Consistency and accuracy of indexing systematic review articles and meta-analyses in medline
- PMID: 19712212
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00823.x
Consistency and accuracy of indexing systematic review articles and meta-analyses in medline
Abstract
Background: Systematic review articles support the advance of science and translation of research evidence into healthcare practice. Inaccurate retrieval from medline could limit access to reviews.
Objective: To determine the quality of indexing systematic reviews and meta-analyses in medline.
Methods: The Clinical Hedges Database, containing the results of a hand search of 161 journals, was used to test medline indexing terms for their ability to retrieve systematic reviews that met predefined methodologic criteria (labelled as 'pass' review articles) and reviews that reported a meta-analysis.
Results: The Clinical Hedges Database contained 49 028 articles; 753 were 'pass' review articles (552 with a meta-analysis). In total 758 review articles (independent of whether they passed) reported a meta-analysis. The search strategy that retrieved the highest number of 'pass' systematic reviews achieved a sensitivity of 97.1%. The publication type 'meta analysis' had a false positive rate of 5.6% (95% CI 3.9 to 7.6), and false negative rate of 0.31% (95% CI 0.26 to 0.36) for retrieving systematic reviews that reported a meta-analysis.
Conclusions: Inaccuracies in indexing systematic reviews and meta-analyses in medline can be partly overcome by a 5-term search strategy. Introducing a publication type for systematic reviews of the literature could improve retrieval performance.
Similar articles
-
The search and selection for primary studies in systematic reviews published in dental journals indexed in MEDLINE was not fully reproducible.J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Jun;98:53-61. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.02.011. Epub 2018 Feb 21. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018. PMID: 29476922 Review.
-
Cochrane systematic reviews in acupuncture: methodological diversity in database searching.J Altern Complement Med. 2005 Aug;11(4):719-22. doi: 10.1089/acm.2005.11.719. J Altern Complement Med. 2005. PMID: 16131298 Review.
-
Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey.BMJ. 2005 Jan 8;330(7482):68. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38336.804167.47. Epub 2004 Dec 24. BMJ. 2005. PMID: 15619601 Free PMC article.
-
Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey.BMC Med. 2004 Jun 9;2:23. doi: 10.1186/1741-7015-2-23. BMC Med. 2004. PMID: 15189561 Free PMC article.
-
Taking advantage of the explosion of systematic reviews: an efficient MEDLINE search strategy.Eff Clin Pract. 2001 Jul-Aug;4(4):157-62. Eff Clin Pract. 2001. PMID: 11525102
Cited by
-
Tackling Research Inefficiency in Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Illustrative Review.JMIR Res Protoc. 2020 Jun 11;9(6):e15922. doi: 10.2196/15922. JMIR Res Protoc. 2020. PMID: 32525490 Free PMC article.
-
Evolving Trends in Physiotherapy Research Publications between 1995 and 2015.Physiother Can. 2020 Spring;72(2):122-131. doi: 10.3138/ptc-2018-0065. Physiother Can. 2020. PMID: 32494096 Free PMC article.
-
A review of recent publication trends from top publishing countries.Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 27;7(1):147. doi: 10.1186/s13643-018-0819-1. Syst Rev. 2018. PMID: 30261915 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review.J Med Libr Assoc. 2018 Jan;106(1):46-56. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2018.82. Epub 2018 Jan 2. J Med Libr Assoc. 2018. PMID: 29339933 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Toward a comprehensive evidence map of overview of systematic review methods: paper 1-purpose, eligibility, search and data extraction.Syst Rev. 2017 Nov 21;6(1):231. doi: 10.1186/s13643-017-0617-1. Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 29162130 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous
