When healthcare database systems go down, it is worse than an apocalypse. Starting with the most recent articles, we determined the databases searched either from the abstract or from the full text until we had data for 200 reviews. It covers more than 50 nursing specialties and includes quick lessons, evidence-based care sheets, CEU modules and research instruments. Using both Web of Science and Google Scholar in addition to MEDLINE and Embase increased the overall recall to 98.3%. Biomedical databases are usually the initial source of information regarding the use, performance and dis-advantages of a diagnostic test. Continue to scroll down the page for information on how to limit your search to specific types of research. kON0=ArP35x`*[r(DYVBa9BJ2w\LueOJ=i.dR;mmP/P Of the 11 references included in this review, one was found only in Google Scholar and one only in Web of Science. Disadvantages of Databases 1. Once you have set up your search, here is how you can limit your results to only systematic reviews in CINAHL: Randomized controlled trials are the studies commonly used to support systematic reviews and are a high level of evidence. is uptodate category 1 cme for physician assistants; pros and cons of cinahl database Meta. However, searching databases is laborious and time-consuming, as syntax of search strategies are database specific. 2008;39:e139. J Clin Epidemiol. We find that Embase is critical for acceptable recall in a review and should always be searched for medically oriented systematic reviews. Perfect for researchers at all levels, this comprehensive consumer health resource provides authoritative information on the full range of health-related issues, from current disease and disorder information to in-depth coverage of alternative medical practices. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. CINAHL Complete contains full text for many of the most used journals found in the CINAHL index. (DOCX 19kb). 4 0 obj Complement Ther Med. We analyzed whether the added value of Web of Science and Google Scholar was dependent of the domain of the review. Because these studies based on retrospective analysis of database coverage do not account for the searchers abilities, the actual findings from the searches performed, and the indexing for particular articles, their conclusions lack immediate translatability into practice. Kr Mo@h(fW"\x| Tu?g n=~?@(wg 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. PubMed Central 2019 Aug;21(4):853-878. doi: 10.1007/s10903-018-0816-4. It is therefore important to search MEDLINE including the Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations references. MedicLatinais a unique collection of medical research and investigatory journals from renowned Latin American and Spanish publishers. "N` ;:"Z,Ov;s90yz` x:Na|8{4Bl9fxbRZk96L.00t4+a6.dx8Uc*$Ea=KhIn+4Byp0>*Wu$(3}sd6[J6\Lx%U Bramer WM, de Jonge GB, Rethlefsen ML, Mast F, Kleijnen J. Table3 displays the number of unique results retrieved for each single database. Register to receive personalised research and resources by email. An overview of the broad topical categories covered in these reviews is given in Table2. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. In short, the method consists of an efficient way to combine thesaurus terms and title/abstract terms into a single line search strategy. 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. Many of the articles reporting on previous research concluded that one database was able to retrieve most included references. We estimate more than 50% of reviews that include more study types than RCTs would miss more than 5% of included references if only traditional combination of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTAL is searched. Registered in England & Wales No. There is an overlap in the journals indexed by these two databases. 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. We selected the domain from a pre-defined set of broad domains, including therapy, etiology, epidemiology, diagnosis, management, and prognosis. Subject-specific databases such as CINAHL, PsycINFO, and SportDiscus only retrieved additional included references when the topic of the review was directly related to their special content, respectively nursing, psychiatry, and sports medicine. The information specialists of Erasmus MC developed an efficient method that helps them perform searches in many databases in a much shorter time than other methods. 2006 Jul;59(7):710-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.013. Quick Answer: What are Boolean operators? Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. BMC Med Res Methodol. This Spanish language database contains full text for 130 peer-reviewed medical journals in native Spanish. Cochrane CENTRAL is absent from the table, as for the five reviews limited to randomized trials, it did not add any unique included references. When the number of references from other databases was low, we expected the total number of potential relevant references to be low. The references to these reviews can be found in Additional file 1. Based on these calculations, we estimate that the probability that this random set of reviews retrieved more than 95% of all possible included references was 40%. Systematic Reviews disadvantages of cinahl database . For a search related to nursing, . MEDLINE is a great resource for medical . endobj Where should the pharmacy researcher look first? This method of literature searching and a pragmatic evaluation thereof are published in separate journal articles [21, 22]. Even when taking into account that many searchers consider the use of Scopus as a replacement of Embase, plus taking into account the large overlap of Scopus and Web of Science, this estimate remains similar. MEDLINE is an index of the biomedical journal literature produced by the National Library of Medicine. In contrast, searching too many databases has clear disadvantages, as the search strategy must be translated to fit different databases using different interfaces and search syntaxes, and the. While previous studies determined the coverage of databases, we analyzed the actual retrieval from the original searches for systematic reviews. Many of the reviews were initiated by members of the departments of surgery and epidemiology. PubMed Of the five reviews that included only RCTs, four reached 100% recall if MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar combined were complemented with Cochrane CENTRAL. how to send secure email attachments in gmail. In Excel, we calculated the performance of each individual database and various combinations. Phys Ther. Asterisk indicates that the recall of all databases has been calculated over all included references. Correspondence to Subject-specific databases like PsycINFO only added unique references to a small percentage of systematic reviews when they had been used for the search. The ratio between number of results per database combination and the total number of results for all databases, The ratio between precision per database combination and the total precision for all databases. In 12 reviews (52%), Scopus retrieved 100% of all included references retrieved by Embase or Web of Science. There are also fewer of them, and they can be harder to find. government site. J Clin Epidemiol. 0_!g3SR}W/galG/g)Wz37;467WfW_E\wf_Q"#H3)j\]'gr[ ~dFq @Xj7yfC pOYAnaKruN" VI$wkD F\+ Fd7[)g `xBI@Oj Ross-White A, Godfrey C. Is there an optimum number needed to retrieve to justify inclusion of a database in a systematic review search? On 5 January 2017, we searched PubMed for articles with the phrase systematic review in the title. Are included references being missed because the review authors failed to search a certain database? 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. The SMART Imagebase is a unique, educational resource for students, educators, library patrons, and professionals in healthcare and news media. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. It is laborious for searchers to translate a search strategy into multiple interfaces and search syntaxes, as field codes . Nursing: Indexes & Databases. These are mostly unique PubMed references, which are not assigned MeSH terms, and are often freely available via PubMed Central. A researcher wants to be able to estimate the chances that his or her current project will miss a relevant reference. del rio rams . For the search of nursing care literature on a medical condition, it was helpful to search both CINAHL and MEDLINE. WB designed the searches used in this study and gathered the data. Springer Nature. Objective: To review the literature on the benefits and disadvantages of clinical and medical audit, and to assess the main facilitators and barriers to conducting the audit process. <>>> Differences in thesaurus terms between databases add another significant burden for translation. 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. Note: Putting quotation marks around phrases tells the database to search for these words as a phrase and not as individual words. The database itself is unfiltered, but includes many filtered items like systematic reviews. 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. Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Mast F, Kleijnen J. Nearly 5,000 journals are read and their individual articles indexed and added to the MEDLINE database, which contains information about over 12 million journal articles. PubMedGoogle Scholar. 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 We calculated the recall for individual databases and databases in all possible combination for all reviews included in the research. [10] and van Enst et al. Some reviewers might accept a potential loss of 5% of relevant references; others would want to pursue 100% recall, no matter what cost. Database designers and developers, the data and database administrators and end-users must understand this functionality to take full advantage of it. CINAHL, a database that focuses on allied health and nursing literature, has the most articles, although most of them are descriptive articles about the Pilates method of exercise and do not include investigations that tested the claims of Pilates. Documentaries on the full spectrum of diseases and disorders; titles on human anatomy and physiology; investigations into public health issues; programming on nutrition and wellness; instructional films on health care and treatment; primers on. Posted on 16 December 2021 - 7:39 pm by . Preston L, Carroll C, Gardois P, Paisley S, Kaltenthaler E. Syst Rev. andy gibb last interview. ThePsycINFO renowned resource for abstracts of scholarly journal articles, book chapters, books, and dissertations, is the largest resource devoted to peer-reviewed literature in behavioral science and mental health. 