核心之外是什么?定性信息检索中的数据库覆盖范围。

What's beyond the core? Database coverage in qualitative information retrieval.

作者信息

Horton Jennifer, Kaunelis David, Rabb Danielle, Smith Andrea

出版信息

J Med Libr Assoc. 2025 Jan 14;113(1):49-57. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2025.1591.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study investigates the effectiveness of bibliographic databases to retrieve qualitative studies for use in systematic and rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) research. Qualitative research is becoming more prevalent in reviews and health technology assessment, but standardized search methodologies-particularly regarding database selection-are still in development.

METHODS

To determine how commonly used databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) perform, a comprehensive list of relevant journal titles was compiled using InCites Journal Citation Reports and validated by qualitative researchers at Canada's Drug Agency (formerly CADTH). This list was used to evaluate the qualitative holdings of each database, by calculating the percentage of total titles held in each database, as well as the number of unique titles per database.

RESULTS

While publications on qualitative search methodology generally recommend subject-specific health databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, this study found that multidisciplinary citation indexes Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection not only had the highest percentages of total titles held, but also a higher number of unique titles.

CONCLUSIONS

These indexes have potential utility in qualitative search strategies, if only for supplementing other database searches with unique records. This potential was investigated via tests on qualitative rapid review search strategies translated to Scopus to determine how the index may contribute relevant literature.

摘要

目的

本研究调查书目数据库检索定性研究用于卫生技术评估(HTA)研究的系统评价和快速评价的有效性。定性研究在综述和卫生技术评估中越来越普遍,但标准化的检索方法,特别是关于数据库选择的方法仍在发展中。

方法

为了确定常用数据库(MEDLINE、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Scopus和Web of Science)的表现,使用InCites期刊引证报告编制了一份相关期刊标题的综合列表,并由加拿大药品局(原CADTH)的定性研究人员进行了验证。该列表用于评估每个数据库的定性收录情况,通过计算每个数据库中收录的标题总数的百分比以及每个数据库中独特标题的数量。

结果

虽然关于定性检索方法的出版物通常推荐特定主题的卫生数据库,包括MEDLINE、CINAHL和PsycINFO,但本研究发现,多学科引文索引Scopus和Web of Science核心合集不仅拥有收录标题总数的最高百分比,而且独特标题的数量也更多。

结论

这些索引在定性检索策略中具有潜在效用,即便只是用独特记录补充其他数据库检索。通过对转换为Scopus的定性快速评价检索策略进行测试,研究了这种潜力,以确定该索引如何贡献相关文献。

相似文献

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