Literature DB >> 10616135

Identifying randomized controlled trials of cognitive therapy for depression: comparing the efficiency of Embase, Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic databases.

R J Watson1, P H Richardson.   

Abstract

This study sought to compare the sensitivity and precision of Embase, Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic database searches for randomized controlled trials of cognitive therapy for depression. Searches in each database combined with a hand search in five selected journals formed the total pool against which each search was assessed. Sensitivities of standard searches (index terms only) were 68%, 84% and 38% in Embase, Medline and PsycINFO respectively. Sensitivities of expert searches (index and free text terms) were 76%, 97% and 65% for Embase, Medline and PsycINFO respectively. Medline appears to be the most efficient at identifying articles describing psychological treatment evaluation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10616135     DOI: 10.1348/000711299160220

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Med Psychol        ISSN: 0007-1129


  15 in total

1.  Comparison of Medical Subject Headings and text-word searches in MEDLINE to retrieve studies on sleep in healthy individuals.

Authors:  Elizabeth S Jenuwine; Judith A Floyd
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2004-07

2.  EMBASE versus MEDLINE for family medicine searches: can MEDLINE searches find the forest or a tree?

Authors:  Thad Wilkins; Ralph A Gillies; Kathy Davies
Journal:  Can Fam Physician       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.275

3.  PsycINFO search strategies identified methodologically sound therapy studies and review articles for use by clinicians and researchers.

Authors:  Angela May Eady; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  Precision and recall of search strategies for identifying studies on return-to-work in Medline.

Authors:  Jean-François Gehanno; Laetitia Rollin; Tony Le Jean; Alexandre Louvel; Stefan Darmoni; William Shaw
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2009-04-21

Review 5.  Which resources should be used to identify RCT/CCTs for systematic reviews: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ellen T Crumley; Natasha Wiebe; Kristie Cramer; Terry P Klassen; Lisa Hartling
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2005-08-10       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  Identifying observational studies of surgical interventions in MEDLINE and EMBASE.

Authors:  Cynthia Fraser; Alison Murray; Jennifer Burr
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2006-08-18       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Optimal search strategies for identifying sound clinical prediction studies in EMBASE.

Authors:  Jennifer L Holland; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2005-04-29       Impact factor: 2.796

Review 8.  Should methodological filters for diagnostic test accuracy studies be used in systematic reviews of psychometric instruments? A case study involving screening for postnatal depression.

Authors:  Rachel Mann; Simon M Gilbody
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2012-02-09

9.  Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews.

Authors:  Jean-François Gehanno; Laetitia Rollin; Stefan Darmoni
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2013-01-09       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  Enhancing access to reports of randomized trials published world-wide--the contribution of EMBASE records to the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library.

Authors:  Carol Lefebvre; Anne Eisinga; Steve McDonald; Nina Paul
Journal:  Emerg Themes Epidemiol       Date:  2008-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.