Improving search efficiency for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy: An exploratory study to assess the viability of limiting to MEDLINE, EMBASE and reference checking

被引：21

作者：

Preston L. ^{[1
]}

Carroll C. ^{[1
]}

Gardois P. ^{[2
]}

Paisley S. ^{[1
]}

Kaltenthaler E. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] University of Sheffield, School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), Sheffield

[2] University of Turin, Department of Public Health and Pediatrics, Piazza Polonia, 94, Turin

来源：

Systematic Reviews | / 4卷 / 1期

关键词：

Diagnostic test accuracy; EMBASE; Health Technology Assessment; Literature searching; MEDLINE; Systematic reviews;

D O I：

10.1186/s13643-015-0074-7

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: Increasing numbers of systematic reviews evaluating the diagnostic test accuracy of technologies are being published. Currently, review teams tend to apply conventional systematic review standards to identify relevant studies for inclusion, for example sensitive searches of multiple bibliographic databases. There has been little evaluation of the efficiency of searching only one or two such databases for this type of review. The aim of this study was to assess the viability of an approach that restricted searches to MEDLINE, EMBASE and the reference lists of included studies. Methods: A convenience sample of nine Health Technology Assessment (HTA) systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, with 302 included citations, was analysed to determine the number and proportion of included citations that were indexed in and retrieved from MEDLINE and EMBASE. An assessment was also made of the number and proportion of citations not retrieved from these databases but that could have been identified from the reference lists of included citations. Results: 287/302 (95%) of the included citations in the nine reviews were indexed across MEDLINE and EMBASE. The reviews' searches of MEDLINE and EMBASE accounted for 85% of the included citations (256/302). Of the forty-six (15%) included citations not retrieved by the published searches, 24 (8%) could be found in the reference lists of included citations. Only 22/302 (7%) of the included citations were not found by the proposed, more efficient approach. Conclusions: The proposed approach would have accounted for 280/302 (93%) of included citations in this sample of nine systematic reviews. This exploratory study suggests that there might be a case for restricting searches for systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy studies to MEDLINE, EMBASE and the reference lists of included citations. The conduct of such reviews might be rendered more efficient by using this approach. © 2015 Preston et al.

引用

共 25 条

[1]

Report on pilot project on the assessment of non-invasive diagnostic assessment tools for the detection of liver fibrosis in patients with suspected alcohol related liver disease, (2011)

[2]

Diagnostics Assessment Programme manual, (2011)

[3]

Whiting P., Rutjes A.W., Westwood M., Mallett S., Deeks J.J., Reitsma J.B., Et al., QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies, Ann Intern Med, 155, pp. 529-536, (2011)

[4]

Leeflang M., Deeks J.J., Gatsonis C., Bossuyt P., Cochrane Diagnostic Test Accuracy Working Group. Systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy, Ann Intern Med, 149, pp. 889-897, (2008)

[5]

Holmes M., Rathbone J., Littlewood C., Rawdin A., Stevenson M., Stevens J.W., Et al., Routine echocardiography in the management of stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA): a systematic review and an economic evaluation, Health Technol Assess, 18, 16, pp. 1-176, (2014)

[6]

de Vet H.C.W., Eisinga A., Riphagen I.I., Aertgeerts B., Pewsner D., Chapter 7: Searching for Studies, (2008)

[7]

Beyer F., Wright K., Can we prioritise which databases to search? A case study using a systematic review of frozen shoulder management, Health Info Lib J, 30, pp. 49-58, (2012)

[8]

Booth A., How much searching is enough? Comprehensive versus optimal retrieval for technology assessments, Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 26, pp. 431-435, (2010)

[9]

Egger M., Juni P., Bartlett C., Holenstein F., Sterne J., How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study, Health Technol Assess, 7, 1, pp. 1-76, (2003)

[10]

Van Enst W.A., Scholten R.J.P.M., Hooft L., Could a search for a diagnostic test accuracy review be restricted to MEDLINE?, Madrid: Cochrane Colloquium, (2011)

← 1 2 3 →