Suppr超能文献

古巴医学期刊中临床试验的手工检索与电子检索:术语分析

Handsearching and electronic search of clinical trials in Cuban medical journals: analysis of terminology.

作者信息

Torres-Pombert Ania, Santana-Arroyo Sonia

机构信息

Centro Nacional Coordinador de Ensayos Clínicos (CENCEC), La Habana, Cuba. Address: Calle 5ta A entre 60 y 62, La Habana, Cuba, CP: 11300. Email:

Biblioteca Médica Nacional, Centro Nacional Información Ciencias Médicas/CNICM-Infomed, La Habana, Cuba.

出版信息

Medwave. 2019 Mar 29;19(2):e7603. doi: 10.5867/medwave.2019.02.7603.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Clinical trials are the gold standard for testing the efficacy and safety of interventions. On their own they may not be enough to reach definitive conclusions, but they are the basis for systematic reviews that synthesize the results of several studies. However, once clinical trials have been published, a poor description of the study design and lack of specific key words and descriptors make it difficult to retrieve them by electronic searches, thus requiring hand searching.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the retrieving capacity between hand search and the multiple strategies of electronic searches for identifying clinical trials in Cuban medical journals, and to determine the terminology used for describing these studies.

METHODS

We combined electronic searches in the Scientific Electronic Library Online of Cuba (SciELO Cuba) and Cuban database Cumed with hand search using the Cochrane guide to locate trials in three Cuban journals in the period 2000-2012. We identified the significant terms included in the title, summary, keywords and methods of each article according to Cochrane, CONSORT, and the health sciences thesaurus.

RESULTS

We identified 50 trials by hand search; four of them were retrieved by electronic search through SciELO Cuba (8%) while none was found through Cumed. The less descriptive sections were the title and the keywords. More keywords than authorized descriptors were used; the only specific concepts used in over half of the retrieved trials were “controlled” (60%), and “study groups” (52%); “randomi-zed” was used in 50% of the retrieved documents. While more specific, the terms “clinical trial”, “phase”, and “clinical trial registration” were not used.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to hand searching, electronic searches are insufficient to identify clinical trials. Therefore, the combination of the two meth-ods is necessary to reach higher retrieval rates. The terminology used to describe clinical trials in the selected journals was deficient due to underutilization of the health sciences thesaurus.

摘要

引言

临床试验是检验干预措施疗效和安全性的金标准。其本身可能不足以得出确定性结论,但却是综合多项研究结果的系统评价的基础。然而,一旦临床试验发表,研究设计描述不佳以及缺乏特定关键词和描述符会使得通过电子检索获取这些试验变得困难,因此需要手工检索。

目的

比较手工检索与多种电子检索策略在查找古巴医学期刊中临床试验方面的检索能力,并确定用于描述这些研究的术语。

方法

我们将古巴科学电子图书馆在线数据库(SciELO Cuba)和古巴数据库Cumed中的电子检索与使用Cochrane指南的手工检索相结合,以查找2000年至2012年期间三种古巴期刊中的试验。我们根据Cochrane、CONSORT和健康科学叙词表确定了每篇文章标题、摘要、关键词和方法中包含的重要术语。

结果

通过手工检索我们识别出50项试验;其中四项通过SciELO Cuba的电子检索找到(8%),而通过Cumed未找到任何试验。描述性较差的部分是标题和关键词。使用的关键词多于授权描述符;在超过一半的检索试验中使用的唯一特定概念是“对照”(60%)和“研究组”(52%);“随机”在50%的检索文档中使用。虽然更具体,但“临床试验”“阶段”和“临床试验注册”等术语未被使用。

结论

与手工检索相比,电子检索不足以识别临床试验。因此,两种方法相结合对于实现更高的检索率是必要的。由于健康科学叙词表利用不足,所选期刊中用于描述临床试验的术语存在缺陷。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验