Identifying diagnostic accuracy studies in EMBASE.

OBJECTIVE The objective was to develop and test search strategies to identify diagnostic articles recorded on EMBASE. METHODS Four general medical journals were hand searched for diagnostic accuracy studies published in 1999. Identified studies served as a gold standard. Candidate terms for search strategies were identified using a word-frequency analysis of their abstracts. According to the frequency of identified terms, searches were run for each term independently. Sensitivity, precision, and number needed to read (NNR) (1/precision) of every candidate term were calculated. Terms with the highest "sensitivity*precision" product were used as free-text terms and combined into a final strategy using the Boolean operator "OR." RESULTS The most frequently occurring eight terms (sensitiv* or detect* or accura* or specific* or reliab* or positive or negative or diagnos*) produced a sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.1 to 100%) and an NNR of 27 (95% CI 21.0 to 34.8). The combination of the two truncated terms sensitiv* or detect* gave a sensitivity of 73.8% (95% CI 60.9 to 84.2%) and an NNR of 5.7 (95% CI 4.4 to 7.6). CONCLUSIONS The identified search terms offer the choice of either reasonably sensitive or precise search strategies for the detection of diagnostic accuracy studies in EMBASE. The terms are useful both for busy health care professionals who value precision and for reviewers who value sensitivity.

[1]  P D Bezemer,et al.  Publications on diagnostic test evaluation in family medicine journals: an optimal search strategy. , 2000, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[2]  K A McKibbon,et al.  Beyond ACP Journal Club: how to harness MEDLINE for prognosis problems. , 1995, ACP journal club.

[3]  Carol Lefebvre,et al.  Identifying systematic reviews in MEDLINE: developing an objective approach to search strategy design , 1998, J. Inf. Sci..

[4]  R. Brian Haynes,et al.  Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in MEDLINE. , 1994, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA.

[5]  Jadad Ar,et al.  A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews. , 1993 .

[6]  R M Centor,et al.  THE ART AND SCIENCE OF SEARCHING MEDLINE TO ANSWER CLINICAL QUESTIONS Finding the Right Number of Articles , 1999, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[7]  K A McKibbon,et al.  Beyond ACP Journal Club: how to harness MEDLINE for diagnostic problems. , 1994, ACP journal club.

[8]  C. Lengeler,et al.  Language bias in randomised controlled trials published in English and German , 1997, The Lancet.

[9]  Frederick Mosteller,et al.  Guidelines for Meta-analyses Evaluating Diagnostic Tests , 1994, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[10]  A R Jadad,et al.  A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews. , 1993, The Online journal of current clinical trials.