why is medline a good database to use

Google Scholar pros: enormous amounts of data on all kinds of topics. In Excel, we calculated the performance of each individual database and various combinations. Syst Rev. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2010.00883.x. J Clin Epidemiol. PubMed is a database that mainly references the United States National Library of Medicine's database called Medline; Medline contains over 19 million references to articles and journals in the field of life sciences and biomedicine, as it boasts on its website. 1999 Jan-Feb;6(1):625. and transmitted securely. This study also highlights once more that searching databases alone is, nevertheless, not enough to retrieve all relevant references. PubMed database contains more than 30 million references of biomedical literature from approximately 7,000 journals. In general, searches are developed in MEDLINE in Ovid (Ovid MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Ovid MEDLINE Daily and Ovid MEDLINE, from 1946); Embase.com (searching both Embase and MEDLINE records, with full coverage including Embase Classic); the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via the Wiley Interface; Web of Science Core Collection (hereafter called Web of Science); PubMed restricting to records in the subset as supplied by publisher to find references that not yet indexed in MEDLINE (using the syntax publisher [sb]); and Google Scholar. [14] Selection is based on the recommendations of a panel, the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee, based on scientific scope and quality of a journal. ANS Adv Nurs Sci. Other databases that we identified as essential for good recall were searched much less frequently; Embase was searched in 61% and Web of Science in 35%, and Google Scholar was only used in 10% of all reviews. Beyer FR, Wright K. Can we prioritise which databases to search? 2016;5:39. 2014;67:11929. This search was used in earlier research [21]. 11 The majority of records in PubMed are from MEDLINE, which has . Percentage of systematic reviews for which a certain database combination reached a certain recall. A recent paper tried to find an acceptable number needed to read for adding an additional database; sadly, however, no true conclusion could be drawn [20]. In 12 reviews (52%), Scopus retrieved 100% of all included references retrieved by Embase or Web of Science. MEDLARS (Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System) is a computerised biomedical bibliographic retrieval system. CINAHL - Effective Database Searching - LibGuides at Mayo Clinic A total of 292 (17%) references were found by only one database. Epub 2015 Dec 2. Systematic review searchers should consider using these databases if they are available to them, and if their institution lacks availability, they should ask other institutes to cooperate on their systematic review searches. Over a third of the reviews were therapeutic, while slightly under a quarter answered an etiological question. Most reviews did not limit to certain study designs, 9% limited to RCTs only, and another 9% limited to other study types. Emtree (used in EMBASE) is quite similar and was modeled based on MeSH in 1988. An overview of the broad topical categories covered in these reviews is given in Table2. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 4 and 5. In keeping with the fact that MEDLINE's primary user community is professionals (medical scientists, health care providers), searching MEDLINE effectively is a learned skill; untrained users are sometimes frustrated with the large numbers of articles returned by simple searches. Explore the Medline (PubMed) guide to learn more. Aagaard T, Lund H, Juhl C. Optimizing literature search in systematic reviewsare MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders? [1], Since 1879, the National Library of Medicine had published Index Medicus, a monthly guide to medical articles in thousands of journals. Also searchable with the PubMed interface are non-Medline citations, i.e. In 23 reviews included in this research, Scopus was searched. The 2 most frequently used resources were journals (print and online) and the MEDLINE database. We are aware that the Cochrane Handbook [7] recommends more than only these databases, but further recommendations focus on regional and specialized databases. 2021 May 6;16(5):e0234221. Other specialized databases, such as CINAHL or PsycINFO, add unique references to some reviews where the topic of the review is related to the focus of the database. Using data sources beyond PubMed has a modest impact on the results of systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions. J Med Libr Assoc. Methods: Searching Google Scholar is challenging as it lacks basic functionality of traditional bibliographic databases, such as truncation (word stemming), proximity operators, the use of parentheses, and a search history. Together, these reviews included a total of 1830 references. The most common topic in the database is Cancer with around 12% of all records between 1950-2016, which have risen from 6% in 1950 to 16% in 2016. J Clin Epidemiol. Phys Ther. For example, kidney N5 failure will find results that contain kidney failure as well as failure of the kidneys. [11] New journals are not included automatically or immediately. 2014 Jul;102(3):169-76. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.102.3.006. It therefore finds articles in which the topic of research is not mentioned in title, abstract, or thesaurus terms, but where the concepts are only discussed in the full text. -. Performance was measured using recall, precision, and number needed to read. For four out of five systematic reviews that limited to randomized controlled trials (RCTs) only, the traditional combination retrieved 100% of all included references. One explanation for our finding may be that if the research question is very specific, the topic of research might not always be mentioned in the title and/or abstract. Google Scholar adds relevant articles not found in the other databases, possibly because it indexes the full text of all articles. BMC Med Res Methodol. Learn more in: Query Log Analysis in . In 1957 the staff of the NLM started to plan the mechanization of the Index Medicus, prompted by a desire for a better way to manipulate all this information, not only for Index Medicus but also to produce subsidiary products. In the top bar, we present the results of the complete database searches relative to the total number of included references. Embase and MEDLINE combined with either Google Scholar or Web of Science scored similarly well on overall recall (95.9%). 7 day access to Embase.com (limited 4 subscription purchases a year) Search > 32 million abstracts and indexes. For citations added during 1995-2003: about 48% are for cited articles published in the U.S., about 88% are published in English, and about 76% have English abstracts written by authors of the articles. Google Scholar. The journals included in MEDLINE must target health professionals and researchers as their audience and publish original research. In our analyses, we combined the results from MEDLINE in Ovid and PubMed (the subset as supplied by publisher) into one database labeled MEDLINE. J Kerman Univ Med Sci. 2005;51:8489. Many articles written on this topic have calculated overall recall of several reviews, instead of the effects on all individual reviews. Searching for the best evidence. Part 2: searching CINAHL and Medline Nearly 5,000 journals are read and their individual articles indexed and added to the MEDLINE database, which contains information about over 12 million journal articles. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 2015;68:107684. 2021 Apr-Jun 01;44(2):102-110. doi: 10.1097/ANS.0000000000000349. 3 for the legend of the plots in Figs. WB has received travel allowance from Embase for giving a presentation at a conference. The History of the NLM: Chapter 20 . This search is then optimized. For each published systematic review, we extracted the references of the included studies. It is an essential research tool for doctors, nurses, health professionals and researchers. The searcher in the case of all 58 systematic reviews is an experienced biomedical information specialist. [4] This early system covered 239 journals and boasted that it could support as many as 25 simultaneous online users (remotely logged-in from distant medical libraries) at one time. MEDLINE is the National Library of Medicine's (NLM) premier bibliographic database that contains references to journal articles in life sciences, with a concentration on biomedicine.. MEDLINE content is searchable via PubMed and constitutes the primary component of PubMed, a literature database developed and maintained by the NLM National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). The original computer configuration operated from 1964 until its replacement by MEDLARS II in January 1975.[2][3]. Those databases that contributed the most unique included references were then considered candidate databases to determine the most optimal combination of databases in the further analyses. EBVM Search Guide: Medline or Google Scholar? - Tufts University Using similar calculations, also shown in Table5, we estimated the probability that 100% of relevant references were retrieved is 23%. Full-Text for Top Nursing and Medical Journals The higher recall from adding extra databases came at a cost in number needed to read (NNR). (DOCX 19kb). Review projects at Erasmus MC cover a wide range of medical topics, from therapeutic effectiveness and diagnostic accuracy to ethics and public health. [10], MEDLINE functions as an important resource for biomedical researchers and journal clubs from all over the world. What is the difference between Pubmed and Medline? Will I get the same However, whether an article is present in a database may not translate to being found by a search in that database. 2 for the comparison of the recall of Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane CENTRAL per review for all identified domains. [15] The Journals Database (one of the Entrez databases) contains information, such as its name abbreviation and publisher, about all journals included in Entrez, including PubMed. sharing sensitive information, make sure youre on a federal The other authors declare no competing interests. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BM, Anderson PF. For a sample of 200 recently published systematic reviews, we calculated how many had used enough databases to ensure 95% recall. 2016;16:113. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with, the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health. It is laborious for searchers to translate a search strategy into multiple interfaces and search syntaxes, as field codes and proximity operators differ between interfaces. It is likely that topical differences in systematic reviews may impact whether databases such as Web of Science and Google Scholar add value to the review. Based on the record numbers of the search results in EndNote, we determined from which database these references came. Since May 2013, the first author prospectively recorded results from systematic review searches that he performed at his institution. Searching multiple databases for systematic reviews: added value or diminishing returns? Article Syst Rev 6, 245 (2017). This study analyzed data from a study on the value of libraries to understand the specific role that the MEDLINE database plays in relation to other information resources that are available to health care providers and its role in positively impacting patient care. You may have seen or used PubMed (Public Medline) which is exactly the same database but open access. In the other 48%, the recall by Scopus was suboptimal, in one occasion as low as 38%. Most of the previous studies did not include these two databases in their research. Check tags help identify the subjects and language of research studies such as: Publication types identify the kind of article presented such as: Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) describe the actual content of an article and provide details about the information discussed in the article. So through PubMed we are able to access this wealth of knowledge; it's an . In the case of a clinical question, precision is most important, as a practicing clinician does not have a lot of time to read through many articles in a clinical setting. In 1996, soon after most home computers began automatically bundling efficient web browsers, a free public version of MEDLINE was deployed. Objective: Medline | Ebsco -, McKibbon KA, Fridsma DB. MEDLINE - Wikipedia However, the combination with Google Scholar had a higher precision and higher median recall, a higher minimum recall, and a higher proportion of reviews that retrieved all included references. We have not yet gathered enough data to be able to make a full comparison between Embase and Scopus. [11][12][13] Most systematic review articles published presently build on extensive searches of MEDLINE to identify articles that might be useful in the review. Google Scholar. MEDLINE also covers much of the literature in biology and biochemistry, as well as fields such as molecular evolution. In Pubmed, in addition to Medline articles, you will have access to PubMedCentral papers, which are full text articles deposited to promote open access, and articles that are "in process" that is, prior to being indexed with MeSH terms, and articles submitted by publishers, "ahead of print." For reviews where RCTs are the desired study design, Cochrane CENTRAL may be similarly useful. Percentage of systematic reviewsof a certain domainfor which the combination Embase, MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL reached a certain recall. Once optimal recall is achieved, macros are used to translate the search syntaxes between databases, though manual adaptation of the thesaurus terms is still necessary. articles supplied . Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited. These descriptors are arranged in both, an alphabetic and a hierarchical structure 2. Whether a reference is available in a database is important, but whether the article can be found in a precise search with reasonable recall is not only impacted by the databases coverage. According to our data, PubMeds as supplied by publisher subset retrieved 12 unique included references, and it was the most important addition in terms of relevant references to the four major databases. The interventions were mostly from the chemicals and drugs category, or surgical procedures. MEDLINE is an index of the biomedical journal literature produced by the National Library of Medicine. Of the individual databases, Embase had the highest overall recall (85.9%). Based on our findings, this combination achieves acceptable recall about half the time (47%). 2014;21:34354. MEDLINE was the most likely to be among consulted resources compared to any other information resource other than journals. Embase - A biomedical research database - Elsevier The Cochrane Handbook, for example, recommends the use of at least MEDLINE and Cochrane Central and, when available, Embase for identifying reports of randomized controlled trials [7]. 2013;2:115. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000 Oct;88(4):346-54. Cochrane CENTRAL is absent from the table, as for the five reviews limited to randomized trials, it did not add any unique included references. A secondary aim is to investigate the current practice of databases searched for published reviews. We documented the department of the first author. The aim of our research is to determine the combination of databases needed for systematic review searches to provide efficient results (i.e., to minimize the burden for the investigators without reducing the validity of the research by missing relevant references). [9], MEDLINE added a "publication type" term for randomized controlled trial in 1991 and a MESH subset systematic review in 2001. Previous studies have investigated the added value of different databases on different topics [8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15]. Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Mast F, Kleijnen J. Age groups (elderly, adult, child, infant, etc.). CAS It was launched by the National Library of Medicine in 1964 and was the first large scale, computer based, retrospective search service available to the general public. (Best viewed using Chrome). New candidate terms are added to the basic search and evaluated. For CINAHL and PsycINFO, in one case each, unique relevant references were found. Beckles Z, Glover S, Ashe J, Stockton S, Boynton J, Lai R, Alderson P. Searching CINAHL did not add value to clinical questions posed in NICE guidelines. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic We found that two databases previously not recommended as essential for systematic review searching, Web of Science and Google Scholar, were key to improving recall in the reviews we investigated. The sum of all these values is the total probability of acceptable recall in the random sample. [5], In May 2022, the database contained more than 34 million records[6] from 5,639[needs update] selected publications[7] covering biomedicine and health from 1781 to the present.[timeframe?] Health care professionals used 3.5 resources, on average, to aid in patient care.
City Of Fort Worth Electrical Inspection, 2022 High School Basketball Tournaments, How Long To Leave Serum On Face Before Moisturizer, Articles W