Hi Jacqueline
Apologies for the slow reply - I have been moving countries!
I find the systematic review filter "useless" because it lumps so many things together. That might be helpful if I was writing a general review. But for rapid searches on clinical questions i want a filter that just gives me "systematic reviews" and not a large miscellany of things to sort through. The My NCBI filter works nicely for this, so I never use the PubMed one*.
Cheers
Paul Glasziou
* The full so-called "systematic review" in PubMed is:
(systematic review [ti] OR meta-analysis [pt] OR meta-analysis [ti] OR systematic literature review [ti] OR
(systematic review [tiab] AND review [pt]) OR consensus development conference [pt] OR
practice guideline [pt] OR cochrane database syst rev [ta] OR acp journal club [ta] OR
health technol assess [ta] OR evid rep technol assess summ [ta])
OR
((evidence based[ti] OR evidence-based medicine [mh] OR best practice* [ti] OR evidence synthesis [tiab])
AND
(review [pt] OR diseases category[mh] OR behavior and behavior mechanisms [mh] OR therapeutics [mh] OR
evaluation studies[pt] OR validation studies[pt] OR guideline [pt]))
OR
((systematic [tw] OR systematically [tw] OR critical [tiab] OR (study selection [tw]) OR
(predetermined [tw] OR inclusion [tw] AND criteri* [tw]) OR exclusion criteri* [tw] OR main outcome measures [tw] OR
standard of care [tw] OR standards of care [tw])
AND
(survey [tiab] OR surveys [tiab] OR overview* [tw] OR review [tiab] OR reviews [tiab] OR search* [tw] OR
handsearch [tw] OR analysis [tiab] OR critique [tiab] OR appraisal [tw] OR
(reduction [tw]AND (risk [mh] OR risk [tw]) AND (death OR recurrence)))
AND
(literature [tiab] OR articles [tiab] OR publications [tiab] OR publication [tiab] OR
bibliography [tiab] OR bibliographies [tiab] OR published [tiab] OR
unpublished [tw] OR citation [tw] OR citations [tw] OR database [tiab] OR internet [tiab] OR textbooks [tiab] OR
references [tw] OR scales [tw] OR papers [tw] OR datasets [tw] OR trials [tiab] OR meta-analy* [tw] OR
(clinical [tiab] AND studies [tiab]) OR treatment outcome [mh] OR treatment outcome [tw]))
NOT
(letter [pt] OR newspaper article [pt] OR comment [pt])
>>> Jacqueline aka Laika 05/07/10 9:58 >>>
Hi Paul
Just out of curiosity. Why do you find the systematic review filter "pretty useless" and all other filters great? For me it is almost the other way around. As a clinical librarian I advise clinicians to use the SR-filter first, and to apply a Clinical Study Category filter if necessary. Of these I only find the therapy narrow filter quite good (in case of sufficient evidence). A diagnosis-filter consisting of the word "specificity" is seldom appropriate (missing relevant papers and finding a lot of irrelevant ones, i.e. about antibody specificity etc.)
The SR-filter only has the wrong name. It is a filter for aggregate evidence & it seems to get broader every year. But in general -when there is not an overwhelming amount of aggregate evidence, it is quite good. The Montori filter you show seems pretty good at finding Systematic Reviews only.
You said: "If I am logged in to MyNCBI then this filter shows up whatever search I do! ...But this does not seem to work with the new interface."
The filter I created last year (Cochrane filter for RCT's) still exists/shows the results....
As a matter of fact, I could add the Montori filter to my NCBI (thanks for the tip ;)
What can't be done with the custom filters is that you can "add" them to your search (you only see the results but not the filter and you can't save the entire search). But that was right so from the start (unfortunately)
Is this the problem or doesn't your filter show up at all?
Jacqueline
|