Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Transinformação (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000 |
Resumo: | Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence for decision making in health care issues. One of the first steps of a SR involves identifying all relevant clinical trials on the topic of interest. However, the retrieval of clinical trials in a database partially depends on the article indexing quality. The aim of this article is to evaluate the adequacy of indexing of clinical trials as a publication type in the LILACS database in a sample of articles published in cardiology journals. This cross-sectional study analyzed the indexing quality of clinical trials published between 2008 and 2009 in cardiology journals indexed in LILACS. Two independent reviewers identified and reclassified all original studies published in these journals as being clinical trials or other types of studies. The result of their classification was compared with the indexing publication type produced by LILACS. A total of 721 articles published in 11 cardiology journals were included. The reviewers classified 63 articles as clinical trials; 44 of these were correctly indexed in LILACS, while 19 were indexed as other types of studies (false negatives). The reviewers classified 658 articles as non-clinical trials; 651 were correctly indexed and 7 were incorrectly indexed in LILACS as being clinical trials (false positives). The sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy of LILACS indexing were 69.8%, 98.9% and 96.4% (695/721), respectively. Almost one third of the clinical trials published in LILACS-indexed Cardiology journals are not adequately indexed. The indexing quality of the studies published in these journals must be improved. |
id |
PUC_CAMP-4_40c05e7692f490979e2068ec86b2cff4 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br:article/6000 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_CAMP-4 |
network_name_str |
Transinformação (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journalsSystematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence for decision making in health care issues. One of the first steps of a SR involves identifying all relevant clinical trials on the topic of interest. However, the retrieval of clinical trials in a database partially depends on the article indexing quality. The aim of this article is to evaluate the adequacy of indexing of clinical trials as a publication type in the LILACS database in a sample of articles published in cardiology journals. This cross-sectional study analyzed the indexing quality of clinical trials published between 2008 and 2009 in cardiology journals indexed in LILACS. Two independent reviewers identified and reclassified all original studies published in these journals as being clinical trials or other types of studies. The result of their classification was compared with the indexing publication type produced by LILACS. A total of 721 articles published in 11 cardiology journals were included. The reviewers classified 63 articles as clinical trials; 44 of these were correctly indexed in LILACS, while 19 were indexed as other types of studies (false negatives). The reviewers classified 658 articles as non-clinical trials; 651 were correctly indexed and 7 were incorrectly indexed in LILACS as being clinical trials (false positives). The sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy of LILACS indexing were 69.8%, 98.9% and 96.4% (695/721), respectively. Almost one third of the clinical trials published in LILACS-indexed Cardiology journals are not adequately indexed. The indexing quality of the studies published in these journals must be improved.As revisões sistemáticas são consideradas o mais alto nível de evidência para a tomada de decisão em questões de cuidados de saúde. Um dos primeiros passos de uma RS envolve a identificação de todos ensaios clínicos relevantes sobre o tema de interesse. Porém, a recuperação de ensaios clínicos em uma base de dados, depende em parte da qualidade da indexação. O objetivo deste artigo é avaliar a adequação da indexação dos ensaios clínicos como tipo de publicação na base de dados LILACS, em uma amostra de artigos publicados em periódicos de cardiologia. Estudo transversal de análise da indexação dos ensaios clínicos publicados entre 2008-2009 em periódicos de cardiologia na LILACS. Duas revisoras identificaram e reclassificaram, de forma independente, todos os estudos publicados nesses periódicos e compararam sua classificação tipo de publicação com a indexação LILACS. Foram incluídos 721 artigos publicados em 11 periódicos. Os revisores classificaram 63 artigos como ensaios clínicos; 44 desses haviam sido corretamente indexados na LILACS, enquanto 19 tinham sido indexados como outros tipos de estudos (falsos negativos). As revisoras classificaram 658 estudos como não ensaios clínicos; 651 haviam sido corretamente indexados como não ensaios clínicos na LILACS e 7 haviam sido indexados como ensaios clínicos na LILACS (falsos positivos). A sensibilidade, especificidade e a acurácia da indexação LILACS foram de 69,8%, 98,9% e 96,4% (695/721), respectivamente. Quase um terço dos ensaios clínicos em periódicos de cardiologia da LILACS não está corretamente indexado. É necessário melhorar a qualidade da indexação dos estudos publicados nesses periódicos. Núcleo