Comparison of indexing times among articles from medical, nursing, and pharmacy journals

Rodriguez, Ryan

doi:10.2146/ajhp150319

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We analyzed keywords in relevant publications and similar articles that we identified via PubMed to determine frequently occurring terms to include in the search strategy. Considering the presence of delays in keyword indexing, we also searched for controlled vocabulary terms in title and abstract search fields [ 21 ]. The search strategy is provided in supplemental Appendix A and Appendix B .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Educational interventions to improve literature searching skills in the health sciences: a scoping review

Hirt

Nordhausen

Meichlinger

et al. 2020

jmla

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The authors reviewed educational interventions for improving literature searching skills in the health sciences.Methods: We performed a scoping review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies published in English and German, irrespective of publication year. Targeted outcomes were objectively measurable literature searching skills (e.g., quality of search strategy, study retrieval, precision). The search methods consisted of searching databases (CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science), tracking citations, free web searching, and contacting experts. Two reviewers performed screening and data extraction. To evaluate the completeness of reporting, the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) was applied.Results: We included 6 controlled trials and 8 pre-post trials from the 8,484 references that we screened. Study participants were students in various health professions and physicians. The educational formats of the interventions varied. Outcomes clustered into 2 categories: (1) developing search strategies (e.g., identifying search concepts, selecting databases, applying Boolean operators) and (2) database searching skills (e.g., searching PubMed, MEDLINE, or CINAHL). In addition to baseline and post-intervention measurement, 5 studies reported follow-up. Almost all studies adequately described their intervention procedures and delivery but did not provide access to the educational material. The expertise of the intervention facilitators was described in only 3 studies.Conclusions: The results showed a wide range of study populations, interventions, and outcomes. Studies often lacked information about educational material and facilitators’ expertise. Further research should focus on intervention effectiveness using controlled study designs and long-term follow-up. To ensure transparency, replication, and comparability, studies should rigorously describe their intervention. This article has been approved for the Medical Library Association’s Independent Reading Program.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Considering the presence of delays in keyword indexing, we also searched for controlled vocabulary terms in title and abstract search fields [21]. The search strategy is provided in supplemental Appendix A and Appendix B.…”

Section: Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Educational interventions to improve literature searching skills in the health sciences: a scoping review

Hirt

Nordhausen

Meichlinger

et al. 2020

jmla

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Meta-analyses were targeted for searching the term "meta-analysis" in the title eld or articles classi ed with the National Library of Medicine publication type meta-analysis. The time period 2012 to 2016 was selected to allow su cient time for indexation with MeSH terms between the time of publication and the time of searching, because delays in indexing have previously been documented [24]. In the online supplementary appendix, we report the key terms (PRISMA owchart as Fig.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Evidence-Rating Systems Used in Meta-Analyses of Pharmacotherapy

Pérez-Surio¹,

Hernando²,

Mendoza³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Evidence-rating systems (ERSs) provide a framework for the systematic evaluation of the quality of individual interventional or observational studies and the overall body of evidence in meta-analyses. Authors and users of meta-analyses require a familiarity with ERSs to determine the level of confidence in the application of results. Many ERSs have been published, but no consensus exists regarding best practice for their use. Objective: The aim is to describe patterns of use of ERSs in meta-analyses of drug therapy published in contemporary high-impact medical journals.Methods: We design a review. Medline / PubMed was searched to identify meta-analyses evaluating drug therapy from the top 5 ranked general medical journals from 2012 to 2016. Methods of full-texts were reviewed to ensure the meta-analyses evaluated drug therapy and to identify the ERS used to rate individual studies and the overall body of evidence. Frequency of ERS use was analyzed using descriptive statistics.Results: The top-ranked journals were Ann Intern Med, BMJ, JAMA, Lancet and PLoS Medicine. Of the 309 results, manual review excluded 111 meta-analyses. In 198 evaluated meta-analyses, 86.4% (171) utilized an ERS; the most commonly used was the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool in 80.7% (138) of all meta-analyses. An ERS was used to evaluate the body of literature in 19.1% (38) of meta-analyses; the most commonly used of three systems was the GRADE methodology. Overall, 14 unique ERSs, including author-defined systems, were usedConclusions: Most meta-analyses of drug effects in high-impact medical journals evaluated individual studies with an ERS, most commonly the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, while the use of ERSs to evaluate the body of literature was less frequent. The familiarity of authors and users of meta-analyses with commonly used ERSs may facilitate the evaluation and application of findings of meta-analyses.

show abstract

“…A utilização dos vocabulários controlados por fontes de informação científica é uma estratégia eficaz na recuperação dos conteúdos, sobretudo devido às especificidades das áreas de conhecimento e suas respectivas temáticas. Rodriguez (2016) pontua que a busca de literatura científica por termos simples ocasiona a não-recuperação de literatura relevante, uma vez que muitos artigos podem usar uma terminologia diferente para se referir a um mesmo tópico, além de ocasionar também a recuperação de resultados com falso positivo, ou seja, resultados que de fato contém o termo de busca inserido, porém fora do contexto ideal e que não satisfaz a necessidade informacional do pesquisador. Em contrapartida, é pertinente que as fontes de informação continuem disponibilizando em suas interfaces de busca a possibilidade de pesquisa por termos simples, ou seja, que não pertencem ao vocabulário controlado, para que o pesquisador também possua a liberdade de buscar alternativas para encontrar os conteúdos que precisa.…”

Section: 3 Atraso No Tempo De Indexação Das Publicações Nas Bases De Dadosunclassified

Informação científica em tempos de pandemia

Maimone

Santos

2021

RDBCI rev. dig. Bibliotecon. e Ci. Info.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introdução/Objetivo: Apresenta temática vinculada à recuperação da informação científica contida no buscador PubMed cujo objetivo é verificar atrasos na indexação de publicações científicas com os termos do vocabulário controlado Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Metodologia: Contempla a pesquisa bibliográfica para contextualização temática, e é exploratória e descritiva com aplicabilidade prática sobre assuntos relacionados à pandemia de Covid-19. Foi construída estratégia de busca no PubMed com 16 termos relacionados à temática nos campos MeSH Terms e Text Word. Para o estudo foram selecionadas publicações de 2021 no idioma português. Os metadados das 85 publicações foram exportados para análise em planilha sob os aspectos de entrada da publicação no PubMed, tempo até a indexação com os termos MeSH e categoria da publicação. Resultados: Cerca de 89% das publicações, considerando a amostra de 62 itens, tiveram um atraso na indexação de pelo menos 15 dias; e cerca de 11% demoraram de 15 a 135 dias. Conclusão: Para que os pesquisadores consigam recuperar os mais recentes conteúdos científicos sobre a COVID-19, é fundamental que sejam construídas estratégias de busca que contemplem a utilização do termo do vocabulário controlado MeSH aliado à utilização das variações de nomenclatura da temática em demais campos, como o Text Word, já que publicações podem constar no buscador, mas ainda não terem sido indexadas, a fim de recuperar maior número de literatura científica já publicada.

show abstract

Comparison of indexing times among articles from medical, nursing, and pharmacy journals

Abstract: Analysis of major medical, nursing, and pharmacy journals found that articles from nursing and pharmacy journals were indexed with MeSH terms more slowly than articles from medical journals. Journal identity was significantly associated with time to indexing.

Cited by 26 publications

References 7 publications

Educational interventions to improve literature searching skills in the health sciences: a scoping review

Educational interventions to improve literature searching skills in the health sciences: a scoping review

Analysis of Evidence-Rating Systems Used in Meta-Analyses of Pharmacotherapy

Informação científica em tempos de pandemia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About