Literature DB >> 23019242

MEDLINE clinical queries are robust when searching in recent publishing years.

Nancy L Wilczynski1, K Ann McKibbon, Stephen D Walter, Amit X Garg, R Brian Haynes.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE clinical queries (which were developed in the publishing year 2000, for the purpose categories therapy, diagnosis, prognosis, etiology, and clinical prediction guides) perform as well when searching in current publishing years.
METHODS: A gold standard database of recently published research literature was created using the McMaster health knowledge refinery (http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/HIRU_McMaster_HKR.aspx) and its continuously updated database, McMaster PLUS (http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/HIRU_McMaster_PLUS_projects.aspx). This database contains articles from over 120 clinical journals that are tagged for meeting or not meeting criteria for scientific merit and clinical relevance. The clinical queries sensitive ('broad') and specific ('narrow') search filters were tested in this gold standard database, and sensitivity and specificity were calculated and compared with those originally reported for the clinical queries.
RESULTS: In all cases, the sensitivity of the highly sensitive search filters and the specificity of the highly specific search filters did not differ substantively when comparing results derived in 2000 with those derived in a more current database. In addition, in all cases, the specificities for the highly sensitive search filters and the sensitivities for the highly specific search filters remained above 50% when testing them in the current database. DISCUSSION: These results are reassuring for modern-day searchers. The clinical queries that were derived in the year 2000 perform equally well a decade later.
CONCLUSION: The PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE clinical queries have been revalidated and remain a useful public resource for searching the world's medical literature for research that is most relevant to clinical care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23019242      PMCID: PMC3638187          DOI: 10.1136/amiajnl-2012-001075

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc        ISSN: 1067-5027            Impact factor:   4.497


  16 in total

1.  Do clinicians use online evidence to support patient care? A study of 55,000 clinicians.

Authors:  Johanna I Westbrook; A Sophie Gosling; Enrico Coiera
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2003-12-07       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound causation studies in MEDLINE.

Authors:  Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2003

3.  Developing optimal search strategies for detecting sound clinical prediction studies in MEDLINE.

Authors:  Sharon S -L Wong; Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes; Ravi Ramkissoonsingh
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2003

4.  Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of diagnosis from Medline: analytical survey.

Authors:  R Brian Haynes; Nancy L Wilczynski
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-04-08

5.  Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey.

Authors:  R Brian Haynes; K Ann McKibbon; Nancy L Wilczynski; Stephen D Walter; Stephen R Werre
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-05-13

6.  MEDLINE as a source of just-in-time answers to clinical questions.

Authors:  Dina Demner-Fushman; Susan E Hauser; Susanne M Humphrey; Glenn M Ford; Joshua L Jacobs; George R Thoma
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2006

7.  Family medicine patients' use of the Internet for health information: a MetroNet study.

Authors:  Kendra L Schwartz; Thomas Roe; Justin Northrup; James Meza; Raouf Seifeldin; Anne Victoria Neale
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2006 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.657

Review 8.  Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative.

Authors:  Patrick M Bossuyt; Johannes B Reitsma; David E Bruns; Constantine A Gatsonis; Paul P Glasziou; Les M Irwig; Jeroen G Lijmer; David Moher; Drummond Rennie; Henrica C W de Vet
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-01-04

9.  How do consumers search for and appraise information on medicines on the Internet? A qualitative study using focus groups.

Authors:  Geraldine Peterson; Parisa Aslani; Kylie A Williams
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2003-12-19       Impact factor: 5.428

10.  Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey.

Authors:  Nancy L Wilczynski; R Brian Haynes
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 8.775

View more
  25 in total

1.  Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to perform a high-quality literature search.

Authors:  Daniel Waltho; Manraj Nirmal Kaur; R Brian Haynes; Forough Farrokhyar; Achilleas Thoma
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.089

2.  Building a gold standard to construct search filters: a case study with biomarkers for oral cancer.

Authors:  John J Frazier; Corey D Stein; Eugene Tseytlin; Tanja Bekhuis
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2015-01

3.  Feasibility of Extracting Key Elements from ClinicalTrials.gov to Support Clinicians' Patient Care Decisions.

Authors:  Heejun Kim; Jiantao Bian; Javed Mostafa; Siddhartha Jonnalagadda; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2017-02-10

4.  Mining MEDLINE for problems associated with vitamin D.

Authors:  Dina Demner-Fushman; James G Mork; Alan R Aronson
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2013-11-16

5.  Automatic identification of high impact articles in PubMed to support clinical decision making.

Authors:  Jiantao Bian; Mohammad Amin Morid; Siddhartha Jonnalagadda; Gang Luo; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2017-07-26       Impact factor: 6.317

6.  Automatic identification of recent high impact clinical articles in PubMed to support clinical decision making using time-agnostic features.

Authors:  Jiantao Bian; Samir Abdelrahman; Jianlin Shi; Guilherme Del Fiol
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2018-11-22       Impact factor: 6.317

Review 7.  Prognostic factors for outcome following lumbar spine fusion surgery: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

Authors:  Retze J Achttien; Andrew Powell; Konstantinos Zoulas; J Bart Staal; Alison Rushton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-10-27       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Aducanumab Use in Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease Evidence in Focus: A Report of the AAN Guidelines Subcommittee.

Authors:  Gregory S Day; Nikolaos Scarmeas; Richard Dubinsky; Katherine Coerver; Anitra Mostacero; Brooks West; Scott R Wessels; Melissa J Armstrong
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2022-02-23       Impact factor: 11.800

Review 9.  Low-dose corticosteroids for adult patients with septic shock: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

Authors:  Sofie Louise Rygård; Ethan Butler; Anders Granholm; Morten Hylander Møller; Jeremy Cohen; Simon Finfer; Anders Perner; John Myburgh; Balasubramanian Venkatesh; Anthony Delaney
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Optimizing a literature surveillance strategy to retrieve sound overall prognosis and risk assessment model papers.

Authors:  Patricia L Kavanagh; Francine Frater; Tamara Navarro; Peter LaVita; Rick Parrish; Alfonso Iorio
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-03-18       Impact factor: 4.497

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.