disadvantages of cinahl database

Ws"30z@+RY{"+NTzXnnf.ote{X-C.!0rxY_K+LSA12"fDAKJtk/FQS. The searcher in the case of all 58 systematic reviews is an experienced biomedical information specialist. Journal coverage, which spans from the 1800s to present, includes international material selected from around 2,400 periodicals in dozens of languages. New candidate terms are added to the basic search and evaluated. Based on these, we determined the percentage of reviews where that database combination had achieved 100% recall, more than 95%, more than 90%, and more than 80%. PubMed For example, around a third of the reviews (37%) relied on the combination of MEDLINE and Embase. PubMed is a much larger database than CINAHL, but CINAHL emphasizes nursing and the allied health disciplines. Systematic reviews of epidemiology in diabetes: finding the evidence. A fast and easy research tool for nursing and allied health professionals with access to content coverage including over 50 nursing specialties, speech and language pathology, nutrition, general health and medicine and . Our experience has shown us that it is also impacted by the ability of the searcher, the accuracy of indexing of the database, and the complexity of terminology in a particular field. For the individual databases and combinations that were used in those reviews, we multiplied the frequency of occurrence in that set of 200 with the probability that the database or combination would lead to an acceptable recall (which we defined at 95%) that we had measured in our own data. Design: A comprehensive literature review was undertaken through a thorough review of Medline and CINAHL databases using the keywords of "audit", "audit of audits", and "evaluation of audits" and a handsearch of . Figure1 shows the percentages of reviews where a certain database combination led to a certain recall. Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine. Disclaimer. 2016;16:161. van Enst WA, Scholten RJ, Whiting P, Zwinderman AH, Hooft L. Meta-epidemiologic analysis indicates that MEDLINE searches are sufficient for diagnostic test accuracy systematic reviews. Are included references being missed because the review authors failed to search a certain database? Together, these reviews included a total of 1830 references. Because of this major limitation, the question of which databases are necessary to retrieve all relevant references for a systematic review remains unanswered. Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page Select your options by scrolling through the box and clicking your choice to highlight. Bookshelf 2017;33:21724. Accessibility In both these reviews, the topic was highly related to the topic of the database. This Spanish language database contains full text for 130 peer-reviewed medical journals in native Spanish. Furthermore, it is time-consuming for reviewers who have to screen more, and likely irrelevant, titles and abstracts. If this resulted in extraneous results, the search was subsequently limited using a distinct part of the title or a second author name. Manage cookies/Do not sell my data we use in the preference centre. 9v[-[TkBaly.Ja%"uu'Nd&nNSevS}VXcS63#qN From: Complementary Therapies for Physical Therapy, 2008 View all Topics Add to Mendeley Lorenzetti DL, Topfer L-A, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than MEDLINE for rapid health technology assessments. l1FcqL@Bk>>T FOIA MEDLINE is an index of the biomedical journal literature produced by the National Library of Medicine. Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Mast F, Kleijnen J. For all individual reviews, we determined the median recall, the minimum recall, and the percentage of reviews for which each single database or combination retrieved 100% recall. Lastly, access to databases is often limited and only available on subscription basis. We are not implying that a combined search of the four recommended databases will never result in relevant references being missed, rather that failure to search any one of these four databases will likely lead to relevant references being missed. Syst Rev. To ensure adequate performance in searches (i.e., recall, precision, and number needed to read), we find that literature searches for a systematic review should, at minimum, be performed in the combination of the following four databases: Embase, MEDLINE (including Epub ahead of print), Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar. We aimed to determine the optimal combination of databases needed to conduct efficient searches in systematic reviews and whether the current practice in published reviews is appropriate. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BM, Anderson PF. 2011. Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below: If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. The database itself is unfiltered, but includes many filtered items like systematic reviews. MedicLatinais a unique collection of medical research and investigatory journals from renowned Latin American and Spanish publishers. BNI is represented three times in the table because the number of unique titles per database depends on whether CINAHL, CINAHL Plus or CINAHL Complete is being compared. NOTE There are many limiters that we haven't covered. However, for one review of this domain, the recall was 82%. Article J Kerman Univ Med Sci. We have not yet gathered enough data to be able to make a full comparison between Embase and Scopus. Lawrence DW. Terms and Conditions, Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/. 3 for the legend of the plots in Figs. In general, we use the first 200 references as sorted in the relevance ranking of Google Scholar. Gale Health and Wellness offers 24/7 access to full-text medical journals, magazines, reference works, multimedia, and much more. Before On 5 January 2017, we searched PubMed for articles with the phrase systematic review in the title. Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BMR. We recommend that, regardless of their topic, searches for biomedical systematic reviews should combine Embase, MEDLINE (including electronic publications ahead of print), Web of Science (Core Collection), and Google Scholar (the 200 first relevant references) at minimum. 