Abstract
Our study was designed to optimize the search strategies based on the work of Haynes et al. for detecting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through PubMed. In particular, we aimed to improve precision for broad and narrow searches on interventional studies. We used in addition to the string suggested by the Hedge Team the following: {NOT ((animals [mh] NOT humans [mh]) OR (review [pt] OR meta-analysis [pt]))} and tested its effectiveness. The search was carried out on a year’s worth of articles from the PubMed database. We analyzed 35,590 bibliographic citations about four relevant major topics in internal medicine (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, and hepatitis). Precision, percentage gain between the Hedge Team search strategies and the new one were computed and reported in the text. Moreover, a pooled analysis was carried out in terms of absolute precision difference. We observed better precision for both broad and narrow searches. However, effective gain resulted only for broad searches. In this case, bibliographic citation recall effectively reduced (−24 to −35 % retrieved citation with a gain of 32–54 %) without loss of information. The search strategy improved broad searches regarding each of the four considered topics. We think this new search strategy, based on a previous work of the Hedge team, could be a step forward and can save some time by researchers.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
search term indicates one of the four topics considered (hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, and hepatitis). For each of them broad and narrow searches were performed.
Abbreviations
- dp:
-
Publication date
- pt:
-
Publication type
- mh:
-
MeSH terms
- sh:
-
MeSH subheading
- tiab:
-
Title/abstract
References
Haynes RB, Wilczymski N, McKibbon KA, Walker CJ, Sinclair JC (1994) Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound studies in MEDLINE. J Am Inform Assoc 1:447–458
Hedges Team, Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR (2005) Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from MEDLINE: analytical survey. BMJ 330(7501):1179
Robinson KA, Dickersin K (2002) Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol 31:150–153
Nwosu CR, Khan KS, Chien PF (1998) A two-term MEDLINE search strategy for identifying randomized trials in obstetrics and gynecology. Obstet Gynecol 91:618–622
Marson AG, Chadwick DW (1996) How easy are randomized controlled trials in epilepsy to find on MEDLINE? The sensitivity and precision of two MEDLINE searches. Epilepsia 37:377–380
Adams CE, Power A, Frederick K, LeFebvre C (1994) An investigation of the adequacy of MEDLINE searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of mental health care. Psychol Med 24:741–748
Dumbrigue HB, Esquivel JF, Jones JS (2000) Assessment of MEDLINE search strategies for randomized controlled trials in prosthodontics. J Prosthodont 9:8–13
Jadad AR, McQuay HJ (1993) A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews. Online J Curr Clin Trials No 33
LeFebvre C, Clarke MJ (2001) Identifying randomised trials. In: Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG (eds) Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context. BMJ, London, pp 69–86
Li Zhang, Ajiferuke I, Sampson M (2006) Optimizing search strategies to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE. BMC Med Res Methodol 6:23
Corrao S, Colomba D, Arnone S, Argano C, Di Chiara T, Scaglione R, Licata G (2006) Improving efficacy of PubMed clinical queries for retrieving scientifically strong studies on treatment. J Am Inform Assoc 13(5):485–487
Team Hedges, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB (2009) Retrieving randomized controlled trials from MEDLINE: a comparison of 38 published search filters. Health Info Libr J 26(3):187–202
Conflict of interest
None.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix—search strategies
Appendix—search strategies
Narrow search
# 1:“search term”Footnote 1 AND 2006 [dp].
# 2: (randomized controlled trial [pt] OR (randomized [tiab] AND controlled [tiab] AND trial [tiab])).
# 3: # 1 AND # 2.
# 4: # 3 NOT ((animals [mh] NOT humans [mh]) OR (review [pt] OR meta-analysis [pt])).
Broad search
# 1:“search term” AND 2006 [dp].
# 2: ((clinical [tiab] AND trial [tiab]) OR clinical trials [mh] OR clinical trial [pt] OR random*[tiab] OR random allocation [mh] OR therapeutic use [sh]).
# 3: # 1 AND # 2.
# 4: # 3 NOT ((animals [mh] NOT humans [mh]) OR (review [pt] OR meta-analysis [pt])).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Corrao, S., Colomba, D., Argano, C. et al. Optimized search strategy for detecting scientifically strong studies on treatment through PubMed. Intern Emerg Med 7, 283–287 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-012-0773-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-012-0773-1