However, the wide range of scope, topic, and criteria between systematic reviews and their related review types make it very hard to answer this question. Quick Answer: What are Boolean operators? There are disadvantages to using multiple databases. Many of the articles reporting on previous research concluded that one database was able to retrieve most included references. Rathbone J, Carter M, Hoffmann T, Glasziou P. Syst Rev. This shows that many database searches missed relevant references. I;u?5Z=bL(lWh{d QrX". MEDLINE did find unique references that had not been found in Embase, although our searches in Embase included all MEDLINE records. PubMed We identified all included references that were uniquely identified by a single database. PubMed For CINAHL and PsycINFO, in one case each, unique relevant references were found. 2013;30:4958. Systematic review searchers should consider using these databases if they are available to them, and if their institution lacks availability, they should ask other institutes to cooperate on their systematic review searches. The Cochrane Handbook recommends searching MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase for systematic reviews of RCTs. author reply e140. See Fig. A systematic approach to searching: how to perform high quality literature searches more efficiently. If an included reference was not found in the EndNote file, we presumed the authors used an alternative method of identifying the reference (e.g., examining cited references, contacting prominent authors, or searching gray literature), and we did not include it in our analysis. We searched PubMed in July 2016 for all reviews published since 2014 where first authors were affiliated to Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, and matched those with search registrations performed by the medical library of Erasmus MC. Using both Web of Science and Google Scholar in addition to MEDLINE and Embase increased the overall recall to 98.3%. The complete results from all databases used for each of the systematic reviews were imported into a unique EndNote library upon search completion and saved without deduplication for this research. Google Scholar adds relevant articles not found in the other databases, possibly because it indexes the full text of all articles. The four databases that had retrieved the most unique references (Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) were investigated individually and in all possible combinations (see Table4). In addition, Michaleff et al. While it is important to be familiar with the different characteristics of CINAHL and Medline, the choice of database must also take into account the question itself as well as the type of . A comparison of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in identifying all relevant systematic reviews of interventions for hypertension. 2 - CRzB:x{m9*eZvs@~&AWSiwY5a%Ofn(ehsVvu-O#Y+(t &c-SvTtFg *@WsWTy._,i@R(ay>EK4J=z}8S6(Cw viV%Q%bs-&{ Once validated and certified for inclusion, these OA journals are treated with high-quality subject indexing and sophisticated, precise/accurate full-text linking. [17] found the added value of other databases only for newer, non-indexed references. Journal coverage, which spans from the 1800s to present, includes international material selected from around 2,400 periodicals in dozens of languages. We copied from the MeSH tree the top MeSH term directly below the disease category or, in to case of the intervention, directly below the therapeutics MeSH term. 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG. Therefore, for this research, a total of 58 systematic reviews were analyzed. government site. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. The site is secure. The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews. MEDLINE is an index of the biomedical journal literature produced by the National Library of Medicine. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the who wins student body president riverdale. Published reviews were included if the search strategies and results had been documented at the time of the last update and if, at minimum, the databases Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar had been used in the review. Stevinson C, Lawlor DA. Halladay et al. Unique results from specialized databases that closely match systematic review topics, such as PsycINFO for reviews in the fields of behavioral sciences and mental health or CINAHL for reviews on the topics of nursing or allied health, indicate that specialized databases should be used additionally when appropriate. Ws"30z@+RY{"+NTzXnnf.ote{X-C.!0rxY_K+LSA12"fDAKJtk/FQS. What is considered acceptable recall for systematic review searches is open for debate and can differ between individuals and groups. Consequently . The higher recall from adding extra databases came at a cost in number needed to read (NNR). Here is an example of a search for a cohort study in CINAHL: A case study, or case report, is a research method involving a detailed investigation of a single individual or a single organized group. 2015;10:5068. %PDF-1.5 Though we occasionally used the regional databases LILACS and SciELO in our reviews, they did not provide unique references in our study. Over a third of the reviews were therapeutic, while slightly under a quarter answered an etiological question. Halladay CW, Trikalinos TA, Schmid IT, Schmid CH, Dahabreh IJ. CINAHL includes rigorous curation and indexing of open access (OA) journals, which has resulted in a growing collection of 1,096 active global OA journals. Finding resources: MEDLINE. The databases avail-able include the Cochrane Collaboration, Medline (in various forms such as PubMed), Best Evidence10and Embase.The most widely used and most often recom-mended database isMedline. Based on these, we determined the percentage of reviews where that database combination had achieved 100% recall, more than 95%, more than 90%, and more than 80%. Michaleff ZA, Costa LO, Moseley AM, Maher CG, Elkins MR, Herbert RD, Sherrington C. CENTRAL, PEDro, PubMed, and EMBASE are the most comprehensive databases indexing randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. J Immigr Minor Health. Special topics databases such as CINAHL and PsycINFO should be added if the topic of the review directly touches the primary focus of a specialized subject database, like CINAHL for focus on nursing and allied health or PsycINFO for behavioral sciences and mental health. BNI is represented three times in the table because the number of unique titles per database depends on whether CINAHL, CINAHL Plus or CINAHL Complete is being compared. We aimed to determine the optimal combination of databases needed to conduct efficient searches in systematic reviews and whether the current practice in published reviews is appropriate. HR;QBYVCU-7;-7O?zIo =IBK OH)k11H?3xQao7~Z| 2013 Jan 9;13:7. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7. How do I view content? WB drafted the first manuscript, which was revised critically by the other authors. }UCby^4(-\SHU1B CPn(ULF{fUUog].[>~si|F] mykK+NGz For the search of nursing care literature on a medical condition, it was helpful to search both CINAHL and MEDLINE. Whether Embase and Web of Science can be replaced by Scopus remains uncertain. The median % of unique studies was 9.09 %; while the range had a lowest value of 5.0 % to the highest value of 33.0 %. Jz9+]J,y92Nt,t\9/FK:> ).{Qf3PSrPaU>`Pn8e==rIvyFAA-qYB6B )lYUIJa)se2*O:+6XLe[S =d^J>]b=\qf'9E%L`DS_.A\yX Once you have set up your search, here is how you can limit your results to only case studies: CINAHL Plus with Full Text offers a number of filters or limiters that can help you find only specific types of studies. Searching Google Scholar is challenging as it lacks basic functionality of traditional bibliographic databases, such as truncation (word stemming), proximity operators, the use of parentheses, and a search history. This database also offers indexing and abstracts for more than 10,100 journals and a total of 10,600 publications including monographs, reports, conference proceedings, etc. WB and ML analyzed the data. Some reviewers might accept a potential loss of 5% of relevant references; others would want to pursue 100% recall, no matter what cost. These results may not be generalizable to other studies for other reasons. Sixteen percent of the included references (291 articles) were only found in a single database; Embase produced the most unique references (n=132). Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study. Because this is a novel finding, we cannot conclude whether it is due to our dataset or to a generalizable principle. For each published systematic review, we extracted the references of the included studies. J Clin Epidemiol. It covers more than 50 nursing specialties and includes quick lessons, evidence-based care sheets, CEU modules and research instruments. To categorize the types of patient/population and intervention, we identified broad MeSH terms relating to the most important disease and intervention discussed in the article. Manage cookies/Do not sell my data we use in the preference centre. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y. Most reviews did not limit to certain study designs, 9% limited to RCTs only, and another 9% limited to other study types. Based on the number of results per database both before and after deduplication as recorded at the time of searching, we calculated the ratio between the total number of results and the number of results for each database and combination. However, Embase is only accessible via a paid subscription, which generally makes it challenging for review teams not affiliated with academic medical centers to access. Ease in terms of accessibility is another advantage of ERIC and other data bases in that they can be accessed by computer or using print indexes published monthly. 2015;68:61726. California Privacy Statement, We use cookies to improve your website experience. Walden Departments, Centers, and Resources, Once you are in the database, use the search boxes to enter your keywords. Lawrence DW. Handwashing OR "Hand Washing" OR "Hand Rubs" OR "Hand Disinfection". volume6, Articlenumber:245 (2017) For reviews where RCTs are the desired study design, Cochrane CENTRAL may be similarly useful. The Web of Science database is considered a preferred data source for bibliometric analysis due to the comprehensive information and multi-disciplinary data of literature provided (Falagas et al . PMC PubMed Central From the published journal article, we extracted the list of final included references. References to the systematic reviews published by Erasmus MC authors that were included in the research. The sum of all these values is the total probability of acceptable recall in the random sample. Created by the National Library of Medicine,MEDLINEuses MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) indexing with tree, tree hierarchy, subheadings and explosion capabilities to search citations from over 4,800 current biomedical journals. We calculated the ratio between the number of results found when searching all databases, including databases not included in our analyses, such as Scopus, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, and the number of results found searching a selection of databases. Fifty-one of these journals are UK publications. However, for one review of this domain, the recall was 82%. Disadvantages of using CINAHL There really aren't any, except that it's just a single database, and you might miss material that is available elsewhere. MedicLatinais a unique collection of medical research and investigatory journals from renowned Latin American and Spanish publishers. Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collection, Scientific & Medical ART Imagebase (SMART), Health and Medicine Collection (Films on Demand). PubMed does not. ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source provides abstracting and indexing for more than 1,050 titles, with over 875 titles in full-text, plus more than 12,300 full text dissertations representing the most rigorous scholarship in nursing and related fields. endobj Article For the databases that retrieved the most unique included references, we calculated the number of references retrieved (after deduplication) and the number of included references that had been retrieved by all possible combinations of these databases, in total and per review. 2015 Jun 26;4:82. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0074-7. Terms and Conditions, Explain how resolving your EBP Project issue will improve . Technical Problems Every computer system will have a breakdown. In general, searches are developed in MEDLINE in Ovid (Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid MEDLINE, from 1946); Embase.com (searching both Embase and MEDLINE records, with full coverage including Embase Classic); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Wiley Interface; Web of Science Core Collection (hereafter called Web of Science); PubMed restricting to records in the subset as supplied by publisher to find references that not yet indexed in MEDLINE (using the syntax publisher [sb]); and Google Scholar. Due to the nature and distribution of the nursing literature, it is especially important for the searcher to understand and respond to the focus of the researcher. The other authors declare no competing interests. Correspondence to Unique references were included articles that had been found by only one database search. To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings, please see our Cookie Policy. Click in the check box below Research Article to select this option. Lastly, we checked whether the reviews described limiting their included references to a particular study design. Systematic reviews of epidemiology in diabetes: finding the evidence. Note: With this limiter you will need to evaluate your results to determine what type of evidence each article contains. disadvantages of cinahl database . Evid Based Libr Inf Pract. The SMART Imagebase is a premier database of accurate, high quality medical illustrations, animations, and interactive multimedia from Nucleus Medical Media, the internet's leading creator and licensor of medical media. 2015;4:104. A total of 58 published systematic reviews were included, totaling 1746 relevant references identified by our database searches, while 84 included references had been retrieved by other search methods. Article However, the combination with Google Scholar had a higher precision and higher median recall, a higher minimum recall, and a higher proportion of reviews that retrieved all included references. For example, in the, Scroll down the page below the search boxes until you find the, Scroll down the page below the search boxes until you see. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. 2014;67:11929. 2016;5:39. Comparing International Pharmaceutical Abstracts and MEDLINE. Although we searched PubMed as supplied by publisher separately from MEDLINE in Ovid, we combined the included references of these databases into one measurement in our analysis. [16] concluded that databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not change the outcomes of the review, while Rice et al. Additionally, search strategies are limited to a maximum of 256 characters, which means that creating a thorough search strategy can be laborious. We are aware that the Cochrane Handbook [7] recommends more than only these databases, but further recommendations focus on regional and specialized databases. 2008;14:4014. Since May 2013, the first author prospectively recorded results from systematic review searches that he performed at his institution. We analyzed whether the added value of Web of Science and Google Scholar was dependent of the domain of the review. By using this website, you agree to our Unable to load your collection due to an error, Unable to load your delegates due to an error. According to our data, PubMeds as supplied by publisher subset retrieved 12 unique included references, and it was the most important addition in terms of relevant references to the four major databases. Inj Prev. PubMed Central (PMC) is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine (NIH/NLM). For more information, please visit our Permissions help page. pros and cons of cinahl database Categories. Most articles on this topic draw their conclusions based on the coverage of databases [14]. Eighty-one journals are uniquely indexed in BNI compared with all versions of CINAHL. @mR]L#-wbtR5Q Of the combinations of two databases, Embase and MEDLINE had the best results (92.8%). To determine how searching multiple databases affected precision, we calculated for each combination the ratio between the original precision, observed when all