Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Searching on electronic databases is an important part of conducting systematic reviews (SR). In order to avoid publication bias, the aim is to maximize sensitivity. However, if sensitivity is maintained, optimizing precision can reduce workload of reviewers and costs of retrieving full-text articles. Recently, the HEDGES team proposed a set of search strategies claimed to be at least as sensitive as and more precise than the Cochrane's Highly Sensitive Search Strategy (HSSS). Relevance of these differences is not clear.
Objectives: To compare Cochrane's HSSS and Hedges strategy for searching databases for Systematic Reviews in different fields.
Methods: The HSSS search strategies for MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycInfo developed for 4 Cochrane SRs protocols ('Non hormonal interventions for vasomotor symptoms in women with history of breast cancer', 'Amiodarone versus other pharmacological interventions for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death', 'Topical corticosteroids for treating phimosis in children', 'Communication skills training for health care professionals working with cancer patients, their families and/or carers') will be compared to the results of the Hedges strategies ('higher sensitivity'). All the HEDGES searches will be identical to HSSS in all aspects, except for the 'publication type phase' and will be evaluated independently by two reviewers.
Results: A comparison of the number of total hits, potentially eligible articles (based on review of the title), selected for full-text retrieval (based on title and abstract) and included studies will be reported.
Conclusions: Pending results.
References:
1. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR; Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005 May 21;330(7501):1179. Epub 2005 May 13.
2. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994;309:1286-1291.
3. Robinson KA, Dickersin K. Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;31(1):150-3.
4. http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hedges/
Objectives: To compare Cochrane's HSSS and Hedges strategy for searching databases for Systematic Reviews in different fields.
Methods: The HSSS search strategies for MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycInfo developed for 4 Cochrane SRs protocols ('Non hormonal interventions for vasomotor symptoms in women with history of breast cancer', 'Amiodarone versus other pharmacological interventions for primary and secondary prevention of sudden cardiac death', 'Topical corticosteroids for treating phimosis in children', 'Communication skills training for health care professionals working with cancer patients, their families and/or carers') will be compared to the results of the Hedges strategies ('higher sensitivity'). All the HEDGES searches will be identical to HSSS in all aspects, except for the 'publication type phase' and will be evaluated independently by two reviewers.
Results: A comparison of the number of total hits, potentially eligible articles (based on review of the title), selected for full-text retrieval (based on title and abstract) and included studies will be reported.
Conclusions: Pending results.
References:
1. Haynes RB, McKibbon KA, Wilczynski NL, Walter SD, Werre SR; Hedges Team. Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005 May 21;330(7501):1179. Epub 2005 May 13.
2. Dickersin K, Scherer R, Lefebvre C. Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews. BMJ 1994;309:1286-1291.
3. Robinson KA, Dickersin K. Development of a highly sensitive search strategy for the retrieval of reports of controlled trials using PubMed. Int J Epidemiol. 2002 Feb;31(1):150-3.
4. http://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hedges/