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. This can be offset, as noted above, by going to the EBSCOhost (Health) package of databases. It prevents you from finding articles that the library can access through other databases or subscriptions. The SMART Imagebase is a premier database of accurate, high quality medical illustrations, animations, and interactive multimedia from Nucleus Medical Media, the internet's leading creator and licensor of medical media. Wright K, Golder S, Lewis-Light K. What value is the CINAHL database when searching for systematic reviews of qualitative studies? Wichor M. Bramer. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. <> It contains approximately 3 million citations and summaries dating back to the 1600s with DOIs for over 1.4 million records. 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? Ross-White A, Godfrey C. Is there an optimum number needed to retrieve to justify inclusion of a database in a systematic review search? Complement Ther Med. Prior research on database importance for systematic reviews has looked primarily at whether included references could have theoretically been found in a certain database, but most have been unable to ascertain whether the researchers actually found the articles in those databases [10, 12, 16, 17, 26]. 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 Excel, we calculated the performance of each individual database and various combinations. In addition, Michaleff et al. [10] and van Enst et al. We've already shown how to use this limiter for systematic reviews and case studies; other useful publication types for evidence-based practice include Clinical Trial and Meta Analysis. For reviews where RCTs are the desired study design, Cochrane CENTRAL may be similarly useful. For 55 reviews, we determined the domain. Some reviewers might accept a potential loss of 5% of relevant references; others would want to pursue 100% recall, no matter what cost. Halladay CW, Trikalinos TA, Schmid IT, Schmid CH, Dahabreh IJ. Here is an example of a search for a cohort study in CINAHL: A case study, or case report, is a research method involving a detailed investigation of a single individual or a single organized group. Due to the nature and distribution of the nursing literature, it is especially important for the searcher to understand and respond to the focus of the researcher. Cite this article. Google Scholar, Zheng MH, Zhang X, Ye Q, Chen YP. Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. 2014;67:11929. Created by the National Library of Medicine,MEDLINEuses MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) indexing with tree, tree hierarchy, subheadings and explosion capabilities to search citations from over 4,800 current biomedical journals. At Erasmus MC, search strategies for systematic reviews are often designed via a librarian-mediated search service. People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read. J Clin Epidemiol. Differences in thesaurus terms between databases add another significant burden for translation. 2013;2:115. Melissa Rethlefsen receives funding in part from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number UL1TR001067. Imagine you are a patient with cancer and your doctor can't order your pain medication. Therefore, for this research, a total of 58 systematic reviews were analyzed. 5 Howick Place | London | SW1P 1WG. CINAHL indexing terms and policies reflect a more general approach and the index term "diagnosis," when exploded (ie, when all subdivisions of the indexed term are retrieved), covers most aspects of nursing assessment, screening (people with no symptoms or indications of disease), and diagnosis (people with symptoms or conditions suggestive of See Fig. J Med Libr Assoc. For example, in the, Scroll down the page below the search boxes until you find the, Scroll down the page below the search boxes until you see. iOm3w]9`V>@X(xF$u,mA5US{^2w" `15p3SCzSM2w+! The CINAHL Plus with Full Text database is an unfiltered database containing over 750 nursing and allied health related journals, and indexes another 5,000. This research goes beyond retrospectively assessed coverage to investigate real search performance in databases. Most reviews did not limit to certain study designs, 9% limited to RCTs only, and another 9% limited to other study types. Clipboard, Search History, and several other advanced features are temporarily unavailable. 1990;23:58393. Of the individual databases, Embase had the highest overall recall (85.9%). Google Scholar adds relevant articles not found in the other databases, possibly because it indexes the full text of all articles. For nine of these reviews, all the studies that had been included in the final synthesis were available in the CINAHL database, so it could have been possible to identify all the included studies using just this one database, while for an additional 21 reviews (49 %), 80 % or more of the included studies were available in CINAHL. Psychology & Behavioral Sciences Collectionis a comprehensive database covering information concerning topics in emotional and behavioral characteristics, psychiatry & psychology, mental processes, anthropology, and observational & experimental methods. 1 0 obj Click in the check box below Research Article to select this option. 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. Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. This site needs JavaScript to work properly. Literature search parameters marginally improved the pooled estimate accuracy for ultrasound in detecting deep venous thrombosis. Abbreviations: EM Embase, ML MEDLINE, WoS Web of Science, GS Google Scholar. On this page you will learn how to limit your results in CINAHL to: Video: CINAHL Quick Guide at Walden Library (YouTube), (2 min 24 sec) Recorded April 2020 There is an overlap in the journals indexed by these two databases. Based on our findings, this combination achieves acceptable recall about half the time (47%). Perfect for researchers at all levels, this comprehensive consumer health resource provides authoritative information on the full range of health-related issues, from current disease and disorder information to in-depth coverage of alternative medical practices. 2013 Jan 9;13:7. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7. In 72% of studied systematic reviews, the combination of Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar retrieved all included references. Privacy Of the five reviews that included only RCTs, four reached 100% recall if MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar combined were complemented with Cochrane CENTRAL. This is the world's largest full text psychology database offering full text coverage for nearly 400 journals. If the research question is more interdisciplinary, a broader science database such as Web of Science is likely to add value. endobj A systematic approach to searching: how to perform high quality literature searches more efficiently. Of course, the loss of a minor non-randomized included study that follows the systematic reviews conclusions would not be as problematic as losing a major included randomized controlled trial with contradictory results. It is therefore important to search MEDLINE including the Epub Ahead of Print, In-Process, and Other Non-Indexed Citations references. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. vD@3h0MusH%|$e5Cl|Pl aWEEv~3v:hq`M 1LYi"eo*mZTmiMBV(']YJYa:{Xk4S9Tj-MLNAN}V%!U]h*us(5i:8}takdd-~^3I+LR0mkb4Kb3tTl! The combination of Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science Core Collection, and Google Scholar performed best, achieving an overall recall of 98.3 and 100% recall in 72% of systematic reviews. We calculated the recall for individual databases and databases in all possible combination for all reviews included in the research. 1996 Jul;84(3):402-8. Database designers and developers, the data and database administrators and end-users must understand this functionality to take full advantage of it. Transcript. There are disadvantages to using multiple databases. PubMed Central 2016;5:39. Syst Rev. Size This database provides nearly 550 scholarly full text journals focusing on many medical disciplines. "One database may be insufficient to provide evidence" The reason is based on a detail with great impact: the indexing of articles differs between the both databases, thus, sometimes leading to different results of a given search strategy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. The complete results from all databases used for each of the systematic reviews were imported into a unique EndNote library upon search completion and saved without deduplication for this research. California Privacy Statement, 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. Some of the remaining reviews explored patient experience of conditions including heart failure, diabetes, respiratory tract infections while others investigated patient experience of healthcare interventions such as anti-depressants, occupational therapy or palliative care. PMC 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. ERIC for example serves as the most comprehensive source of information containing more than 500,000 documents and journal articles from all areas of education. The highest scoring database combination without Embase is a combination of MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, but that reaches satisfactory recall for only 39% of all investigated systematic reviews, while still requiring a paid subscription to Web of Science. The other authors declare no competing interests. . 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]. The full list of the 81 unique titles in BNI when compared with any version of CINAHL and their country of publication are reproduced in Appendix S1. 2. This filter can be usedfind articles that are clinically-sound. We documented the department of the first author. For CINAHL and PsycINFO, in one case each, unique relevant references were found. Unable to load your collection due to an error, Unable to load your delegates due to an error. 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. However, Embase is only accessible via a paid subscription, which generally makes it challenging for review teams not affiliated with academic medical centers to access. 3099067 Disadvantages of using CINAHL There really aren't any, except that it's just a single database, and you might miss material that is available elsewhere. PubMed The Cochrane Handbook recommends searching MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase for systematic reviews of RCTs. Our conclusion that Web of Science and Google Scholar are needed for completeness has not been shared by previous research. Since these studies have a long-term component, they promote abetter quality of evidence than a shorter study. Res Synth Methods. Part of It is laborious for searchers to translate a search strategy into multiple interfaces and search syntaxes, as field codes . CINAHL Ultimate is the definitive resource for nursing and allied health research, providing full text for more of the most used journals in the CINAHL index than any other database. Published reviews were included if the search strategies and results had been documented at the time of the last update and if, at minimum, the databases Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science, and Google Scholar had been used in the review. The database combinations with the highest recall did not reduce the total number of results by large margins. This database is updated daily and features searchable PDF content going back as far as 1887. Kr Mo@h(fW"\x| Tu?g n=~?@(wg This limiter box allows you to select specific article types. To identify whether our searches had found the included references, and if so, from which database(s) that citation was retrieved, each included reference was located in the original corresponding EndNote library using the first author name combined with the publication year as a search term for each specific relevant publication. stream 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. Stevinson C, Lawlor DA. 2 for the comparison of the recall of Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane CENTRAL per review for all identified domains. BMC Med Res Methodol. Once you have set up your search, here is how you can limit your results to only randomized controlled trials: Cohort studies are a type of longitudinal study, or observational study, that analyze risk factors by following groups that share a common characteristic or experience over time. del rio rams . Article Special topics databases such as CINAHL and PsycINFO should be added if the topic of the review directly touches the primary focus of a specialized subject database, like CINAHL for focus on nursing and allied health or PsycINFO for behavioral sciences and mental health. Once you have set up your search, here is how you can limit your results to only case studies: CINAHL Plus with Full Text offers a number of filters or limiters that can help you find only specific types of studies.

Optum Offer Letter Process, Roe Messner And Melanie Hart, Ohio State Baseball Camp, Grand Canyon Fall Caught On Video, Upcoming Housing Lotteries In Ma 2022, Articles D

disadvantages of cinahl database