Suppr超能文献

谷歌学术作为耳鼻咽喉头颈外科学元分析的唯一文献来源。

Google Scholar as a Sole Literature Source for Meta-analyses in Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery.

作者信息

Ungar Omer J, Muhanna Nidal, Chaushu Hen

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, 6 Weizman Street, 6423906 Tel Aviv, Israel.

Sackler School of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.

出版信息

Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023 Jun;75(2):864-870. doi: 10.1007/s12070-023-03532-8. Epub 2023 Feb 10.

Abstract

The strength of meta-analyses lies in the synthesis of data from multiple studies. Current guidelines require a thorough systematic search to maximize results, which usually includes searching multiple academic search systems (ASS). Google Scholar (GS) is considered a promising tool for searching the scientific literature. We aimed to determine whether GS is a valid and sufficient solitary data source for meta-analyses in the field of otolaryngology. Selected ENT-HNS journal was searched for meta-analyses published between 2010 and 2021 that adhered to the systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines and precisely followed the search algorithm. The latter was reproduced with GS, and the position of each enrolled study in each meta-analysis was determined. Ten meta-analyses were enrolled, the total number of search results ranged from 57 to 17,949. The number of GS search results was significantly greater than those of other ASS combinations (range 1,360-25,400,  = .006). The number of included papers for each meta-analysis ranged from 5 to 26. The position of all enrolled papers throughout GS searching was in the first 200 GS results in four of 10 meta-analyses. The reference lists of all included papers in the first 200 GS results identified 106 papers out of 108 (98%), while searching until the 500th GS output results identified 107 papers out of 108 papers (99%). meta-analyses in the field of otolaryngology

摘要

荟萃分析的优势在于整合多项研究的数据。当前指南要求进行全面的系统检索以最大化结果,这通常包括搜索多个学术搜索系统(ASS)。谷歌学术(GS)被认为是搜索科学文献的一个有前景的工具。我们旨在确定GS是否是耳鼻喉科领域荟萃分析的一个有效且充分的单一数据源。检索选定的耳鼻喉 - 头颈外科杂志,查找2010年至2021年期间发表的遵循系统评价和荟萃分析指南并严格遵循搜索算法的荟萃分析。后者用GS重现,并确定每项纳入研究在每项荟萃分析中的位置。纳入了10项荟萃分析,搜索结果总数在57至17949之间。GS搜索结果的数量显著多于其他ASS组合的结果(范围为1360 - 25400,P = 0.006)。每项荟萃分析纳入的论文数量在5至26篇之间。在10项荟萃分析中的4项中,所有纳入论文在整个GS搜索中的位置都在前200个GS结果中。前200个GS结果中所有纳入论文的参考文献列表在108篇论文中识别出106篇(98%),而搜索到第500个GS输出结果时在108篇论文中识别出107篇(99%)。耳鼻喉科领域的荟萃分析

相似文献

1
Google Scholar as a Sole Literature Source for Meta-analyses in Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery.
Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2023 Jun;75(2):864-870. doi: 10.1007/s12070-023-03532-8. Epub 2023 Feb 10.
3
Google Scholar is not enough to be used alone for systematic reviews.
Online J Public Health Inform. 2013 Jul 1;5(2):214. doi: 10.5210/ojphi.v5i2.4623. Print 2013.
4
The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching.
PLoS One. 2015 Sep 17;10(9):e0138237. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0138237. eCollection 2015.
5
Small class sizes for improving student achievement in primary and secondary schools: a systematic review.
Campbell Syst Rev. 2018 Oct 11;14(1):1-107. doi: 10.4073/csr.2018.10. eCollection 2018.
8
Is the coverage of Google Scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 Jan 9;13:7. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-7.

本文引用的文献

1
Systematic and Other Reviews: Criteria and Complexities.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2021 Jul;130(7):649-652. doi: 10.1177/00034894211004324. Epub 2021 Mar 24.
2
Disparities in Citation Metrics Amongst Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar for Interventional Radiology Journals.
Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2020 Oct;43(10):1583-1586. doi: 10.1007/s00270-020-02535-0. Epub 2020 Jun 3.
3
Database combinations to retrieve systematic reviews in overviews of reviews: a methodological study.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jun 1;20(1):138. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-00983-3.
4
The difference in referencing in Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar.
ESC Heart Fail. 2019 Dec;6(6):1291-1312. doi: 10.1002/ehf2.12583. Epub 2019 Dec 30.
7
Network meta-analyses should be the highest level of evidence in treatment guidelines.
Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2016 Sep;266(6):477-80. doi: 10.1007/s00406-016-0715-4.
9
Can we prioritise which databases to search? A case study using a systematic review of frozen shoulder management.
Health Info Libr J. 2013 Mar;30(1):49-58. doi: 10.1111/hir.12009. Epub 2012 Dec 12.
10
Medical literature searches: a comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar.
Health Info Libr J. 2012 Sep;29(3):214-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00992.x. Epub 2012 Jun 19.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验