de Editoração - PUC-Campinas2017-11-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionPeer-reviewed ArticleArtículo revisado por paresAvaliado pelos Paresapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000Transinformação; Vol. 29 No. 3 (2017)Transinformação; Vol. 29 Núm. 3 (2017)Transinformação; v. 29 n. 3 (2017)2318-08890103-3786reponame:Transinformação (Online)instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS)instacron:PUC_CAMPporhttps://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000/3726Copyright (c) 2022 Transinformaçãohttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessda CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Anália Chiquetto da SILVA, Maria ReginaTELLO, German Eduardo TORLONI, Maria Regina 2024-04-02T11:39:43Zoai:ojs.periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br:article/6000Revistahttp://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/seer/index.php/transinfo/indexPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpsbi.nucleodeeditoracao@puc-campinas.edu.br2318-08890103-3786opendoar:2024-04-02T11:39:43Transinformação (Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
title |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
spellingShingle |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals da CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Anália |
title_short |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
title_full |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
title_fullStr |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
title_full_unstemmed |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
title_sort |
Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals |
author |
da CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Anália |
author_facet |
da CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Anália Chiquetto da SILVA, Maria Regina TELLO, German Eduardo TORLONI, Maria Regina |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Chiquetto da SILVA, Maria Regina TELLO, German Eduardo TORLONI, Maria Regina |
author2_role |
author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
da CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Anália Chiquetto da SILVA, Maria Regina TELLO, German Eduardo TORLONI, Maria Regina |
description |
Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence for decision making in health care issues. One of the first steps of a SR involves identifying all relevant clinical trials on the topic of interest. However, the retrieval of clinical trials in a database partially depends on the article indexing quality. The aim of this article is to evaluate the adequacy of indexing of clinical trials as a publication type in the LILACS database in a sample of articles published in cardiology journals. This cross-sectional study analyzed the indexing quality of clinical trials published between 2008 and 2009 in cardiology journals indexed in LILACS. Two independent reviewers identified and reclassified all original studies published in these journals as being clinical trials or other types of studies. The result of their classification was compared with the indexing publication type produced by LILACS. A total of 721 articles published in 11 cardiology journals were included. The reviewers classified 63 articles as clinical trials; 44 of these were correctly indexed in LILACS, while 19 were indexed as other types of studies (false negatives). The reviewers classified 658 articles as non-clinical trials; 651 were correctly indexed and 7 were incorrectly indexed in LILACS as being clinical trials (false positives). The sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy of LILACS indexing were 69.8%, 98.9% and 96.4% (695/721), respectively. Almost one third of the clinical trials published in LILACS-indexed Cardiology journals are not adequately indexed. The indexing quality of the studies published in these journals must be improved. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-11-25 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Peer-reviewed Article Artículo revisado por pares Avaliado pelos Pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000 |
url |
https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.puc-campinas.edu.br/transinfo/article/view/6000/3726 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Transinformação https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2022 Transinformação https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Núcleo de Editoração - PUC-Campinas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Núcleo de Editoração - PUC-Campinas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Transinformação; Vol. 29 No. 3 (2017) Transinformação; Vol. 29 Núm. 3 (2017) Transinformação; v. 29 n. 3 (2017) 2318-0889 0103-3786 reponame:Transinformação (Online) instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS) instacron:PUC_CAMP |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS) |
instacron_str |
PUC_CAMP |
institution |
PUC_CAMP |
reponame_str |
Transinformação (Online) |
collection |
Transinformação (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Transinformação (Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de Campinas (PUC-CAMPINAS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
sbi.nucleodeeditoracao@puc-campinas.edu.br |
_version_ |
1799125984589381632 |