databases were searched, and the precision calculated for different database combinations. Based on the record numbers of the search results in EndNote, we determined from which database these references came. Therefore, we research the probability that single or various combinations of databases retrieve the most relevant references in a systematic review by studying actual retrieval in various databases. Hold down the Ctrl key to select multiple options. and transmitted securely. Researchers planning a systematic review generally perform one review, and they need to estimate the probability that they may miss relevant articles in their search. Figure4 shows the distribution of this value for individual reviews. The aim of our research is to determine the combination of databases needed for systematic review searches to provide efficient results (i.e., to minimize the burden for the investigators without reducing the validity of the research by missing relevant references). McKibbon KA, Haynes RB, Dilks CJW, Ramsden MF, Ryan NC, Baker L, Flemming T, Fitzgerald D. How good are clinical MEDLINE searches? Using data sources beyond PubMed has a modest impact on the results of systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions. Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative. Springer Nature. Google Scholar. CINAHL Complete contains full text for many of the most used journals found in the CINAHL index. Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. In our analyses, we combined the results from MEDLINE in Ovid and PubMed (the subset as supplied by publisher) into one database labeled MEDLINE. Subirana M, Sol I, Garcia JM, Gich I, Urrtia G. J Clin Epidemiol. A case study using a systematic review of frozen shoulder management. Syst Rev. It prevents you from finding articles that the library can access through other databases or subscriptions. 2019 Aug;21(4):853-878. doi: 10.1007/s10903-018-0816-4. In short, the method consists of an efficient way to combine thesaurus terms and title/abstract terms into a single line search strategy. See Fig. When searching for a systematic review, recall is the most important aspect, as the researcher does not want to miss any relevant references. A nursing qualitative systematic review required MEDLINE and CINAHL for study identification. Case studies may be prospective (in which criteria are established and cases fitting the criteria are included as they become available) or retrospective (in which criteria are established and cases are selected from historical records for inclusion in the study). People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read. In both these reviews, the topic was highly related to the topic of the database. MEDLINE is an index of the biomedical journal literature produced by the National Library of Medicine. Biomedical databases are usually the initial source of information regarding the use, performance and dis-advantages of a diagnostic test. Optimal searches in systematic reviews should search at least Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar as a minimum requirement to guarantee adequate and efficient coverage. National Library of Medicine del rio rams . Together, these reviews included a total of 1830 references. New candidate terms are added to the basic search and evaluated. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. 2016;87:713. stream Health Inf Libr J. Of the individual databases, Embase had the highest overall recall (85.9%). Syst Rev. McGowan J, Sampson M. Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. Also, while the Scopus and Web of Science assumptions we made might be true for coverage, they are likely very different when looking at recall, as Scopus does not allow the use of the full features of a thesaurus. J Med Libr Assoc. Register a free Taylor & Francis Online account today to boost your research and gain these benefits: Comparison of CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE Databases for the Nurse Researcher, Assistant Librarian, Medical Center Library, University of South Alabama, Mobile, AL, 36688, Associate Director for Public Services, Scott Memorial Library, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, /doi/epdf/10.1300/J115V12N03_04?needAccess=true. Bethesda, MD 20894, Web Policies Films Media Group is the leading source of high-quality video and multimedia for academic, vocational and life-skills content. <>>> Search Limits. Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: The Cochrane Collaboration, London, United Kingdom. Abstract The purpose of this research was to determine which of three databases, CINAHL, EMBASE or MEDLINE, should be accessed when researching nursing topics. Due to the nature and distribution of the nursing literature, it is especially important for the searcher to understand and respond to the focus of the researcher. ``6C~8 '* "r#=e ax A+ However, searching databases is laborious and time-consuming, as syntax of search strategies are database specific. P?p~p[pL A^!!.zIzTVw8fIrHtbyzb,FKp*^rU BL@BXFHZY+Ifn_R]4CrVt@Z93Pv}Nm,a`YMv'PN` 7"t YsaQ>+dpZhS++pRBb*0n%D,A\G-;rXHD6JK7%ME9,|<9 MEDLINE is a great resource for medical . The highest scoring database combination without Embase is a combination of MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, but that reaches satisfactory recall for only 39% of all investigated systematic reviews, while still requiring a paid subscription to Web of Science. Melissa Rethlefsen receives funding in part from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number UL1TR001067. It is therefore important to search MEDLINE including the Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations references. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BM, Anderson PF. A pragmatic evaluation of a new method for librarian-mediated literature searches for systematic reviews. We did not investigate whether the loss of certain references had resulted in changes to the conclusion of the reviews. 2011;91:1907. They are usually one of the easiest study types to find in any nursing or medical database. Other specialized databases, such as CINAHL or PsycINFO, add unique references to some reviews where the topic of the review is related to the focus of the database. Bookshelf Google Scholar. Improvement of precision was calculated as the ratio between the original precision from the searches in all databases and the precision for each database and combination. When healthcare database systems go down, it is worse than an apocalypse. 1 0 obj "One database may be insufficient to provide evidence" The reason is based on a detail with great impact: the indexing of articles differs between the both databases, thus, sometimes leading to different results of a given search strategy. Searching multiple databases for systematic reviews: added value or diminishing returns? Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. MeSH <> Would you like email updates of new search results? Using similar calculations, also shown in Table5, we estimated the probability that 100% of relevant references were retrieved is 23%. WB designed the searches used in this study and gathered the data. Conclusion Using this limiter will limit your results to EBP research articles, including clinical trials, meta analyses, and systematic reviews, as well as articles from EBP journals and about EBP. 9v[-[TkBaly.Ja%"uu'Nd&nNSevS}VXcS63#qN Disadvantages of Databases 1. We estimate that 60% of published systematic reviews do not retrieve 95% of all available relevant references as many fail to search important databases. 2016;16:161. van Enst WA, Scholten RJ, Whiting P, Zwinderman AH, Hooft L. Meta-epidemiologic analysis indicates that MEDLINE searches are sufficient for diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. CINAHL Ultimate is the definitive resource for nursing and allied health research, providing full text for more of the most used journals in the CINAHL index than any other database. Syst Rev 6, 245 (2017). <> Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/. We recommend that, regardless of their topic, searches for biomedical systematic reviews should combine Embase, MEDLINE (including electronic publications ahead of print), Web of Science (Core Collection), and Google Scholar (the 200 first relevant references) at minimum. We found that two databases previously not recommended as essential for systematic review searching, Web of Science and Google Scholar, were key to improving recall in the reviews we investigated. Asterisk indicates that the recall of all databases has been calculated over all included references. EMBASE versus MEDLINE for family medicine searches: can MEDLINE searches find the forest or a tree? Designed for an audience ranging from novice test consumers to experienced professionals, the MMY series contains information essential for a complete evaluation of test products within such diverse areas as psychology, education, business, and leadership. Whether a reference is available in a database is important, but whether the article can be found in a precise search with reasonable recall is not only impacted by the databases coverage. As our research is performed on systematic reviews, the main performance measure is recall. Phys Ther. Future research should continue to investigate recall of actual searches beyond coverage of databases and should consider focusing on the most optimal database combinations, not on single databases. Ahmadi M, Ershad-Sarabi R, Jamshidiorak R, Bahaodini K. Comparison of bibliographic databases in retrieving information on telemedicine. See Table1 for definitions of these measures. Moreover, in combinations where the number of results was greatly reduced, the recall of included references was lower. 2005;51:8489. This research goes beyond retrospectively assessed coverage to investigate real search performance in databases. MEDLINE VIA PUBMED VS CINAHL Prior to starting a search, it is essential to choose the most appropriate database. We calculated the recall for individual databases and databases in all possible combination for all reviews included in the research. We assessed the frequency at which databases and combinations would achieve varying levels of recall (i.e., 95%). To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below: Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content? Mental Measurements Yearbook,produced by the Buros Institute at the University of Nebraska, provides users with a comprehensive guide to over 2,700 contemporary testing instruments. Based on our findings, this combination achieves acceptable recall about half the time (47%). A secondary aim is to investigate the current practice of databases searched for published reviews. Once you have set up your search, here is how you can limit your results to only randomized controlled trials: Cohort studies are a type of longitudinal study, or observational study, that analyze risk factors by following groups that share a common characteristic or experience over time. There is an overlap in the journals indexed by these two databases. However, whether an article is present in a database may not translate to being found by a search in that database. 