Clinical Search Retrieval from 4 Electronic Databases

从 4 个电子数据库进行临床检索

• 批准号: 6649870
• 负责人: R BRIAN HAYNES
• 金额: $ 10.8万
• 依托单位: MCMASTER UNIVERSITY
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 财政年份: 2002
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2002-09-01 至 2004-08-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://reporter.nih.gov/project-details/6649870
• 关键词: clinical research; data collection methodology /evaluation; experimental designs; indexing; information retrieval; information system analysis; information systems; journals; statistics /biometry; vocabulary development for information system

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): The projects in this continuation proposal are part of a series of investigations seeking ways to develop and harness search strategies ("hedges") that will improve retrieval of clinically relevant and scientifically sound study reports from large, general purpose, biomedical research bibliographic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, and CINAHL. The long-term objective is to harness the most clinically relevant content of these electronic databases so that their effects on clinical practice can be eventually tested. In our previous research Using MEDLINE, we documented the retrieval performance of over 60,000 "methodologic hedges", that is, search strategies designed to detect applied clinical research studies that meet key scientific standards for validity and applicability to clinical practice. A project is currently underway to extend this research in recent MEDLINE files and in EMBASE, PsycLIT, and CINAHL. The database created in this research can be used to answer new questions, specifically: A) What are the operating characteristics, in year 2000 files of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycLIT, and CINAHL, of methodologic terms that define studies of the most importance to clinical questions about the economic aspects of human disorders, to questions about clinical prediction, and to clinical questions that lead to a review of the literature? B) What are the operating characteristics in these electronic databases of individual age-related terms for retrieving studies of a particular age-specific area of medicine, and how do the top yielding strategies perform when combined with top yielding methodologic search strategies? C) For diverse clinical content areas, to what extent are articles clustered in journal subsets, and how is the precision of searching affected when running searches in journal subsets? D) What is the correlation between journal impact factors and yield from the journals included in our hand searched database? To create and evaluate the search strategies, index terms and text words are treated as 'diagnostic tests' and a hand search of the literature is treated as the 'gold standard'. Articles are defined as having relevant content and meeting basic methodologic criteria for clinical practice by the hand search. The operating characteristics of these strategies are determined in the 4 electronic databases.

描述（由申请人提供）： 本延续提案中的项目是一系列研究的一部分，旨在寻求开发和利用检索策略（“模糊限制”）的方法，这些策略将改善从大型通用生物医学研究书目数据库（包括MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycLIT和CINAHL）中检索临床相关和科学合理的研究报告。 长期目标是利用这些电子数据库中与临床最相关的内容，以便最终测试它们对临床实践的影响。 在我们之前的研究中，使用MEDLINE，我们记录了超过60，000个“方法学模糊限制”的检索性能，即旨在检测符合有效性和临床实践适用性关键科学标准的应用临床研究的检索策略。 目前正在进行一个项目，以在最近的MEDLINE文件和EMBASE，PsycLIT和CINAHL中扩展这项研究。 在这项研究中创建的数据库可以用来回答新的问题，特别是：A）在MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycLIT和CINAHL的2000年文件中，定义对人类疾病经济方面的临床问题、临床预测问题最重要的研究的方法学术语的操作特征是什么，和临床问题，导致文献综述？ B）在这些电子数据库中，用于检索特定年龄特定医学领域研究的个体年龄相关术语的操作特征是什么？当与最高产出方法学检索策略相结合时，最高产出策略的表现如何？ C）对于不同的临床内容领域，在期刊子集中聚集的文章有多大程度，在期刊子集中运行搜索时，搜索的精度如何受到影响？ D）期刊影响因子和我们手工检索数据库中期刊的产量之间的相关性是什么？ 为了创建和评估检索策略，将索引术语和文本词视为“诊断测试”，将手动检索文献视为“金标准”。 通过手动检索，文章定义为具有相关内容并符合临床实践的基本方法学标准。 这些战略的操作特性在4个电子数据库中确定。