Kwon Yoojin, Lemieux Michelle, McTavish Jill, Wathen Nadine
J Med Libr Assoc. 2015 Oct;103(4):184-8. doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.004.
The purpose of this study was to compare effectiveness of different options for de-duplicating records retrieved from systematic review searches.
Using the records from a published systematic review, five de-duplication options were compared. The time taken to de-duplicate in each option and the number of false positives (were deleted but should not have been) and false negatives (should have been deleted but were not) were recorded.
The time for each option varied. The number of positive and false duplicates returned from each option also varied greatly.
The authors recommend different de-duplication options based on the skill level of the searcher and the purpose of de-duplication efforts.
本研究旨在比较从系统评价检索中去重记录的不同方法的有效性。
使用已发表的系统评价中的记录,比较了五种去重方法。记录了每种方法去重所需的时间以及误报(被删除但不应被删除的记录)和漏报(应被删除但未被删除的记录)的数量。
每种方法所需的时间各不相同。每种方法返回的肯定重复和错误重复的数量也有很大差异。
作者根据检索者的技术水平和去重工作的目的推荐不同的去重方法。