Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Sep;62(9):974-81.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.11.006. Epub 2009 Feb 20.

Diagnostic test systematic reviews: bibliographic search filters ("Clinical Queries") for diagnostic accuracy studies perform well

Monika Kastner  1 , Nancy L Wilczynski, Ann K McKibbon, Amit X Garg, R Brian Haynes
Affiliations

Diagnostic test systematic reviews: bibliographic search filters ("Clinical Queries") for diagnostic accuracy studies perform well

Monika Kastner et al. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009 Sep.

Abstract

Background: Systematic reviews of health care topics are valuable summaries of all pertinent studies on focused questions. However, finding all relevant primary studies for systematic reviews remains challenging.

Objectives: To determine the performance of the Clinical Queries sensitive search filter for diagnostic accuracy studies for retrieving studies for systematic reviews.

Methods: We compared the yield of the sensitive Clinical Queries diagnosis search filter for MEDLINE and EMBASE to retrieve studies in diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews reported in ACP Journal Club in 2006.

Results: Twelve of 22 diagnostic accuracy reviews (452 included studies) met the inclusion criteria. After excluding 11 studies not in MEDLINE or EMBASE, 95% of articles (417 of 441) were captured by the sensitive Clinical Queries diagnosis search filter (MEDLINE and EMBASE combined). Of 24 studies not retrieved by the filter, 22 were not diagnostic accuracy studies. Reanalysis of the Clinical Queries filter without these 22 nondiagnosis articles increased its performance to 99% (417 of 419). We found no substantive impact of the two articles missed by the Clinical Queries filter on the conclusions of the systematic reviews in which they were cited.

Conclusion: The sensitive Clinical Queries diagnostic search filter captured 99% of articles and 100% of substantive articles indexed in MEDLINE and EMBASE in diagnostic accuracy systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram of the process for analyzing the proportion of articles that were captured by the best sensitivity Clinical Query (CQ) diagnosis search filters
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126:376–380. - PubMed
    1. Devereaux PJ, Manns BJ, Ghali WA, Quan H, Guyatt GH. Reviewing the reviewers: the quality of reporting in three secondary journals. CMAJ. 2001;164:1573–1576. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Ebell MH, et al. Obstacles to answering doctors’ questions about patient care with evidence: qualitative study. BMJ. 2002;324:710. - PMC - PubMed
    1. InterTASC Information Specialists' Sub-Group Search Filter Resource. 2008. [Accessed January 23]. Available at: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/intertasc/diag.htm.
    1. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre S for the Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytic survey. BMJ. 2005;330:1179–1182. - PMC - PubMed