List members interested in search filters may like to know about the ISSG
Search filter resource which, as well as listing filters, provides critical
appraisals of published filters and also lists performance reviews - which
may help with decisions about which filters perform best for specific
tasks.
http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/intertasc/
Julie Glanville
Project Director-Information Services
York Health Economics Consortium
University of York
On Jul 5 2010, Jacqueline aka Laika wrote:
>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
>
|