Phi-Yen Nguyen, Joanne E. McKenzie, Simon L. Turner, Matthew J. Page, Steve McDonald
{"title":"Development of a search filter to retrieve reports of interrupted time series studies from MEDLINE and PubMed","authors":"Phi-Yen Nguyen, Joanne E. McKenzie, Simon L. Turner, Matthew J. Page, Steve McDonald","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Interrupted time series (ITS) studies contribute importantly to systematic reviews of population-level interventions. We aimed to develop and validate search filters to retrieve ITS studies in MEDLINE and PubMed.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A total of 1017 known ITS studies (published 2013–2017) were analysed using text mining to generate candidate terms. A control set of 1398 time-series studies were used to select differentiating terms. Various combinations of candidate terms were iteratively tested to generate three search filters. An independent set of 700 ITS studies was used to validate the filters' sensitivities. The filters were test-run in Ovid MEDLINE and the records randomly screened for ITS studies to determine their precision. Finally, all MEDLINE filters were translated to PubMed format and their sensitivities in PubMed were estimated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Three search filters were created in MEDLINE: a <i>precision-maximising</i> filter with high precision (78%; 95% CI 74%–82%) but moderate sensitivity (63%; 59%–66%), most appropriate when there are limited resources to screen studies; a <i>sensitivity-and-precision-maximising</i> filter with higher sensitivity (81%; 77%–83%) but lower precision (32%; 28%–36%), providing a balance between expediency and comprehensiveness; and a s<i>ensitivity-maximising</i> filter with high sensitivity (88%; 85%–90%) but likely very low precision, useful when combined with specific content terms. Similar sensitivity estimates were found for PubMed versions.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our filters strike different balances between comprehensiveness and screening workload and suit different research needs. Retrieval of ITS studies would be improved if authors identified the ITS design in the titles.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":"15 4","pages":"627-640"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jrsm.1716","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1716","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background
Interrupted time series (ITS) studies contribute importantly to systematic reviews of population-level interventions. We aimed to develop and validate search filters to retrieve ITS studies in MEDLINE and PubMed.
Methods
A total of 1017 known ITS studies (published 2013–2017) were analysed using text mining to generate candidate terms. A control set of 1398 time-series studies were used to select differentiating terms. Various combinations of candidate terms were iteratively tested to generate three search filters. An independent set of 700 ITS studies was used to validate the filters' sensitivities. The filters were test-run in Ovid MEDLINE and the records randomly screened for ITS studies to determine their precision. Finally, all MEDLINE filters were translated to PubMed format and their sensitivities in PubMed were estimated.
Results
Three search filters were created in MEDLINE: a precision-maximising filter with high precision (78%; 95% CI 74%–82%) but moderate sensitivity (63%; 59%–66%), most appropriate when there are limited resources to screen studies; a sensitivity-and-precision-maximising filter with higher sensitivity (81%; 77%–83%) but lower precision (32%; 28%–36%), providing a balance between expediency and comprehensiveness; and a sensitivity-maximising filter with high sensitivity (88%; 85%–90%) but likely very low precision, useful when combined with specific content terms. Similar sensitivity estimates were found for PubMed versions.
Conclusion
Our filters strike different balances between comprehensiveness and screening workload and suit different research needs. Retrieval of ITS studies would be improved if authors identified the ITS design in the titles.
期刊介绍:
Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines.
Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines.
By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.