70 research outputs found
Analysis of queries sent to PubMed at the point of care: Observation of search behaviour in a medical teaching hospital
Contains fulltext :
69801.pdf ( ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: The use of PubMed to answer daily medical care questions is limited because it is challenging to retrieve a small set of relevant articles and time is restricted. Knowing what aspects of queries are likely to retrieve relevant articles can increase the effectiveness of PubMed searches. The objectives of our study were to identify queries that are likely to retrieve relevant articles by relating PubMed search techniques and tools to the number of articles retrieved and the selection of articles for further reading. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of queries regarding patient-related problems sent to PubMed by residents and internists in internal medicine working in an Academic Medical Centre. We analyzed queries, search results, query tools (Mesh, Limits, wildcards, operators), selection of abstract and full-text for further reading, using a portal that mimics PubMed. RESULTS: PubMed was used to solve 1121 patient-related problems, resulting in 3205 distinct queries. Abstracts were viewed in 999 (31%) of these queries, and in 126 (39%) of 321 queries using query tools. The average term count per query was 2.5. Abstracts were selected in more than 40% of queries using four or five terms, increasing to 63% if the use of four or five terms yielded 2-161 articles. CONCLUSION: Queries sent to PubMed by physicians at our hospital during daily medical care contain fewer than three terms. Queries using four to five terms, retrieving less than 161 article titles, are most likely to result in abstract viewing. PubMed search tools are used infrequently by our population and are less effective than the use of four or five terms. Methods to facilitate the formulation of precise queries, using more relevant terms, should be the focus of education and research
STARD 2015: An Updated List of Essential Items for Reporting Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.
Incomplete reporting has been identified as a major source of avoidable waste in biomedical research. Essential information is often not provided in study reports, impeding the identification, critical appraisal, and replication of studies. To improve the quality of reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies, the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (STARD) statement was developed. Here we present STARD 2015, an updated list of 30 essential items that should be included in every report of a diagnostic accuracy study. This update incorporates recent evidence about sources of bias and variability in diagnostic accuracy and is intended to facilitate the use of STARD. As such, STARD 2015 may help to improve completeness and transparency in reporting of diagnostic accuracy studies
Endorsement of the STARD statement by biomedical journals: Survey of instructions for authors
Comparing patient characteristics, type of intervention, control, and outcome (PICO) queries with unguided searching: a randomized controlled crossover trial
Contains fulltext :
110627.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Translating a question into a query using patient characteristics, type of intervention, control, and outcome (PICO) should help answer therapeutic questions in PubMed searches. The authors performed a randomized crossover trial to determine whether the PICO format was useful for quick searches of PubMed. METHODS: Twenty-two residents and specialists working at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre were trained in formulating PICO queries and then presented with a randomized set of questions derived from Cochrane reviews. They were asked to use the best query possible in a five-minute search, using standard and PICO queries. Recall and precision were calculated for both standard and PICO queries. RESULTS: Twenty-two physicians created 434 queries using both techniques. Average precision was 4.02% for standard queries and 3.44% for PICO queries (difference nonsignificant, t(21) = -0.56, P = 0.58). Average recall was 12.27% for standard queries and 13.62% for PICO queries (difference nonsignificant, t(21) = -0.76, P = 0.46). CONCLUSIONS: PICO queries do not result in better recall or precision in time-limited searches. Standard queries containing enough detail are sufficient for quick searches
World Association of Medical Editors: Support for the Croatian Medical Journal’s Editorial Independence
Contains fulltext :
69352.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access
Publication status of manuscripts submitted to eight medical journals during the study time frame.
<p>Publication status of manuscripts submitted to eight medical journals during the study time frame.</p
Characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with publication: multivariable analysis.
<p>*Collapsed categories: Europe and US vs rest of the world.</p
Publication status of submitted manuscripts reporting positive versus negative results by sponsor type.
<p>*1 manuscript with positive results of an industry-supported trial was withdrawn by authors before editorial decisions were made. N = number of submitted manuscripts.</p
Publication status of submitted manuscripts reporting positive vs negative results by journal.
<p>*1 manuscript with positive results submitted to the BMJ was withdrawn by authors before editorial decisions were made. N = number of submitted manuscripts.</p
Characteristics of submitted manuscripts and their association with publication: univariate analysis (accepted vs all rejected).
<p>*Percentage of grand total of submitted manuscripts. <sup>§</sup> Percentage of row category that were accepted for publication. IF = journal impact factor, 2011.</p
- …