Efficiency of pragmatic search strategies to update clinical guidelines recommendations
Artículo
Open/ Download
Publication date
2015Metadata
Show full item record
Cómo citar
Martínez García, L.
Cómo citar
Efficiency of pragmatic search strategies to update clinical guidelines recommendations
Author
- Martínez García, L.;
- Sanabria, A. J.;
- Araya Cabello, Ignacio;
- Lawson, J.;
- Solà, Iván;
- Vernooij, R. W. M.;
- López, D.;
- García Álvarez, E.;
- Trujillo Martín, M. M.;
- Etxeandia-Ikobaltzeta, I.;
- Kotzeva, A.;
- Rigau, D.;
- Louro González, A.;
- Barajas Nava, L.;
- Díaz del Campo, P.;
- Estrada, M. D.;
- Gracia, J.;
- Salcedo Fernández, F.;
- Haynes, R. B.;
- Alonso Coello, Pablo;
Abstract
Background: A major challenge in updating clinical guidelines is to efficiently identify new, relevant evidence.
We evaluated the efficiency and feasibility of two new approaches: the development of restrictive search
strategies using PubMed Clinical Queries for MEDLINE and the use of the PLUS (McMaster Premium Literature
Service) database.
Methods: We evaluated a random sample of recommendations from a national guideline development
program and identified the references that would potentially trigger an update (key references) using an
exhaustive approach.
We designed restrictive search strategies using the minimum number of Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms and
text words required from the original exhaustive search strategies and applying broad and narrow filters. We
developed PLUS search strategies, matching Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Systematized Nomenclature of
Medicine (SNOMED) terms with guideline topics. We compared the number of key references retrieved by these
approaches with those retrieved by the exhaustive approach.
Results: The restrictive approach retrieved 68.1 % fewer references than the exhaustive approach (12,486 versus
39,136), and identified 89.9 % (62/69) of key references and 88 % (22/25) of recommendation updates. The use of PLUS
retrieved 88.5 % fewer references than the exhaustive approach (4,486 versus 39,136) and identified substantially fewer
key references (18/69, 26.1 %) and fewer recommendation updates (10/25, 40 %).
Conclusions: The proposed restrictive approach is a highly efficient and feasible method to identify new evidence that
triggers a recommendation update. Searching only in the PLUS database proved to be a suboptimal approach and
suggests the need for topic-specific tailoring.
General note
Artículo de publicación ISI
Patrocinador
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Instituto de Salud Carlos III (FIS)
CM11/00035
CM12/00168
CP09/00137
FIS PI10/00346
Identifier
URI: https://repositorio.uchile.cl/handle/2250/134409
DOI: DOI: 10.1186/s12874-015-0058-2
Quote Item
BMC Medical Research Methodology (2015) 15:57
Collections
The following license files are associated with this item: