Yaylali Ibrahim Ethem, Alaçam Tayfun
Department of Dentistry, Military Hospital, Isparta, Turkey.
Department of Endodontics, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
J Endod. 2016 Jun;42(6):854-60. doi: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.02.018. Epub 2016 Apr 9.
The aim of this study was to perform an overview of literature search strategies in systematic reviews (SRs) published in 2 endodontic journals, Journal of Endodontics and International Endodontic Journal.
A search was done by using the MEDLINE (PubMed interface) database to retrieve the articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2015. The last search was on January 10, 2016. All the SRs published in the 2 journals were retrieved and screened. Eligible SRs were assessed by using 11 questions about search strategies in the SRs that were adapted from 2 guidelines (ie, AMSTAR checklist and the Cochrane Handbook).
A total of 83 SRs were retrieved by electronic search. Of these, 55 were from the Journal of Endodontics, and 28 were from the International Endodontic Journal. After screening, 2 SRs were excluded, and 81 SRs were included in the study. Some issues, such as search of grey literature and contact with study authors, were not fully reported (30% and 25%, respectively). On the other hand, some issues, such as the use of index terms and key words and search in at least 2 databases, were reported in most of the SRs (97% and 95%, respectively). The overall quality of the search strategy in both journals was 61%. No significant difference was found between the 2 journals in terms of evaluation criteria (P > .05).
There exist areas for improving the quality of reporting of search strategies in SRs; for example, grey literature should be searched for unpublished studies, no language limitation should be applied to databases, and authors should make an attempt to contact the authors of included studies to obtain further relevant information.
本研究旨在对发表于两本牙髓病学期刊《牙髓病学杂志》和《国际牙髓病学杂志》上的系统评价(SRs)中的文献检索策略进行综述。
通过使用MEDLINE(PubMed界面)数据库进行检索,以获取2000年1月1日至2015年12月31日期间发表的文章。最后一次检索时间为2016年1月10日。检索并筛选了这两本期刊上发表的所有SRs。符合条件的SRs使用从2个指南(即AMSTAR清单和Cochrane手册)改编而来的关于SRs中检索策略的11个问题进行评估。
通过电子检索共检索到83篇SRs。其中,55篇来自《牙髓病学杂志》,28篇来自《国际牙髓病学杂志》。筛选后,排除2篇SRs,81篇SRs纳入研究。一些问题,如灰色文献检索和与研究作者联系,未得到充分报告(分别为30%和25%)。另一方面,一些问题,如索引词和关键词的使用以及在至少2个数据库中进行检索,在大多数SRs中得到了报告(分别为97%和95%)。两本期刊检索策略的总体质量为61%。在评估标准方面,两本期刊之间未发现显著差异(P>0.05)。
SRs中检索策略的报告质量存在改进空间;例如,应检索灰色文献以获取未发表的研究,数据库不应设置语言限制,作者应尝试联系纳入研究的作者以获取更多相关信息。