Strategies to optimize MEDLINE and EMBASE search strategies for anesthesiology systematic reviews. An experimental study

Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira; Betini, Marluci; Puga, Maria Eduarda dos Santos; Agarwal, Arnav; Catâneo, Antônio José Maria; Oliveira, Luciane Dias de; Bazan, Rodrigo; Braz, Leandro Gobbo; Pereira, José Eduardo Guimarães; Dib, Regina El

doi:10.1590/1516-3180.2017.0277100917

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 7 publications

(6 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MeSH database is a very useful tool for identifying concepts and choosing appropriate terms. It is recommended that controlled vocabulary and natural language terms be used [25], regardless of whether they are synonyms or alternative terms, along with their variations and different possible sequences within a phrase [41].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval

Oliván

Cuenca

Avilès

2019

jmla

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Errors in search strategies negatively affect the quality and validity of systematic reviews. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate searches performed in MEDLINE/PubMed to identify errors and determine their effects on information retrieval.Methods: A PubMed search was conducted using the systematic review filter to identify articles that were published in January of 2018. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses were selected from a systematic search for literature containing reproducible and explicit search strategies in MEDLINE/PubMed. Data were extracted from these studies related to ten types of errors and to the terms and phrases search modes.Results: The study included 137 systematic reviews in which the number of search strategies containing some type of error was very high (92.7%). Errors that affected recall were the most frequent (78.1%), and the most common search errors involved missing terms in both natural language and controlled language and those related to Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) search terms and the non-retrieval of their more specific terms.Conclusions: To improve the quality of searches and avoid errors, it is essential to plan the search strategy carefully, which includes consulting the MeSH database to identify the concepts and choose all appropriate terms, both descriptors and synonyms, and combining search techniques in the free-text and controlled-language fields, truncating the terms appropriately to retrieve all their variants.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval

Oliván

Cuenca

Avilès

2019

jmla

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Limits (eg, publication date) and study design filters must be applied as necessary, and appropriate databases must be selected in which to run the search. Due to their complexity, great care must be taken in developing and executing electronic search strategies as even a minor mistake or typographical error can have an impact on retrieval.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of the peer review of literature search strategies in support of rapid review reports

Spry

Mierzwinski‐Urban

2018

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of the peer review of literature search strategies prepared in support of rapid reviews. Methods A sample of 200 CADTH rapid reviews was selected. For each rapid review meeting the inclusion criteria, the pre–peer‐reviewed and corresponding post–peer‐reviewed search strategies were run, and the search results were compared. Bibliographic records retrieved solely by the post–peer‐reviewed search strategy and included in the rapid review report were identified as representing “included studies.” The publication type of each included study was determined, and the attributes of the corresponding record were analyzed to determine the reason for its retrieval by the post–peer‐reviewed search. Results The peer review of search strategies resulted in the retrieval of one or more additional records for 75% of the searches investigated, but only a small proportion of these records (4%) represented included studies. The main publication types of the included studies were nonrandomized studies (60%) and narrative reviews (20%). The principal changes to search strategies that resulted in the retrieval of additional included studies were the inclusion of more keywords or subject headings or a change in the way concepts were combined. Conclusions The peer review of literature search strategies aids in the retrieval of relevant records particularly those representing nonrandomized studies. The scrutiny of keywords, subject headings, and the relation between search concepts are key components of the peer review process.

show abstract

The use of subject headings varied in Embase and MEDLINE: An analysis of indexing across six subject areas

Frandsen

Carlsen

Eriksen

2022

Journal of Information Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many bibliographic databases describe the content of a publication using a thesaurus. The vocabularies vary and the extent to which the databases apply them may also differ significantly. The aim of this study is to empirically explore the number of subject headings assigned to publications in two databases over time and to determine if publication characteristics are associated with the number of subject headings. Articles and reviews in MEDLINE and Embase from 1990 to 2019 assigned with one of the subject headings from six subject areas are included in this study. Each of the retrieved publications in Embase is matched with a similar publication in MEDLINE. Furthermore, multivariable linear regressions are used to explore the association of the number of subject headings in MEDLINE and Embase with six prespecified publication characteristics. The average number of assigned subject headings in MEDLINE is stable or even slightly decreasing over time. In Embase, the average number of assigned subject headings was stable until about 2000 where the average number increased dramatically during the next 3 years. Furthermore, linear regressions show that the average number of subject headings in MEDLINE and Embase is higher for publications in English, publications with longer abstract, recent publications and if it belongs to specific subject areas. However, reviews are assigned with more subject headings in Embase and fewer in MEDLINE. The implications of the results are discussed.

show abstract

Strategies to optimize MEDLINE and EMBASE search strategies for anesthesiology systematic reviews. An experimental study

Cited by 3 publications

References 7 publications

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval

Errors in search strategies used in systematic reviews and their effects on information retrieval

The impact of the peer review of literature search strategies in support of rapid review reports

The use of subject headings varied in Embase and MEDLINE: An analysis of indexing across six subject areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About