Currency The timeliness of the information.	Does currency matter for this topic? When was this published? Is it the most recent edition? (books/articles) When was the information created or last updated? (websites) Is the information current, or outdated?

Rubric

Use this rubric to "grade" your sources. Higher scores are better, but keep in mind that a source does not have to have the highest score to be considered a reputable resource.

	3	2	1
Authority	Author is listed with credentials that qualify them to speak on the topic; information is reviewed by experts.	Author is listed without credentials; unclear if information is reviewed by experts.	No author is listed, or author is not qualified or credentialed in the field.
Accuracy	Claims are supported by evidence; resources are cited; source is organized.	Some claims are not cited; some links are broken.	No evidence is given to support claims; resources not cited; information is not verifiable.
Relevancy	Content is related to your topic; information is written for the correct audience and at the correct level.	Content is either related but not at the correct level, or at the correct level but unrelated.	Content is unrelated to your topic; level is too simple; level is too advanced.
Objectivity	Information is factual, objective and impartial; source is published and supported by a reputable institution or organization; information is free of bias.	Information may show evidence of subjectivity or partiality; source is supported by an institution but there is evidence of bias; unclear if author is connected to a reputable institution or organization.	Information is not factual, objective, or impartial; unclear what institution or organization published and supports the source; bias is evident.
Currency	Publication date included; information is current and/or regularly updated.	Information may be out of date; unclear when last updated.	Unclear publication date; no date of last update.