Can electronic search engines optimize screening of search results in systematic reviews: an empirical study
- PMID: 16504110
- PMCID: PMC1403795
- DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-7
Can electronic search engines optimize screening of search results in systematic reviews: an empirical study
Abstract
Background: Most electronic search efforts directed at identifying primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews rely on the optimal Boolean search features of search interfaces such as DIALOG and Ovid. Our objective is to test the ability of an Ultraseek search engine to rank MEDLINE records of the included studies of Cochrane reviews within the top half of all the records retrieved by the Boolean MEDLINE search used by the reviewers.
Methods: Collections were created using the MEDLINE bibliographic records of included and excluded studies listed in the review and all records retrieved by the MEDLINE search. Records were converted to individual HTML files. Collections of records were indexed and searched through a statistical search engine, Ultraseek, using review-specific search terms. Our data sources, systematic reviews published in the Cochrane library, were included if they reported using at least one phase of the Cochrane Highly Sensitive Search Strategy (HSSS), provided citations for both included and excluded studies and conducted a meta-analysis using a binary outcome measure. Reviews were selected if they yielded between 1000-6000 records when the MEDLINE search strategy was replicated.
Results: Nine Cochrane reviews were included. Included studies within the Cochrane reviews were found within the first 500 retrieved studies more often than would be expected by chance. Across all reviews, recall of included studies into the top 500 was 0.70. There was no statistically significant difference in ranking when comparing included studies with just the subset of excluded studies listed as excluded in the published review.
Conclusion: The relevance ranking provided by the search engine was better than expected by chance and shows promise for the preliminary evaluation of large results from Boolean searches. A statistical search engine does not appear to be able to make fine discriminations concerning the relevance of bibliographic records that have been pre-screened by systematic reviewers.
Figures


Similar articles
-
Folic acid supplementation and malaria susceptibility and severity among people taking antifolate antimalarial drugs in endemic areas.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Feb 1;2(2022):CD014217. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014217. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022. PMID: 36321557 Free PMC article.
-
Optimizing search strategies to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006 May 9;6:23. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-6-23. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006. PMID: 16684359 Free PMC article.
-
Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007 Apr 18;2007(2):MR000001. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000001.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007. PMID: 17443625 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews.J Med Libr Assoc. 2009 Jan;97(1):21-9. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.004. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009. PMID: 19158999 Free PMC article.
-
Search strategies to identify diagnostic accuracy studies in MEDLINE and EMBASE.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Sep 11;2013(9):MR000022. doi: 10.1002/14651858.MR000022.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013. PMID: 24022476 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Titles versus titles and abstracts for initial screening of articles for systematic reviews.Clin Epidemiol. 2013;5:89-95. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S43118. Epub 2013 Mar 15. Clin Epidemiol. 2013. PMID: 23526335 Free PMC article.
-
Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches.Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 14;4(1):5. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-4-5. Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25588314 Free PMC article. Review.
-
A systematic review of methods for studying consumer health YouTube videos, with implications for systematic reviews.PeerJ. 2013 Sep 12;1:e147. doi: 10.7717/peerj.147. eCollection 2013. PeerJ. 2013. PMID: 24058879 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Royle P, Waugh N. Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessment reports carried out for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence appraisal system. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7:1–64. - PubMed
-
- Wallace S, Daly C, Campbell M, Cody J, Grant A, Vale L, Donaldson C, Khan I, Lawrence P, MacLeod A. After MEDLINE? Dividend from other potential sources of randomised controlled trials [abstract] 2nd International Conference, Scientific Basis of Health Services & 5th Annual Cochrane Colloquium, Amsterdam, October. 1997.
-
- Jadad AR, McQuay HJ. A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews. Online Journal of Current Clinical Trials. 1993;Doc No 33:3973. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources