论文信息 - Consistency and accuracy of indexing systematic review articles and meta-analyses in medline.

Consistency and accuracy of indexing systematic review articles and meta-analyses in medline.

BACKGROUND Systematic review articles support the advance of science and translation of research evidence into healthcare practice. Inaccurate retrieval from medline could limit access to reviews. OBJECTIVE To determine the quality of indexing systematic reviews and meta-analyses in medline. METHODS The Clinical Hedges Database, containing the results of a hand search of 161 journals, was used to test medline indexing terms for their ability to retrieve systematic reviews that met predefined methodologic criteria (labelled as 'pass' review articles) and reviews that reported a meta-analysis. RESULTS The Clinical Hedges Database contained 49 028 articles; 753 were 'pass' review articles (552 with a meta-analysis). In total 758 review articles (independent of whether they passed) reported a meta-analysis. The search strategy that retrieved the highest number of 'pass' systematic reviews achieved a sensitivity of 97.1%. The publication type 'meta analysis' had a false positive rate of 5.6% (95% CI 3.9 to 7.6), and false negative rate of 0.31% (95% CI 0.26 to 0.36) for retrieving systematic reviews that reported a meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS Inaccuracies in indexing systematic reviews and meta-analyses in medline can be partly overcome by a 5-term search strategy. Introducing a publication type for systematic reviews of the literature could improve retrieval performance.

R Brian Haynes | Nancy L Wilczynski | R. Haynes | N. Wilczynski

[1] Lawrence E. Leonard,et al. Inter-Indexer Consistency and Retrieval Effectiveness: Measurement of Relationships , 1975 .

[2] Edward H. Shortliffe,et al. Development and evaluation of a context-based document representation for searching the medical literature , 1997, International Journal on Digital Libraries.

[3] C E Lipscomb,et al. Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). , 2000, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[4] et al.,et al. An overview of the design and methods for retrieving high-quality studies for clinical care , 2005, BMC Medical Informatics Decis. Mak..

[5] G. Guyatt,et al. Users' Guides to the Medical Literature: XXV. Evidence-based medicine: principles for applying the Users' Guides to patient care. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 2000, JAMA.

[6] M E Funk,et al. Indexing consistency in MEDLINE. , 1983, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[7] K. A. McKibbon,et al. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8] R. Haynes,et al. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9] Francesco Portaluppi,et al. Consistency and Accuracy of the Medical Subject Headings® Thesaurus for Electronic Indexing and Retrieval of Chronobiologic References , 2007, Chronobiology international.