OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of methodological filters in search strategies for diagnostic studies in systematic reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We made an inventory of existing methodological search filters for diagnostic accuracy studies and applied them in PubMed to a reference set derived from 27 published systematic reviews in a broad range of clinical fields. Outcome measures were the fraction of not identified relevant studies and the reduction in the number of studies to read. RESULTS: We tested 12 search filters. Of the studies included in the systematic reviews, 2%-28% did not pass the sensitive search filters, 4%-24% did not pass the accurate filters, and 39%-42% did not pass the specific filters. Decrease in number-needed-to-read when a search filter was used in a search strategy for a diagnostic systematic review varied from 0% to 77%. CONCLUSION: The use of methodological filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to omission of a considerable number of relevant studies that would otherwise be included. When preparing a systematic review, it may be preferable to avoid using methodological filters.

Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies / Leeflang, Mm; Scholten, Rj; Rutjes, A; Reitsma, Jb; Bossuyt, Pm. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0895-4356. - 59:3(2006), pp. 234-240. [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.014]

Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies

Rutjes A;
2006

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of methodological filters in search strategies for diagnostic studies in systematic reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We made an inventory of existing methodological search filters for diagnostic accuracy studies and applied them in PubMed to a reference set derived from 27 published systematic reviews in a broad range of clinical fields. Outcome measures were the fraction of not identified relevant studies and the reduction in the number of studies to read. RESULTS: We tested 12 search filters. Of the studies included in the systematic reviews, 2%-28% did not pass the sensitive search filters, 4%-24% did not pass the accurate filters, and 39%-42% did not pass the specific filters. Decrease in number-needed-to-read when a search filter was used in a search strategy for a diagnostic systematic review varied from 0% to 77%. CONCLUSION: The use of methodological filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to omission of a considerable number of relevant studies that would otherwise be included. When preparing a systematic review, it may be preferable to avoid using methodological filters.
2006
59
3
234
240
Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies / Leeflang, Mm; Scholten, Rj; Rutjes, A; Reitsma, Jb; Bossuyt, Pm. - In: JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY. - ISSN 0895-4356. - 59:3(2006), pp. 234-240. [10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.014]
Leeflang, Mm; Scholten, Rj; Rutjes, A; Reitsma, Jb; Bossuyt, Pm
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2006_Leeflang_Scholten_Rutjes_JClinEpi.pdf

Accesso riservato

Descrizione: Author's pesonal copy
Tipologia: Versione pubblicata dall'editore
Dimensione 175.72 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
175.72 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Licenza Creative Commons
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11380/1286677
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 34
  • Scopus 113
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 100
social impact