Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Health professionals have easy access to electronic databases, but few know about the precision and capability for selecting articles of high methodological quality that such searches have. Moreover, electronic databases need systematic updating such that they can assist the researcher with their decision making process. Objective: To compare different search strategies for clinical trials in Angiology and Vascular Surgery: manual search in journals versus electronic databases (Lilacs and Cochrane Controlled Trials Database) and to evaluate the quality of these studies. Type of study: An evaluation study of the accuracy of systematic searches for medical information. Setting: Clinical Trials and Meta-analysis Unit of Universidade Federal de S o Paulo/ Escola Paulista de Medicina. Rua Pedro de Toledo 598, S o Paulo, SP. Brasil. Tel: +5511 575 2970, Fax: +5511 570 0469. E-mail: cochrane.dmed@epm.br. URL: http://www.epm.br/cochrane. Sample: Clinical trials published in the following periodicals within the speciality, edited by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV): Cirurgia Vascular e Angiologia, Revista de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Revista Brasileira Cardiovascular, Revista Brasileira de Angiologia e Cirurgia Vascular, Angiopatias.
Procedure: Manual and electronic searches for randomized or controlled clinical trials in Vascular Surgery and Angiology were performed. The first was a manual search, from cover to cover, selecting the trials. The second was an electronic search via Lilacs and Cochrane Controlled Trials database, respectively, via publication type (Pt) and using the Cochrane Collaboration search strategy. To analyze the quality of the studies, the variables considered were randomization, blinding, losses, sample size calculation and definition of the variables. Variables: Sensitivity of the electronic search compared to the manual search. Quality scale described by Jadad (1996).
Results: The manual search identified 9 clinical trials (7 CCT and 2 RCT). Using the electronic search, 1 CCT was identified by the Cochrane strategy. Via Pt and using the Cochrane Controlled Trials Database, no trial was found.
Conclusion: The sensitivity of the electronic search in relation to the manual search and the quality of the clinical trials found are low. Key words: Manual Search. Electronic Search. Clinical Trials. Angiology. Vascular Surgery. Electronic Database.
Procedure: Manual and electronic searches for randomized or controlled clinical trials in Vascular Surgery and Angiology were performed. The first was a manual search, from cover to cover, selecting the trials. The second was an electronic search via Lilacs and Cochrane Controlled Trials database, respectively, via publication type (Pt) and using the Cochrane Collaboration search strategy. To analyze the quality of the studies, the variables considered were randomization, blinding, losses, sample size calculation and definition of the variables. Variables: Sensitivity of the electronic search compared to the manual search. Quality scale described by Jadad (1996).
Results: The manual search identified 9 clinical trials (7 CCT and 2 RCT). Using the electronic search, 1 CCT was identified by the Cochrane strategy. Via Pt and using the Cochrane Controlled Trials Database, no trial was found.
Conclusion: The sensitivity of the electronic search in relation to the manual search and the quality of the clinical trials found are low. Key words: Manual Search. Electronic Search. Clinical Trials. Angiology. Vascular Surgery. Electronic Database.