For those conducting literature reviews, information on how these terms are
used by indexers for MEDLINE and CINAHL might be useful. Both added
Meta-Analysis as a subject heading in the late 1980's, MeSH in 1989 and
CINAHL in 1988. Actual usage in indexing differs. CINAHL also offers
Systematic Review as both a subject heading and publication type; MEDLINE
offers Meta-analysis as a Publication type. For those who are interested,
more information follows (long).
In the indexing for MEDLINE, Meta-Analysis is both a Publication Type and a
MeSH term. The MeSH scope note is:
A quantitative method of combining the results of independent studies
(usually drawn from the published literature) and synthesizing summaries and
conclusions which may be used to evaluate therapeutic effectiveness, plan
new studies, etc., with application chiefly in the areas of research and
medicine.
Annotation: IM for articles & books on meta-analysis as a type of study
design: do not confuse with Publication Type META-ANALYSIS; no qualif; DF:
META ANAL
Term added in 1989 MeSH
The MEDLINE Pub. Type scope note is:
A quantitative method of combining the results of independent studies
(usually drawn from the published literature) and synthesizing summaries and
conclusions which may be used to evaluate therapeutic effectiveness, plan
new studies, etc. It is often an overview of clinical trials. It is usually
called a meta-analysis by the author or sponsoring body and should be
differentiated from reviews of literature.
Annotation: publication type only; for meta-analyses as a subject or
research method, index under main heading META-ANALYSIS; Manual 26.26.6.1
(cross ref to info below)
26.26.6.1 Also available in MeSH is the main heading META-ANALYSIS with a
corresponding publication type META-ANALYSIS (PT). A meta-analysis is "a
quantitative method of combining the results of independent studies" to
provide
a larger population upon which to base a conclusion, usually of
effectiveness. It is considered a method of research, not a review of the
literature.
As with CLINICAL TRIALS (main heading) versus CLINICAL
TRIAL publication type), the main heading META-ANALYSIS will be indexed
relatively infrequently, for articles about meta-analyses. The publication
type will be indexed much more frequently. (NOTE! Both the main heading
and the publication type are singular, so the indexer must add (PT) at the
end of the publication type.)
Since a meta-analysis is by definition a combination of
studies, and CLINICAL TRIAL OVERVIEWS is an X-reference to the main
heading, do not add CLINICAL TRIALS (NIM) for a meta-analysis of clinical
trials. If a specific type of clinical trial was used for the
meta-analysis, that information should be indexed using the main heading,
NIM. Do not use any of the REVIEW publication types.
(These definitions and the reference from the Indexing Manual are from the
online MeSH Browser, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/99MBrowser.html IM means a
major heading; citation will appear under this heading in the print Index
Medicus. NIM is non Index Medicus, for terms used in indexing for the online
database only.)
In CINAHL, Meta Analysis is a Subject Heading, but not a Publication Type.
CINAHL indexing practice is to assign research methodologies used in a study
as minor headings, which differs from the MEDLINE practice. As in MEDLINE,
items ABOUT the methodology would be indexed with the term as a MAJOR
heading.
The CINAHL scope note is: The quantitative analysis of two or more
independent studies to integrate an synthesize the findings and describe the
features of the studies that contribute to variation in their results.
(Added in 1988.)
In 1998, CINAHL added Systematic Review as both a subject heading and
publication type. The scope note for the subject heading:
A specific type of literature review. For articles that are systematic
reviews or contain systematic reviews, search for document type "systematic
review." Before 1998 see under Literature Review.
For Systematic Review as a document (publication) type, the definition is as
follows:
indicates a research process in which a concept is identified and the
research which has studied it is analyzed and evaluated. The results of
this research are synthesized to present the current state of knowledge
regarding the concept. Includes integrated or integrative reviews. If the
material is a research study, coordinate with document type Research. For
materials about systematic reviews, see CINAHL subject heading SYSTEMATIC
REVIEW.
Before 1998, the Publication type "Review" was assigned to systematic
reviews in CINAHL. Therefore, limit your searches to either of these
publication types and include text words like systematic and integrative as
well as meta-analysis as both a subject and a text word.
I believe that the need for a document (publication) type arose from the
fact that many research studies in nursing/allied health are qualitative
rather than quantitative. A major journal, the Online Journal of Knowledge
Synthesis for Nursing, publishes "integrative reviews." Most of these do
not use meta-analysis, but definitely meet the requirements for a systematic
review. CINAHL also indexes the Cochrane reviews, and publishes the Online
Journal of Clinical Innovations, where the articles include systematic
reviews as well as practice information. The Systematic Review publication
type allows searching for all of these in-depth reviews with one publication
type. When searching to see how CINAHL indexed Cochrane reviews, I noticed
that meta analysis was only used for those reviews which used this
technique.
Since MEDLINE does not have a specific publication type for systematic
reviews, you will also need to use a text word approach combined with the
Review publication type to find this literature. In both databases, I found
indexing inconsistencies - some meta-analyses in MEDLINE had the Review pub
type and not Meta-Analysis (if author abstract said they did a
meta-analysis, I assumed they did), and some CINAHL records still followed
the old practice. I have e-mailed CINAHL re. the discrepancies...
Those interested in the history of these terms should look for articles
prior to 1988-89 which discussed Meta-Analysis as a research method. I'm
suggesting this time frame because terms are not added to MeSH until they
are relatively prevalent in the literature. I have done this search for the
nursing literature and will be looking at the articles next week. If I gain
any additional insight, I will write to the list.
Hope this helps - Peg
Margaret (Peg) Allen, MLS-AHIP mailto:[log in to unmask]
Library/Information Consultant
Resource Librarian Consultant for Cinahl Information Systems, Inc.
http://www.cinahl.com/
Library Consultant, Northern Wisconsin Area Health Education Center, Inc.
http://home.dwave.net/~nahec/
PO Box 2, 308 Kann, Stratford, WI 54484-0002
(715)687-4976 Fax:(715)687-4976
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Jull <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
<[log in to unmask]>; 'Systematic Review List'
<[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, August 25, 1999 3:09 PM
Subject: Term "systematic review"
>Dear all
>
>I am interested in the term systematic review/overview and where it
>originated from or who coined it. Until recently I had taken meta-analysis
to
>be the statistical component of a systematic review, but reading Glass who
>coined the term meta-analysis, this would seem quite incorrect. The process
>Glass outlined for conducting a meta-analysis (i.e. clear question, search
>strategy, outcomes of interest, quality assessment of studies) is similar
to
>that of systematic review. I had thought Mulrow might have used it in her
>1987 article, but rereading that the terms systematic and review are used
>but not in juxtaposition. Can anybody enlighten me?
>
>Andrew Jull
>Clinical Nurse Consultant
>Auckland Hospital
>Private Bag 92024
>Auckland
>NEW ZEALAND
>Phone: +64 9 3797440
>Fax:+64 9 3072818 (external)
> 7718 (internal)
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|