An assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control outbreaks

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorKwon, Yoojinen_US
dc.contributor.authorPowelson, Susanen_US
dc.contributor.authorWong, Hollyen_US
dc.contributor.authorGhali, Williamen_US
dc.contributor.authorConly, Johnen_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-11-17T23:18:17Z
dc.date.available2014-11-17T23:18:17Z
dc.date.issued2014-11-11
dc.description.abstractBackground The purpose of our study is to determine the value and efficacy of searching biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE for systematic reviews. Methods We analyzed the results from a systematic review conducted by the authors and others on ward closure as an infection control practice. Ovid MEDLINE including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid Embase, CINAHL Plus, LILACS, and IndMED were systematically searched for articles of any study type discussing ward closure, as were bibliographies of selected articles and recent infection control conference abstracts. Search results were tracked, recorded, and analyzed using a relative recall method. The sensitivity of searching in each database was calculated. Results Two thousand ninety-five unique citations were identified and screened for inclusion in the systematic review: 2,060 from database searching and 35 from hand searching and other sources. Ninety-seven citations were included in the final review. MEDLINE and Embase searches each retrieved 80 of the 97 articles included, only 4 articles from each database were unique. The CINAHL search retrieved 35 included articles, and 4 were unique. The IndMED and LILACS searches did not retrieve any included articles, although 75 of the included articles were indexed in LILACS. The true value of using regional databases, particularly LILACS, may lie with the ability to search in the language spoken in the region. Eight articles were found only through hand searching. Conclusions Identifying studies for a systematic review where the research is observational is complex. The value each individual study contributes to the review cannot be accurately measured. Consequently, we could not determine the value of results found from searching beyond MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL with accuracy. However, hand searching for serendipitous retrieval remains an important aspect due to indexing and keyword challenges inherent in this literature.en_US
dc.description.refereedYesen_US
dc.identifier.citationSystematic Reviews 2014, 3:135en_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/34812
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1880/50260
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherBioMed Centralen_US
dc.publisher.corporateUniversity of Calgaryen_US
dc.publisher.facultyLibraries and Cultural Resourcesen_US
dc.publisher.urlhttp://www.systematicreviewsjournal.com/content/3/1/135en_US
dc.subjectSystematic Reviewsen_US
dc.subjectBibliographic databasesen_US
dc.titleAn assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control outbreaksen_US
dc.typejournal article
thesis.degree.disciplineHealth Sciences Libraryen_US
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Systematic review searching.pdf
Size:
338.01 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.84 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Libraries & Cultural Resources Research & Publications