The efficiency of database searches for creating systematic reviews was improved by search filters
- PMID: 29191446
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.017
The efficiency of database searches for creating systematic reviews was improved by search filters
Abstract
Objectives: To compare Clinical Queries (CQs) for randomized trials of therapy 'methods' and 'NOT' limits search filters with Cochrane methods filters.
Study design and setting: Analytic survey of Cochrane reviews as the reference standard for retrieving studies included in the reviews ("included studies [ISs]"). The sensitivity and precision of Cochrane content terms + Cochrane methods terms were compared in MEDLINE and Embase with Cochrane content terms + CQs maximally sensitive filter for therapy studies, without and with additional 'NOT' limits (CQ-S [CQ sensitive]; CQ-S + limits) and a balanced filter without and with additional NOT limits (CQ-B [CQ balanced]; CQ-B + limits).
Results: Cochrane or CQ methods terms reduced, by 64-96%, the overall retrieval of articles with minimal loss of ISs. Sensitivity was high and similar for the 4 filters. However, CQ-B + limits had the highest precision (2.64%, number needed to be read to find one eligible study [NNR] 38) followed by the CQ-B (1.05%, NNR 95), Cochrane search (0.51%, NNR 198), CQ-S + limits (0.34%, NNR 296), and CQ-S filters (0.31%, NNR 325).
Conclusion: For systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions, the efficiency of searches in MEDLINE and Embase was better served by the CQs for therapy studies with balanced methods filter and NOT limits.
Keywords: Clinical queries; Cochrane review; Embase; Information retrieval; MEDLINE; Precision; Sensitivity.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Search strategies (filters) to identify systematic reviews in MEDLINE and Embase.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Sep 8;9(9):MR000054. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000054.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 37681507 Review.
-
The NICE UK geographic search filters for MEDLINE and Embase (Ovid): Post-development study to further evaluate precision and number-needed-to-read when retrieving UK evidence.Res Synth Methods. 2020 Sep;11(5):669-677. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1431. Epub 2020 Aug 5. Res Synth Methods. 2020. PMID: 32618106
-
Search strategies to identify observational studies in MEDLINE and Embase.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 12;3(3):MR000041. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000041.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019. PMID: 30860595 Free PMC article.
-
Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase.Syst Rev. 2014 Jul 18;3:78. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-78. Syst Rev. 2014. PMID: 25033713 Free PMC article.
-
Search strategies to identify diagnostic accuracy studies in MEDLINE and EMBASE.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 11;2013(9):MR000022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000022.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013. PMID: 24022476 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Development of an efficient search filter to retrieve systematic reviews from PubMed.J Med Libr Assoc. 2021 Oct 1;109(4):561-574. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2021.1223. J Med Libr Assoc. 2021. PMID: 34858085 Free PMC article.
-
Validation of a search strategy for randomized clinical trials related to periodontitis.Arch Public Health. 2021 Apr 3;79(1):43. doi: 10.1186/s13690-021-00560-0. Arch Public Health. 2021. PMID: 33812387 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
