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
. 2022 Jan 1;110(1):43-46.
doi: 10.5195/jmla.2022.1286.

Preliminary comparison of the performance of the National Library of Medicine's systematic review publication type and the sensitive clinical queries filter for systematic reviews in PubMed

Affiliations

Preliminary comparison of the performance of the National Library of Medicine's systematic review publication type and the sensitive clinical queries filter for systematic reviews in PubMed

Tamara Navarro-Ruan et al. J Med Libr Assoc. .

Abstract

Objective: The National Library of Medicine (NLM) inaugurated a "publication type" concept to facilitate searches for systematic reviews (SRs). On the other hand, clinical queries (CQs) are validated search strategies designed to retrieve scientifically sound, clinically relevant original and review articles from biomedical literature databases. We compared the retrieval performance of the SR publication type (SR[pt]) against the most sensitive CQ for systematic review articles (CQrs) in PubMed.

Methods: We ran date-limited searches of SR[pt] and CQrs to compare the relative yield of articles and SRs, focusing on the differences in retrieval of SRs by SR[pt] but not CQrs (SR[pt] NOT CQrs) and CQrs NOT SR[pt]. Random samples of articles retrieved in each of these comparisons were examined for SRs until a consistent pattern became evident.

Results: For SR[pt] NOT CQrs, the yield was relatively low in quantity but rich in quality, with 79% of the articles being SRs. For CQrs NOT SR[pt], the yield was high in quantity but low in quality, with only 8% being SRs. For CQrs AND SR[pt], the quality was highest, with 92% being SRs.

Conclusions: We found that SR[pt] had high precision and specificity for SRs but low recall (sensitivity), whereas CQrs had much higher recall. SR[pt] OR CQrs added valid SRs to the CQrs yield at low cost (i.e., added few non-SRs). For searches that are intended to be exhaustive for SRs, SR[pt] can be added to existing sensitive search filters.

Keywords: evidence-based medicine; information retrieval; systematic reviews.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, Alahdab F. New evidence pyramid. Evid Based Med. 2016. Aug;21(4):125–7. DOI: 10.1136/ebmed-2016-110401. PMID: 27339128; PMCID: PMC4975798. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. National Library of Medicine. Systematic review: MeSH descriptor data 2021. [Internet]. [cited 28 Jan 2021]. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/2028176>.
    1. National Library of Medicine. Review: MeSH descriptor data 2021. [Internet]. [cited 28 Jan 2021].<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68016454>.
    1. Mork J, Aronson A, Demner-Fushman D. 12 years on - Is the NLM medical text indexer still useful and relevant? J Biomed Semantics. 2017. Feb 23;8(1):8. DOI: 10.1186/s13326-017-0113-5. PMID: 28231809; PMCID: PMC5324252. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Del Fiol G, Michelson M, Iorio A, Cotoi C, Haynes RB. Deep learning method to automatically identify reports of scientifically rigorous clinical research from the biomedical literature. J Med Internet Res 2018;20(6): e10281. DOI: 10.2196/10281. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources