Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11449/151659 |
Resumo: | Introduction: A high-quality electronic search is essential in ensuring accuracy and comprehensivness in identifying potentially relevant records in conducting a systematic review. To assist researchers in identifying terms when formulating a sensitive search strategy, librarians and educators instruct researchers to consult and include preferred and non-preferred terms of the controlled database. However, by using all available terms in the thesaurus (i.e. subject headings), strategies can be lengthy and very laborious. Objective: To identify the most efficient method for searching in both Medline through PubMed and EMBASE, covering search terms with different spellings, direct and indirect orders, and association (or lack thereof) with MeSH and EMTREE terms. Method: In our cross-sectional study of search strategies, we selected and analysed 37 search strategies specifically developed for the anesthesiology field. These search strategies were adapted in order to cover all potentially relevant search terms in terms of different spellings and direct and indirect orders, most efficiently. Results: When adapted to include different spellings and direct and indirect orders, adapted versions of the selected search strategies retrieved the same number of search results in the Medline (mean of 61,3%) and higher number in EMBASE (mean of 63,9%) of the analyzed sample. The number of results retrieved by the searches analysed was not identical using the association or not of MeSH and EMTREE terms; however the association of these terms from both controlled vocabularies retireved a large number of records compared to the use of either one of them. Conclusions: In view of these results, we recommend the use of search terms which include preferred and non-preferred terms (i.e., different spellings and direct/indirect order of the same term) and associated MeSH and EMTREE terms, in order to develop highly-sensitive search strategies for systematic reviews. |
id |
UNSP_8ccc79e45b7d5b524a6e4a8b64557350 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/151659 |
network_acronym_str |
UNSP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository_id_str |
2946 |
spelling |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASEComprehensiveness in search strategies in Anesthesiology: subheadings in MEDLINE and EMBASE databasesMEDLINEPubMedMedical Suject HeadingsDatabases, bibliographicVocabulary, controlledAnesthesiologyBases de dados bibliográficasVocabulário controladoAnestesiologiaIntroduction: A high-quality electronic search is essential in ensuring accuracy and comprehensivness in identifying potentially relevant records in conducting a systematic review. To assist researchers in identifying terms when formulating a sensitive search strategy, librarians and educators instruct researchers to consult and include preferred and non-preferred terms of the controlled database. However, by using all available terms in the thesaurus (i.e. subject headings), strategies can be lengthy and very laborious. Objective: To identify the most efficient method for searching in both Medline through PubMed and EMBASE, covering search terms with different spellings, direct and indirect orders, and association (or lack thereof) with MeSH and EMTREE terms. Method: In our cross-sectional study of search strategies, we selected and analysed 37 search strategies specifically developed for the anesthesiology field. These search strategies were adapted in order to cover all potentially relevant search terms in terms of different spellings and direct and indirect orders, most efficiently. Results: When adapted to include different spellings and direct and indirect orders, adapted versions of the selected search strategies retrieved the same number of search results in the Medline (mean of 61,3%) and higher number in EMBASE (mean of 63,9%) of the analyzed sample. The number of results retrieved by the searches analysed was not identical using the association or not of MeSH and EMTREE terms; however the association of these terms from both controlled vocabularies retireved a large number of records compared to the use of either one of them. Conclusions: In view of these results, we recommend the use of search terms which include preferred and non-preferred terms (i.e., different spellings and direct/indirect order of the same term) and associated MeSH and EMTREE terms, in order to develop highly-sensitive search strategies for systematic reviews.Introdução: Para auxiliar os pesquisadores a identificarem os termos que devem compor a estratégia de busca, bibliotecários e educadores orientam os pesquisadores a consultarem e incluírem os termos (autorizados e não autorizados) do vocabulário controlado da base de dados na formulação de estratégias sensíveis para elaboração de revisões sistemáticas. No entanto, ao utilizar todos os termos disponíveis no tesauros (i.e. vocabulário controlado), as estratégias podem ficar extensas, pois alguns descritores incluem muitos termos não autorizados. Objetivo: Avaliar a praticidade e abrangência das estratégias de buscas compostas por descritores tanto do MeSH como do EMTREE, na área de Anestesiologia, que possam compor uma única estratégia de busca a ser utilizada nas bases de dados MEDLINE via PubMed e EMBASE. Método: Em nosso estudo transversal de estratégias de busca, selecionamos e analisamos 37 estratégias de busca desenvolvidas para o campo de Anestesiologia. Foram elaboradas as estratégias de busca originais que incluíram todos os termos disponibilizados nos vocabulários controlados, ou seja, com todas as variações referentes às diferentes grafias e ordens, direta e indireta, analisadas neste estudo. As estratégias originais foram modificadas com a exclusão dos termos que eram uma variação de grafia ou da ordem (direta ou indireta) para comparação dos resultados e adaptadas para submissão nas duas bases de dados. Resultados: As estratégias originais (com inclusão das variações: diferentes grafias e ordens direta e indireta) recuperaram o mesmo número de registros que as estratégias modificadas (sem a inclusão das variações)na base de dados Medline (média de 61,3%) e maior número na EMBASE (média de 63,9 %), na amostra analisada. O número de resultados obtidos pelas pesquisas analisadas não foi idêntico usando a associação ou não dos termos MeSH e EMTREE, sendo que a associação dos termos dos dois vocabulários controlados recuperou maior número de registros em comparação com o uso de termos de apenas um deles, nas duas bases de dados estudadas. Conclusões: Considerando os resultados, recomendamos o uso de todos os termos disponíveis nos vocabulários controlados incluindo termos autorizados e não autorizados (ou seja, diferentes ortografias e ordem direta e indireta do mesmo termo) e a associação dos termos do MeSH com os do EMTREE, para elaboração de estratégias de busca altamente sensíveis na realização de revisões sistemáticas.Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)El Dib, Regina Paolucci [UNESP]Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira [UNESP]2017-09-20T14:47:30Z2017-09-20T14:47:30Z2017-07-24info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/15165900089207533004064076P60000-0002-4081-803Xporinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESP2024-09-02T15:31:35Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/151659Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-09-02T15:31:35Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE Comprehensiveness in search strategies in Anesthesiology: subheadings in MEDLINE and EMBASE databases |
title |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
spellingShingle |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira [UNESP] MEDLINE PubMed Medical Suject Headings Databases, bibliographic Vocabulary, controlled Anesthesiology Bases de dados bibliográficas Vocabulário controlado Anestesiologia |
title_short |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
title_full |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
title_fullStr |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
title_full_unstemmed |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
title_sort |
Abrangência nas estratégias de busca em Anestesiologia: descritores nas bases de dados MEDLINE e EMBASE |
author |
Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira [UNESP] |
author_facet |
Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira [UNESP] |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
El Dib, Regina Paolucci [UNESP] Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Volpato, Enilze de Souza Nogueira [UNESP] |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
MEDLINE PubMed Medical Suject Headings Databases, bibliographic Vocabulary, controlled Anesthesiology Bases de dados bibliográficas Vocabulário controlado Anestesiologia |
topic |
MEDLINE PubMed Medical Suject Headings Databases, bibliographic Vocabulary, controlled Anesthesiology Bases de dados bibliográficas Vocabulário controlado Anestesiologia |
description |
Introduction: A high-quality electronic search is essential in ensuring accuracy and comprehensivness in identifying potentially relevant records in conducting a systematic review. To assist researchers in identifying terms when formulating a sensitive search strategy, librarians and educators instruct researchers to consult and include preferred and non-preferred terms of the controlled database. However, by using all available terms in the thesaurus (i.e. subject headings), strategies can be lengthy and very laborious. Objective: To identify the most efficient method for searching in both Medline through PubMed and EMBASE, covering search terms with different spellings, direct and indirect orders, and association (or lack thereof) with MeSH and EMTREE terms. Method: In our cross-sectional study of search strategies, we selected and analysed 37 search strategies specifically developed for the anesthesiology field. These search strategies were adapted in order to cover all potentially relevant search terms in terms of different spellings and direct and indirect orders, most efficiently. Results: When adapted to include different spellings and direct and indirect orders, adapted versions of the selected search strategies retrieved the same number of search results in the Medline (mean of 61,3%) and higher number in EMBASE (mean of 63,9%) of the analyzed sample. The number of results retrieved by the searches analysed was not identical using the association or not of MeSH and EMTREE terms; however the association of these terms from both controlled vocabularies retireved a large number of records compared to the use of either one of them. Conclusions: In view of these results, we recommend the use of search terms which include preferred and non-preferred terms (i.e., different spellings and direct/indirect order of the same term) and associated MeSH and EMTREE terms, in order to develop highly-sensitive search strategies for systematic reviews. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-09-20T14:47:30Z 2017-09-20T14:47:30Z 2017-07-24 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/151659 000892075 33004064076P6 0000-0002-4081-803X |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/151659 |
identifier_str_mv |
000892075 33004064076P6 0000-0002-4081-803X |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) instacron:UNESP |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
instacron_str |
UNESP |
institution |
UNESP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositoriounesp@unesp.br |
_version_ |
1810021384132231168 |