Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/21107
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase
