Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Jul;97(3):186-93.
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.3.007.

Evaluation of PubMed filters used for evidence-based searching: validation using relative recall

Arjen Hoogendam  1 , Pieter F de Vries Robbé, Anton F H Stalenhoef, A John P M Overbeke
Affiliations

Evaluation of PubMed filters used for evidence-based searching: validation using relative recall

Arjen Hoogendam et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009 Jul.

Abstract

Objectives: The research sought to determine the value of PubMed filters and combinations of filters in literature selected for systematic reviews on therapy-related clinical questions.

Methods: References to 35,281 included and 48,514 excluded articles were extracted from 2,629 reviews published prior to January 2008 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and sent to PubMed with and without filters. Sensitivity, specificity, and precision were calculated from the percentages of unfiltered and filtered references retrieved for each review and averaged over all reviews.

Results: Sensitivity of the Sensitive Clinical Queries filter was reasonable (92.7%, 92.1-93.3); specificity (16.1%, 15.1-17.1) and precision were low (49.5%, 48.5-50.5). The Specific Clinical Queries and the Single Term Medline Specific filters performed comparably (sensitivity, 78.2%, 77.2-79.2 vs. 78.0%; 77.0-79.0; specificity, 52.0%, 50.8-53.2 vs. 52.3%, 51.1-53.5; precision, 60.4%, 59.4-61.4 vs. 60.6%, 59.6-61.6). Combining the Abridged Index Medicus (AIM) and Single Term Medline Specific (65.2%, 63.8-66.6), Two Terms Medline Optimized (64.2%, 62.8-65.6), or Specific Clinical Queries filters (65.0%, 63.6-66.4) yielded the highest precision.

Conclusions: Sensitive and Specific Clinical Queries filters used to answer questions about therapy will result in a list of clinical trials but cannot be expected to identify only methodologically sound trials. The Specific Clinical Queries filters are not suitable for questions regarding therapy that cannot be answered with randomized controlled trials. Combining AIM with specific PubMed filters yields the highest precision in the Cochrane dataset.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of reviews from the Cochrane Database
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. US National Library of Medicine. PubMed [Internet] Bethesda, MD: The Library; 2008. [cited 19 Dec 2008]. < http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez/>.
    1. Hoogendam A, Stalenhoef A.F, Robbe P.F, Overbeke A.J. Answers to questions posed during daily patient care are more likely to be answered by UpToDate than PubMed. J Med Internet Res. 2008;10(4):e29. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1012. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Guyatt G.H, Rennie D, editors. Users' guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice. Chicago, IL: American Medical Association Press; 2002.
    1. Straus S.E, Richardson W.S, Glasziou P, Haynes R.B. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 3rd ed. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK: Churchill Livingstone; 2005.
    1. The CONSORT Group. The CONSORT statement [Internet]. The Group; 2008. [cited 19 Dec 2008]. < http://www.consort-statement.org>.

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources

-