 |
 |
Very good and useful feedback. Certainly not difficult to find cochrane reviews (all are found in the same spot!) so effort for filter was to find the "others". Would be nice to see queries that perform better, particularly as reporting quality improves (for instance in identifying study type in the title). Thanks a million! V Ps: I will surely let my mom know that there is a filter in the family!! ----- Original Message ----- From: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> To: Vonville, Helena M <[log in to unmask]>; [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> Cc: Montori, Victor M., M.D. Sent: Tue Jul 13 18:22:16 2010 Subject: RE: The new PubMed Clinical Queries Interface Dear Helena Thanks for that - very interesting. I am copying in Victor Montori for comments, but should also say that I select just one of his (several) filters* for my NCBI and deliberately used a narrower one (for quick rather than complete searches). However, catching the missing CDSR reviews is important, so I will modify my filter to the one you suggest. Thanks Paul Glasziou * Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB; Hedges Team. BMJ. 2005 Jan 8;330(7482):68. Epub 2004 Dec 24 -----Original Message----- From: Evidence based health (EBH) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Vonville, Helena M Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 5:06 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: The new PubMed Clinical Queries Interface There is a flaw in the Montori search in that the approach is far too narrow. Try this in PubMed: Medline[tiab] OR (systematic[tiab] AND review[tiab]) OR meta-analysis[ptyp] "cochrane database syst rev"[Journal] OR "cochrane database of systematic reviews online"[Journal] #2 NOT #1 I retrieved over 1,000 Cochrane reviews from searching by journal title that weren't retrieved with the Montori filter. I modified with a filter I've been working on and came up with this: "meta-analysis as topic"[MeSH] OR Meta-Analysis[ptyp] OR "systematic literature"[tiab] OR "systematic review*"[tiab] OR meta-analys*[tiab] OR "cochrane database syst rev"[Journal] OR "cochrane database of systematic reviews online"[Journal] OR "research synthesis"[tiab] OR "research integration"[tiab] OR "medline"[tiab] OR "data synthesis"[tiab] I compared it against the Montori filter and found a fairly substantial number of meta-analyses that the Montori filter missed. I have not compared my filter against the PubMed filter. At least, not lately. I've opted to take an overly-broad approach with the filters I've developed. The filter above is not too broad, though, but it is a modified version of the full SR/MA filter. A quick scan of the results shows a high percentage of SRs and MAs. Helena Helena M. VonVille, MLS, MPH Library Director University of Texas School of Public Health Library Houston, TX 77030 [log in to unmask] 713.500.9131 (office) 713.500.9125 (fax) -----Original Message----- From: Evidence based health (EBH) [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paul Glasziou Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 1:08 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: The new PubMed Clinical Queries Interface Good point Tanya - and nice idea to add the filters to MyNCBI. I never use the PubMed systematic reviews filter - its pretty useless (unlike the Therapy, Diagnosis, Prognosis, Etiology, Clinical Prediction Rule ones - which are all great!). So in MyNCBI I have saved one of the Montori filters*: Medline[tiab] OR (systematic[tiab] AND review[tiab]) OR meta-analysis[ptyp] If I am logged in to MyNCBI then this filter shows up whatever search I do! (Including the Clinical Queries filters :-) But this does not seem to work with the new interface. Best wishes Paul Glasziou * Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB; Hedges Team. BMJ. 2005 Jan 8;330(7482):68. Epub 2004 Dec 24 Feddern-Bekcan, Tanya wrote: > > Thank you for the heads up! Is it just me, or is there no drop-down > box or checkbox for the Systematic Reviews option? > > Since one can have up to 15 Filters for their My NCBI account in > PubMed, I'm thinking of just adding 4 of the clinical queries and > Systematic Reviews as filters. It'd be a lot quicker than having to go > to re-run the search on the Clinical Queries page. Is anyone else > doing the same thing? > > Take care, > > > Tanya > > Tanya Feddern-Bekcan, MLIS, AHIP, MOT, OTR/L > (http://www.reocities.com/nqiya/libraryarticles.html) formerly Tanya > Feddern > 305.243.3999 - [log in to unmask] - 305.325.9670 (fax) > EBM Theme Director, Head of Education, & Occupational Therapist > Department of Health Informatics, Louis Calder Memorial Library at the > University of Miami Miller School of Medicine > > They do random drug checks; why don't they do random hand swabs to see > which unhygienic healthcare providers are killing their patients by > spreading deadly infection? > > "A library without a librarian is a reading room."-- Jenny Garcia of > the University of Wyoming, MLS, AHIP > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Evidence based health (EBH) > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Steve Clancy > *Sent:* Wednesday, June 30, 2010 1:04 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] > *Subject:* The new PubMed Clinical Queries Interface > > Howdy. > > Has anyone had a chance to work with the new PubMed Clinical Queries > interface (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/pubmedutils/clinical)? > > What is your opinion? > > --steve > > -- > Steve Clancy, MLS > Medical Librarian > Science Library, Univ. of Calif., Irvine CA. U.S.A. > 949-824-7309 * sclancy AT uci.edu > http://www.faculty.uci.edu/profile.cfm?faculty_id=5109 > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > "We don't see things as they are...We see things as we are." - Anais Nin