OBJECTIVE: Clinical Queries filters were developed to improve the retrieval of high-quality studies in searches on clinical matters. The study objective was to determine the yield of relevant citations and physician satisfaction while searching for diagnostic and treatment studies using the Clinical Queries page of PubMed compared with searching PubMed without these filters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty practicing physicians, presented with standardized treatment and diagnosis questions and one question of their choosing, entered search terms which were processed in a random, blinded fashion through PubMed alone and PubMed Clinical Queries. Participants rated search retrievals for applicability to the question at hand and satisfaction. RESULTS: For treatment, the primary outcome of retrieval of relevant articles was not significantly different between the groups, but a higher proportion of articles from the Clinical Queries searches met methodologic criteria (p=0.049), and more articles were published in core internal medicine journals (p=0.056). For diagnosis, the filtered results returned more relevant articles (p=0.031) and fewer irrelevant articles (overall retrieval less, p=0.023); participants needed to screen fewer articles before arriving at the first relevant citation (p<0.05). Relevance was also influenced by content terms used by participants in searching. Participants varied greatly in their search performance. DISCUSSION: Clinical Queries filtered searches returned more high-quality studies, though the retrieval of relevant articles was only statistically different between the groups for diagnosis questions. CONCLUSION: Retrieving clinically important research studies from Medline is a challenging task for physicians. Methodological search filters can improve search retrieval.
OBJECTIVE: Clinical Queries filters were developed to improve the retrieval of high-quality studies in searches on clinical matters. The study objective was to determine the yield of relevant citations and physician satisfaction while searching for diagnostic and treatment studies using the Clinical Queries page of PubMed compared with searching PubMed without these filters. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty practicing physicians, presented with standardized treatment and diagnosis questions and one question of their choosing, entered search terms which were processed in a random, blinded fashion through PubMed alone and PubMed Clinical Queries. Participants rated search retrievals for applicability to the question at hand and satisfaction. RESULTS: For treatment, the primary outcome of retrieval of relevant articles was not significantly different between the groups, but a higher proportion of articles from the Clinical Queries searches met methodologic criteria (p=0.049), and more articles were published in core internal medicine journals (p=0.056). For diagnosis, the filtered results returned more relevant articles (p=0.031) and fewer irrelevant articles (overall retrieval less, p=0.023); participants needed to screen fewer articles before arriving at the first relevant citation (p<0.05). Relevance was also influenced by content terms used by participants in searching. Participants varied greatly in their search performance. DISCUSSION: Clinical Queries filtered searches returned more high-quality studies, though the retrieval of relevant articles was only statistically different between the groups for diagnosis questions. CONCLUSION: Retrieving clinically important research studies from Medline is a challenging task for physicians. Methodological search filters can improve search retrieval.
Authors: William R Hersh; M Katherine Crabtree; David H Hickam; Lynetta Sacherek; Charles P Friedman; Patricia Tidmarsh; Craig Mosbaek; Dale Kraemer Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2002 May-Jun Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Farah Magrabi; Enrico W Coiera; Johanna I Westbrook; A Sophie Gosling; Victor Vickland Journal: Int J Med Inform Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 4.046
Authors: Kathleen Ann McKibbon; Cynthia Lokker; Arun Keepanasseril; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2013-11-08 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Sebastian Ziemann; Irina Paetzolt; Linda Grüßer; Mark Coburn; Rolf Rossaint; Ana Kowark Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2022-01-20 Impact factor: 4.615