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. However, for one review of this domain, the recall was 82%. Furthermore, it is time-consuming for reviewers who have to screen more, and likely irrelevant, titles and abstracts. FOIA This database is updated daily and features searchable PDF content going back as far as 1887. The interventions were mostly from the chemicals and drugs category, or surgical procedures. Wilkins T, Gillies RA, Davies K. EMBASE versus MEDLINE for family medicine searches: can MEDLINE searches find the forest or a tree? However, whether an article is present in a database may not translate to being found by a search in that database. PubMed 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. 2. 2015 Jun 26;4:82. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0074-7. PubMed See Table1 for definitions of these measures. 2005;51:8489. Did you know that with a free Taylor & Francis Online account you can gain access to the following benefits? Using similar calculations, also shown in Table5, we estimated the probability that 100% of relevant references were retrieved is 23%. McGowan J, Sampson M. Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. Complexity The provision of the functionality we expect of a good DBMS makes the DBMS an extremely complex piece of software. pros and cons of cinahl database Categories. Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. Cookies policy. 2016 Feb 9;5:27. doi: 10.1186/s13643-016-0197-5. If Erasmus MC authors had conducted more reviews that included only RCTs, Cochrane CENTRAL might have added more unique references. Searching only Embase produced an NNR of 57 on average, whereas, for the optimal combination of four databases, the NNR was 73. Most of the previous studies did not include these two databases in their research. 2013;30:4958. 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. In addition to journal articles, CINAHL includes books, book chapters, dissertations, and computer programs. The .gov means its official. For all individual reviews, we determined the median recall, the minimum recall, and the percentage of reviews for which each single database or combination retrieved 100% recall. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 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. 1990;23:58393. 2018. [16] concluded that databases other than MEDLINE/PubMed did not change the outcomes of the review, while Rice et al. Google Scholar. Abbreviations: EM Embase, ML MEDLINE, WoS Web of Science, GS Google Scholar. Disclaimer. For the search of nursing care literature on a medical condition, it was helpful to search both CINAHL and MEDLINE. 9v[-[TkBaly.Ja%"uu'Nd&nNSevS}VXcS63#qN The database includes all charts, diagrams, graphs, tables, photos, and other graphical elements essential to medical research. NOTE There are many limiters that we haven't covered. MEDLINE did find unique references that had not been found in Embase, although our searches in Embase included all MEDLINE records. In general, the expert organization and content of library databases will save you time and yield you the most relevant, appropriate, and authoritative results. For example, around a third of the reviews (37%) relied on the combination of MEDLINE and Embase. A review of meta-analyses. ``6C~8 '* "r#=e ax A+ In 72% of studied systematic reviews, the combination of Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar retrieved all included references. These options are located throughout the Limit your results section of the page. A multi-disciplinary database, with more than 6,100 full-text periodicals, including more than 5,100 peer-reviewed journals. Ahmadi M, Ershad-Sarabi R, Jamshidiorak R, Bahaodini K. Comparison of bibliographic databases in retrieving information on telemedicine. ?lq!9!OW$2w1tp=/0 0aPz6Kx|M}97_jn{oy0@o65I>KrjPov= D@H?z`. Of course, the loss of a minor non-randomized included study that follows the systematic reviews conclusions would not be as problematic as losing a major included randomized controlled trial with contradictory results. BMC Med Res Methodol. Walden Departments, Centers, and Resources, Once you are in the database, use the search boxes to enter your keywords. Google Scholar. For four out of five systematic reviews that limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, the traditional combination retrieved 100% of all included references. Percentage of systematic reviews for which a certain database combination reached a certain recall. It is likely caused by difference in thesaurus terms that were added, but further analysis would be required to determine reasons for not finding the MEDLINE records in Embase. 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. It is likely that topical differences in systematic reviews may impact whether databases such as Web of Science and Google Scholar add value to the review. WB has received travel allowance from Embase for giving a presentation at a conference. The Cochrane Handbook, for example, recommends the use of at least MEDLINE and Cochrane Central and, when available, Embase for identifying reports of randomized controlled trials [7]. The recall of the database combinations was calculated over all included references retrieved by any database. Since May 2013, the first author prospectively recorded results from systematic review searches that he performed at his institution. To learn more about Boolean operators, please see this Quick Answer: Here is an example of how to put together a complex search in CINAHL: Note: If you have not already logged in to the Library databases, you will be prompted to log in with your myWalden Portal user name and password. The purpose of this research was to determine which of three databases, CINAHL, EMBASE or MEDLINE, should be accessed when researching nursing topics. Scroll down the page below the search boxes to locate these filters or limiters. A total of 292 (17%) references were found by only one database. PubMed was used to identify systematic reviews published using our search strategy results. Halladay et al. Our conclusion that Web of Science and Google Scholar are needed for completeness has not been shared by previous research. 2014;67:11929. For the search of nursing care literature on a medical condition, it . There are disadvantages to using multiple databases. The X-axis represents the percentage of reviews for which a specific combination of databases, as shown on the y-axis, reached a certain recall (represented with bar colors). For reviews where RCTs are the desired study design, Cochrane CENTRAL may be similarly useful. 4 and 5. 2015;4:104. Our study shows that, to reach maximum recall, searches in systematic reviews ought to include a combination of databases. J Clin Epidemiol. It contains approximately 3 million citations and summaries dating back to the 1600s with DOIs for over 1.4 million records. Wright K, Golder S, Lewis-Light K. What value is the CINAHL database when searching for systematic reviews of qualitative studies? https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y. Lorenzetti DL, Topfer L-A, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than MEDLINE for rapid health technology assessments. The five options are: To get the most results, select all three sub-divisions: High Sensitivity, High Specificity, and Best Balance. 2 for the comparison of the recall of Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane CENTRAL per review for all identified domains. statement and 2016;16:113. Of the combinations of two databases, Embase and MEDLINE had the best results (92.8%). Beginning in May 2013, the number of records retrieved from each search for each database was recorded at the moment of searching. ; ; The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews. This search is then optimized. Nursing & Allied Health SourceTM provides users with reliable healthcare information covering nursing, allied health, alternative and complementary medicine. We identified all included references that were uniquely identified by a single database. One hundred and fifty-nine journals are uniquely indexed in BNI compared with the basic version of CINAHL. Would you like email updates of new search results? &Jl1/>nw\CCX=prz Dcr8UBW3L`Du8*r (+P/:SXQB^ CINAHL Complete contains full text for many of the most used journals found in the CINAHL index. 2016;5:39. The third key database we identified in this research, Web of Science, is only mentioned as a citation index in the Cochrane Handbook, not as a bibliographic 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. Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited. MEDLINEprovides authoritative medical information on medicine, nursing, dentistry, veterinary medicine, the health care system, pre-clinical sciences, and much more. Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine. Jz9+]J,y92Nt,t\9/FK:> ).{Qf3PSrPaU>`Pn8e==rIvyFAA-qYB6B )lYUIJa)se2*O:+6XLe[S =d^J>]b=\qf'9E%L`DS_.A\yX The collection contains thousands of proprietary, copyrighted images depicting normal anatomy, physiology, embryology, and histology, as well as the web's largest repository of reference illustrations depicting surgery, trauma, pathology, diseases and conditions. Article Almost all reviews (97%) reported a search in MEDLINE. HHS Vulnerability Disclosure, Help A secondary aim is to investigate the current practice of databases searched for published reviews. mOkV1#8 (uTb 3 0 obj Investigators and information specialists searching for relevant references for a systematic review (SR) are generally advised to search multiple databases and to use additional methods to be able to adequately identify all literature related to the topic of interest [1,2,3,4,5,6]. 2005 Jan;58(1):20-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.06.001. J Psychosom Res. 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. Articles that are indexed with a set of identified thesaurus terms, but do not contain the current search terms in title or abstract, are screened to discover potential new terms.