Developing efficient search strategies to identify reports of adverse effects in medline and embase
- 8 February 2006
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Wiley in Health Information and Libraries Journal
- Vol. 23 (1), 3-12
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2006.00634.x
Abstract
This study aimed to assess the performance, in terms of sensitivity and precision, of different approaches to searching MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify studies of adverse effects. Five approaches to searching for adverse effects evidence were identified: approach 1, using specified adverse effects; approach 2, using subheadings/qualifiers; approach 3, using text words; approach 4, using indexing terms; approach 5, searching for specific study designs. The sensitivity and precision of these five approaches, and combinations of these approaches, were compared in a case study using a systematic review of the adverse effects of seven anti-epileptic drugs. The most sensitive search strategy in MEDLINE (97.0%) required a combination of terms for specified adverse effects, floating subheadings, and text words for 'adverse effects'. In EMBASE, a combination of terms for specified adverse effects and text words for 'adverse effects' provided the most sensitive search strategy (98.6%). Both these search strategies yielded low precision (2.8%). A highly sensitive search in either database requires a combination of approaches, and has low precision. This suggests that better reporting and indexing of adverse effects is required and that an effective generic search filter may not yet be feasible.Keywords
This publication has 23 references indexed in Scilit:
- Selective exposure reporting and Medline indexing limited the search sensitivity for observational studies of the adverse effects of oral contraceptivesJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2005
- Availability of large-scale evidence on specific harms from systematic reviews of randomized trialsThe American Journal of Medicine, 2004
- Benefits and harms of drug treatmentsBMJ, 2004
- A comparison of three different sources of data in assessing the frequencies of adverse reactions to amiodaroneBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2004
- Quantifying Adverse Drug EventsDrug Safety, 2004
- Balancing benefits and harms in health careBMJ, 2003
- Standardized retrieval of side effects data for meta-analysis of safety outcomes: A feasibility study in acute sinusitisJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2002
- A statistical approach to designing search filters to find systematic reviews: objectivity enhances accuracyJournal of Information Science, 2001
- The Adverse Effect Dilemma: Quest for Accessible InformationAnnals of Internal Medicine, 1991
- Validity of anecdotal reports of suspected adverse drug reactions: the problem of false alarmsBMJ, 1982