Optimizing the literature search: coverage of included references in systematic reviews in Medline and Embase

被引:1
作者
Heintz, Marita [1 ]
Hval, Gyri [2 ]
Tornes, Ragnhild Agathe [1 ]
Byelyey, Nataliya [1 ]
Hafstad, Elisabet [2 ]
Naess, Gunn Eva [2 ]
Bakkeli, Miriam [1 ]
机构
[1] Norwegian Inst Publ Hlth, Dept Lib Serv, Oslo, Norway
[2] Norwegian Inst Publ Hlth, Div Hlth Serv, Oslo, Norway
关键词
Systematic reviews; literature search; databases; MEDLINE; Embase; cross-sectional study; DATABASES;
D O I
10.5195/jmla.2023.1482
中图分类号
G25 [图书馆学、图书馆事业]; G35 [情报学、情报工作];
学科分类号
1205 ; 120501 ;
摘要
Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate if the included references in a set of completed systematic reviews are indexed in Ovid MEDLINE and Ovid Embase, and how many references would be missed if we were to constrict our literature searches to one of these sources, or the two databases in combination.Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study where we searched for each included reference (n = 4,709) in 274 reviews produced by the Norwegian Institute of Public Health to find out if the references were indexed in the respective databases. The data was recorded in an Excel spreadsheet where we calculated the indexing rate. The reviews were sorted into eight categories to see if the indexing rate differs from subject to subject.Results: The indexing rate in MEDLINE (86.6%) was slightly lower than in Embase (88.2%). Without the MEDLINE records in Embase, the indexing rate in Embase was 71.8%. The highest indexing rate was achieved by combining both databases (90.2%). The indexing rate was highest in the category "Physical health -treatment" (97.4%). The category "Welfare" had the lowest indexing rate (58.9%).Conclusion: Our data reveals that 9.8% of the references are not indexed in either database. Furthermore, in 5% of the reviews, the indexing rate was 50% or lower.
引用
收藏
页码:599 / 605
页数:7
相关论文
共 19 条
  • [1] Berg RC., 2010, Psychological, Social and Sexual Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C): A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies
  • [2] Berg RC., 2014, Immediate Health Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)
  • [3] Berg RC., 2014, Gynecological Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C). Report from Kunnskapssenteret No. 11-2014
  • [4] Berg RC., 2010, Factors promoting and hindering the practice of female genital mutilation/cutting
  • [5] Berg RC., 2013, Obstetric Consequences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C)
  • [6] Folkehelseinstituttet, 2023, PUBL FHI
  • [7] Folkehelseinstituttet, 2018, SLIK OPPS VI FORSK H
  • [8] PubMed coverage varied across specialties and over time: a large-scale study of included studies in Cochrane reviews
    Frandsen, Tove Faber
    Eriksen, Mette Brandt
    Hammer, David Mortan Grone
    Christensen, Janne Buck
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2019, 112 : 59 - 66
  • [9] Using data sources beyond PubMed has a modest impact on the results of systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions
    Halladay, Christopher W.
    Trikalinos, Thomas A.
    Schmid, Ian T.
    Schmid, Christopher H.
    Dahabreh, Issa J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2015, 68 (09) : 1076 - 1084
  • [10] The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study
    Hartling, Lisa
    Featherstone, Robin
    Nuspl, Megan
    Shave, Kassi
    Dryden, Donna M.
    Vandermeer, Ben
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, 2016, 16