Strategies to optimize MEDLINE and EMBASE search strategies for anesthesiology systematic reviews. An experimental study
Palavras-chave:
Evidence-based medicine, MEDLINE, Databases, bibliographic, Medical subject headings, AnesthesiologyResumo
BACKGROUND: A high-quality electronic search is essential for ensuring accuracy and comprehensiveness among the records retrieved when conducting systematic reviews. Therefore, we aimed to identify the most efficient method for searching in both MEDLINE (through PubMed) and EMBASE, covering search terms with variant spellings, direct and indirect orders, and associations with MeSH and EMTREE terms (or lack thereof ). DESIGN AND SETTING: Experimental study. UNESP, Brazil. METHODS: We selected and analyzed 37 search strategies that had specifically been developed for the field of anesthesiology. These search strategies were adapted in order to cover all potentially relevant search terms, with regard to variant spellings and direct and indirect orders, in the most efficient manner. RESULTS: When the strategies included variant spellings and direct and indirect orders, these adapted versions of the search strategies selected retrieved the same number of search results in MEDLINE (mean of 61.3%) and a higher number in EMBASE (mean of 63.9%) in the sample analyzed. The numbers of results retrieved through the searches analyzed here were not identical with and without associated use of MeSH and EMTREE terms. However, association of these terms from both controlled vocabularies retrieved a larger number of records than did the use of either one of them. CONCLUSIONS: In view of these results, we recommend that the search terms used should include both preferred and non-preferred terms (i.e. variant spellings and direct/indirect order of the same term) and associated MeSH and EMTREE terms, in order to develop highly-sensitive search strategies for systematic reviews.
Downloads
Referências
Brettle AJ, Long AF. Comparison of bibliographic databases for information on the rehabilitation of people with severe mental illness. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 2001;89(4):353-62.
Lopes IL. Estratégia de busca na recuperação da informação: revisão da literatura [Search strategy in information retrieval: literature review]. Ci Inf. 2002;31(2):60-71.
Aleixandre-Benavent R, González Alcaide G, González de Dios J, Alonso-Arroyo A. Fuentes de información bibliográfica (I). Fundamentos para la realización de búsquedas bibliográficas [Sources of bibliographic information. Rationale for conducting a literature search]. Acta Pediátrica Española. 2011;69(3):131-6. Available from: Available from: http://www.actapediatrica.com/index.php/secciones/formacion-e-informacion-en-pediatria/34-fuentes-de-informaci%C3%B3n-bibliogr%C3%A1fica-i-fundamentos-para-la-realizaci%C3%B3n-de-b%C3%BAsquedas-bibliogr%C3%A1ficas#.WcuyTMZv-Uk Accessed in 2017 (Sep 27).
Woods D, Trewheelar K. Medline and Embase complement each other in literature searches. BMJ. 1998;316(7138):1166.
Wilkins T, Gillies RA, Davies K. EMBASE versus MEDLINE for family medicine searches: can MEDLINE searches find the forest or a tree? Can Fam Physician. 2005;51:848-9.
Bai Y, Gao J, Zou D, Li Z. Is MEDLINE alone enough for a meta-analysis? Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2007;26(1):125-6; author reply 126.
Castro AA, Clark OA, Atallah AN. Optimal search strategy for clinical trials in the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Literature databases (LILACS). Sao Paulo Med J. 1997;115(3):1423-6.
Gehanno JF, Rollin L, Le Jean TL, et al. Precision and recall of search strategies for identifying studies on return-to-work in Medline. J Occup Rehabil. 2009;19(3):223-30.
Volpato ES, Betini M, El Dib R. Testing search strategies for systematic reviews in the Medline literature database through PubMed. J Eval Clin Pract. 2014;20(2):117-20.
U.S. National Library of Medicine. Unified Medical Language System® (UMLS®). Preferred terms. Available from: Available from: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/research/umls/new_users/online_learning/Meta_004.html Accessed in 2017 (Sep 27).
Ho GJ, Liew SM, Ng CJ, Hisham Shunmugam R, Glasziou P. Development of a Search Strategy for an Evidence Based Retrieval Service. PLoS One. 2016;11(12):e0167170.
Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care. How to develop a search strategy for an intervention review. Oxford: EPOC. Available from: Available from: http://epoc.cochrane.org/sites/epoc.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Resources-for-authors2017/how_to_develop_a_search_strategy.pdf Accessed in 2017 (Sep 27).
Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6. Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Available from: Available from: http://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/ Accessed in 2017 (Sep 27).
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
