文献检索参数在一定程度上提高了超声检测深静脉血栓形成时合并估计值的准确性。

Literature search parameters marginally improved the pooled estimate accuracy for ultrasound in detecting deep venous thrombosis.

作者信息

Kassaï Behrouz, Sonié Sandrine, Shah Nirav R, Boissel Jean-Pierre

机构信息

Clinical Investigation Centre-INSERM, Department of Clinical Pharmacology/EA 3736, Hôpitaux de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon I, Lyon Cedex 08, France.

出版信息

J Clin Epidemiol. 2006 Jul;59(7):710-4. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.013.

DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.09.013

PMID:16765274

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2670362/

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Data collection remains of utmost importance to avoid publication bias in systematic reviews. Our objectives were to compare search strategies with and without methodological terms in Medline, to find out how other databases complement Medline, and how these strategies affect the pooled estimates of the accuracy.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A study was eligible if it prospectively compared ultrasound to venography for the diagnosis of deep venous thrombosis in the lower limbs. All relevant articles found with all databases, searched from 1966 through 2003, constitute the reference standard. Sensitivity was defined as the proportion of relevant studies found by Medline searches divided by the total number of articles in the reference standard.

RESULTS

Of a total of 1,473 citations, 237 abstracts were included. The sensitivity of strategies without methodological terms was higher (96%) than those with (95%, 76%, and 95%). Searches of multiple databases found seven articles not found with Medline. Searches of congress proceedings (International Society of Thrombosis and Haemostasis) found three abstracts not published in full. The diagnostic odds ratio OR was 5.66 (95% confidence interval CI = 4.84-6.48) when multiple databases were searched and 5.57 (95% CI = 3.49-7.65) when only English-language articles in Medline were identified.

CONCLUSION

Medline searches combining free text and MeSH terms were more sensitive. Single Medline search affects only marginally the pooled estimate accuracy.

摘要

背景与目的

数据收集对于避免系统评价中的发表偏倚至关重要。我们的目的是比较在Medline中使用和不使用方法学术语的检索策略，找出其他数据库如何补充Medline，以及这些策略如何影响准确性的合并估计值。

研究设计与设置

如果一项研究前瞻性地比较超声与静脉造影用于诊断下肢深静脉血栓形成，则该研究符合纳入标准。从1966年至2003年在所有数据库中检索到的所有相关文章构成参考标准。敏感性定义为Medline检索到的相关研究数量占参考标准中文章总数的比例。

结果

在总共1473条引文中，纳入了237篇摘要。不使用方法学术语的检索策略的敏感性更高（96%），高于使用方法学术语的检索策略（95%、76%和95%）。多个数据库检索发现了7篇Medline未检索到的文章。会议论文集（国际血栓与止血学会）检索发现了3篇未全文发表的摘要。检索多个数据库时诊断比值比OR为5.66（95%置信区间CI = 4.84 - 6.48），仅识别Medline中的英文文章时诊断比值比OR为5.57（95%CI = 3.49 - 7.65）。