Use of methodological search filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to the omission of relevant studies

To determine the usefulness of methodological filters in search strategies for diagnostic studies in systematic reviews. We made an inventory of existing methodological search filters for diagnostic accuracy studies and applied them in PubMed to a reference set derived from 27 published systematic r...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical epidemiology 2006-03, Vol.59 (3), p.234-240
Main Authors: Leeflang, M.M.G., Scholten, R.J.P.M., Rutjes, A.W.S., Reitsma, J.B., Bossuyt, P.M.M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Biological and medical sciences
Biomedical Research
Databases, Bibliographic
Diagnosis
Diagnostic Errors
Epidemiology
Evidence-based medicine
Evidence-Based Medicine - methods
Filters
General aspects
Human
Humans
Information storage and retrieval
Information Storage and Retrieval - methods
Information Storage and Retrieval - standards
Medical sciences
MEDLINE
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Methodology
Prostate cancer
Public health. Hygiene
Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine
PubMed
Sensitivity and Specificity
Subject Headings
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To determine the usefulness of methodological filters in search strategies for diagnostic studies in systematic reviews. We made an inventory of existing methodological search filters for diagnostic accuracy studies and applied them in PubMed to a reference set derived from 27 published systematic reviews in a broad range of clinical fields. Outcome measures were the fraction of not identified relevant studies and the reduction in the number of studies to read. We tested 12 search filters. Of the studies included in the systematic reviews, 2%–28% did not pass the sensitive search filters, 4%–24% did not pass the accurate filters, and 39%–42% did not pass the specific filters. Decrease in number-needed-to-read when a search filter was used in a search strategy for a diagnostic systematic review varied from 0% to 77%. The use of methodological filters to identify diagnostic accuracy studies can lead to omission of a considerable number of relevant studies that would otherwise be included. When preparing a systematic review, it may be preferable to avoid using methodological filters.
ISSN:0895-4356
1878-5921
DOI:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.07.014