BEYOND MEDLINE

@article{Savoie2003BEYONDM,
  title={BEYOND MEDLINE},
  author={Isabelle Savoie and Diane Helmer and Carolyn J. Green and Armin{\'e}e Kazanjian},
  journal={International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care},
  year={2003},
  volume={19},
  pages={168 - 178}
}
Objective: To evaluate the sensitivity and precision of various extended search methods in identifying randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for systematic reviews. Method: Prospective analysis of extended search methods (specialized databases or trial registries, reference lists, hand-searching, personal communication, and Internet) used in two systematic reviews of RCTs. The gold standard was the total number of RCTs identified by major databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, etc.) and extended search… Expand
Network meta-analyses could be improved by searching more sources and by involving a librarian.
TLDR
Literary searches in NMAs could be improved by searching more sources, and by involving a librarian or information specialist, according to the results of a nationwide survey of meta-analyses. Expand
Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews – are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders?
TLDR
Searching MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was not sufficient for identifying all effect studies on musculoskeletal disorders, but additional ten databases did only increase the median recall by 2%. Expand
Searching for CAM evidence: an evaluation of therapy-specific search strategies.
  • K. Pilkington
  • Medicine
  • Journal of alternative and complementary medicine
  • 2007
TLDR
The findings suggest that a range of different sources is required for identifying relevant studies, particularly for certain therapies, and the development of an optimum generic search strategy for each therapy is hampered by the variation in indexing of CAM studies. Expand
The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study
TLDR
Results did not change in a systematic manner (i.e., regularly over- or underestimating treatment effects), suggesting that selective searching may not introduce bias in terms of effect estimates. Expand
Poor reporting and inadequate searches were apparent in systematic reviews of adverse effects.
TLDR
This investigation shows the variation in the searching element of systematic reviews of adverse effects and demonstrates that the reporting of the methods used to identify research in such reviews could be vastly improved. Expand
An e-mail survey identified unpublished studies for systematic reviews.
TLDR
Using the e-mails of authors detected by the search in electronic databases could contribute toward detecting potentially relevant ongoing or unpublished RCTs enabling rapid, straightforward, low-cost systematic review; the results support the need of universal registration of all studies at their inception. Expand
Checking reference lists to find additional studies for systematic reviews.
TLDR
There is some evidence to support the use of checking reference lists for locating studies in systematic reviews, but this evidence is derived from weak study designs. Expand
Comparison of information sources used in Cochrane and non-Cochrane systematic reviews: a case study in the field of anesthesiology and pain.
TLDR
SRs in the field of anesthesiology and pain often neglect to search all possible information sources, particularly in NCSRs, and Cochrane reviews had more comprehensive searching and shorter search to publication time. Expand
Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews.
TLDR
The instructions from the Cochrane Handbook for reporting search strategies are not being consistently employed by groups producing Cochrane reviews. Expand
An evaluation of search and selection methods used in dental systematic reviews published in English.
TLDR
Systematic review methodology is improving, though key components frequently are absent, and many still failed to search more than MEDLINE, document the search strategy and include all languages. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 45 REFERENCES
A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews.
TLDR
Hand search of entire journals remains the most accurate method for identification of the eligible reports, but it is the most time-consuming, and the combination of MEDLINE with hand search restricted to letters and abstracts might be an acceptable alternative for reviewers with insufficient funds to support a full hand search process. Expand
An investigation of the adequacy of MEDLINE searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of mental health care.
TLDR
Systematic reviews of mental health care which are based solely on MEDLINE searches of the literature will miss a large proportion of the relevant RCTs, and are thus liable to random error and bias. Expand
The comprehensiveness of Medline and Embase computer searches
TLDR
Assessment of the comprehensiveness of Medline and Embase computer searches for controlled trials on the efficacy of homoeopathy, ascorbic acid for common cold, and ginkgo biloba for intermittent claudication and cerebral insufficiency concluded that these searches are sufficient to get an impression of the evidence from controlled trials. Expand
Hand searching the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health as part of th Cochrane Collaboration.
TLDR
To identify randomised controlled trials published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health and to explore the contribution of these to the evaluation of public health issues, hand searching was carried out by both authors. Expand
Review of the usefulness of contacting other experts when conducting a literature search for systematic reviews
TLDR
The usefulness of contacting other experts when searching for relevant references for a systematic review of a field where such a specialist focus does not exist is examined. Expand
Reference bias in reports of drug trials.
Articles published before 1985 describing double blind trials of two or more non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis were examined to see whether there was any bias in theExpand
Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. A meta-analysis.
TLDR
Nearly one half of all studies initially presented in abstract form are subsequently published as full-length reports, and most are published in full within 2 years of appearance as abstracts. Expand
Publication bias and clinical trials.
TLDR
It appears that nonpublication was primarily a result of failure to write up and submit the trial results rather than rejection of submitted manuscripts, implying the existence of a publication bias of importance both to meta-analysis and the interpretation of statistically significant positive trials. Expand
Systematic reviews of trials and other studies.
TLDR
The need for the report should be justified by clearly describing the problem for which evidence of effectiveness is required, and describing the needs of the health care professionals and consumers who are to benefit from the report. Expand
Publication bias in clinical research
TLDR
The presence of publication bias in a cohort of clinical research studies is confirmed and it is suggested that conclusions based only on a review of published data should be interpreted cautiously, especially for observational studies. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...