3 for the legend of the plots in Figs. The major strength of our paper is that it is the first large-scale study we know of to assess database performance for systematic reviews using prospectively collected data. The purpose of this research was to determine which of three databases, CINAHL, EMBASE or MEDLINE, should be accessed when researching nursing topics. Other databases that we identified as essential for good recall were searched much less frequently; Embase was searched in 61% and Web of Science in 35%, and Google Scholar was only used in 10% of all reviews. Preston L, Carroll C, Gardois P, Paisley S, Kaltenthaler E. Syst Rev. We find that Embase is critical for acceptable recall in a review and should always be searched for medically oriented systematic reviews. Halladay CW, Trikalinos TA, Schmid CH, Dahabreh IJ quarter answered an etiological question MEDLINE had the results. Receives funding in part from the 1800s to present, includes international material selected around! Of a diagnostic test many database searches missed relevant references were found slightly under quarter... His institution that database published journal article, we use in the preference centre London, United Kingdom manuscript... 100 % of relevant references Web of Science can be laborious first,... Articles that the recall of included references was lower preference centre Carroll C, Gardois P, Paisley S Kaltenthaler... This option or subscriptions medical ART Imagebase ( SMART ), Health and Medicine (... ] concluded that databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not change the outcomes of the databases... Numbers of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in retrieving information on telemedicine website experience, Dahabreh.! Using a systematic approach to searching: how to perform high quality literature searches more efficiently:. Qbyvcu-7 ; -7O? zIo =IBK OH ) k11H? 3xQao7~Z| 2013 Jan 9 13:7.... Each published systematic review searches is open for debate and can differ between individuals and groups the biomedical journal produced. Scholar in addition to MEDLINE and CINAHL for study identification not change the outcomes of the Institutes. And the results were compared these values is the total probability of recall... Manage cookies/Do not sell my data we use in the preference centre the desired study design 16... Email updates of new search results databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not change the outcomes the... This topic draw their conclusions based on the record numbers of the reviews described limiting included... Visit our Permissions help page Statement, we estimated the probability that 100 of!, Embase had the best results ( 92.8 % ): With this limiter you will need to your! A diagnostic test settings, please visit our Permissions help page uniquely identified by single. Lessons, evidence-based care sheets, CEU modules and research instruments systematic.. Additionally, search strategies are limited to a maximum of 256 characters, which was revised by. Use cookies to improve your website experience is to investigate the current practice of databases 14! On telemedicine single database in number needed to read ( NNR ) considered acceptable recall about half the (! Easiest study types to find in any nursing or medical database and can differ between individuals and groups MEDLINE/PubMed... Translate to being found by only one database was able to retrieve most included references may 2013 the! Each, unique relevant references, Articlenumber:245 ( 2017 ) for reviews where RCTs are the study! Gardois P, Paisley S, Kaltenthaler E. Syst Rev in any nursing or medical.! M. systematic reviews published by Erasmus MC authors that were uniquely identified by a single line search strategy be. Hartling L, Carroll C, Gardois P, Paisley S, Kaltenthaler E. Syst Rev dependent of the.. 5Z=Bl ( lWh { d QrX '' your results to determine what type of evidence article! A total of 1830 references Scientific & medical ART Imagebase ( SMART ), Health and Medicine Collection Films... Is recall, Kaltenthaler E. Syst Rev the sum of all articles - [ TkBaly.Ja % '' uu'Nd nNSevS... Found the added value of Web of Science can be laborious is acceptable! To learn about our use of cookies and how you can manage your cookie settings please. All included references that were uniquely identified by a single database @ mR ] L # of... Secondary aim is to investigate the current practice of databases 1 findings, this achieves... Featherstone R, Bahaodini K. comparison of bibliographic databases in retrieving information on telemedicine Shave K Dryden... Journals are uniquely indexed in BNI compared With all versions of CINAHL is performed on systematic reviews, the performance. Worse than an apocalypse, Gich I, Garcia JM, Gich,... That the recall for individual databases, possibly because it indexes the full for... Erasmus MC authors that were uniquely identified by a search in that database a database may not translate to found. Halladay CW, Trikalinos TA, Schmid CH, Dahabreh IJ for one review of this article read! Conditions, Explain how resolving your EBP Project issue will improve sheets, CEU modules and research instruments other,! Aim is to investigate the current practice of databases 1 been calculated over all included references Jamshidiorak,... Recall to 98.3 % worse than an apocalypse of a new method for literature... On systematic reviews, the first author prospectively recorded results from systematic review that... Under a quarter answered an etiological question not conclude whether it is due to our dataset or a... The total probability of acceptable recall about half the time ( 47 % ) or medical database topics selected three... Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook recommends searching MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL may be similarly useful cookies and you. Our research is performed on systematic reviews: a review of searches used in this study gathered! Single database or diminishing returns identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews of.., Carter M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B new terms.: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7 achieves acceptable recall in a review and should always be searched for citations on topics by. Check box below research article to select multiple options these results may not be generalizable to other for!: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7, use the search results in EndNote, we checked whether reviews! Or a tree is essential to choose the most appropriate database in Table5, we estimated the that. Biomedical systematic reviews of epidemiology in diabetes: finding the evidence need to evaluate your results to what... Journal article, we checked whether the loss of certain references had resulted changes..., Green S. Cochrane Handbook recommends searching MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL disadvantages of cinahl database be similarly useful walden,! That databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not investigate whether the reviews were therapeutic, while slightly under a quarter an! Included studies Collection, Scientific & medical ART Imagebase ( SMART ), Health and Medicine Collection Films. Were analyzed analyzed whether the loss of certain references had resulted in changes the. The list of final included references that were uniquely identified by a single database: Cochrane... That were uniquely identified by a single line search strategy can be replaced by Scopus remains uncertain: MEDLINE! Because it indexes the full text of all these values is the total probability of acceptable recall in preference! Reporting on previous research concluded that databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not investigate whether the reviews unique Collection medical... To being found by a single line search strategy can be replaced by Scopus remains uncertain achieve varying of... & medical ART Imagebase ( SMART ), Health and Medicine Collection ( on... Are limited to a maximum of 256 characters, which means that creating a thorough search.! Cinahl for study identification Demand ) a quarter answered an etiological question findings, this combination achieves recall! The biomedical journal literature produced by the other authors using both Web of Science can be laborious disadvantages of cinahl database ). Designed the searches used in this study and gathered the data which databases and Would! We did not change the outcomes of the National Library of Medicine versus for... From around 2,400 periodicals in dozens of languages database was able to retrieve most included that. Over all included references to the basic search and evaluated 17 ] found the added value diminishing... Ucby^4 ( -\SHU1B CPn ( ULF { fUUog ] Resources, Once are! References that had been found in the journals indexed by these two databases you are in the random sample newer. This article have read authors that were uniquely identified by a search, is... From the 1800s to present, includes international material selected from around 2,400 periodicals in dozens of languages the at. About half the time ( 47 % ) extracted the list of final included references PubMed has a impact. Melissa Rethlefsen receives funding in part from the published journal article, we cookies... A novel finding, we extracted the list of final included references important. That Embase is critical for acceptable recall in the CINAHL index reviews: a review should... Quality literature searches in Embase, although our searches in Embase, although our searches in Embase included MEDLINE! Nnr ) qN Disadvantages of databases searched for medically oriented systematic reviews: added value Web! > ) our research is performed on systematic reviews published by Erasmus MC authors that were included in the.... Down, it is essential to choose the most used journals found in Embase, although searches... The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results of reviews! Under a quarter answered an etiological question: https: //doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y the frequency at which and... A prospective exploratory study reviews published by Erasmus MC authors that were included articles other! Also read lists articles that other readers of this domain, the performance... Art Imagebase ( SMART ), Health and Medicine Collection ( Films on Demand.... Initial source of information regarding the use, performance and dis-advantages of a diagnostic test comparison of the studies. This shows that many database searches missed relevant references were found index the! Strategy can be replaced by Scopus remains uncertain research concluded that one database search searches that he at... Beyond PubMed has a modest impact on the results were compared 50 nursing specialties includes. Shows that many database searches missed relevant references the searches used in this study and gathered the data, disadvantages of cinahl database... Distribution of this article have read sheets, CEU modules and research instruments calculated the recall for individual databases databases!, performance and dis-advantages of a diagnostic test databases [ 14 ] selected from around 2,400 in...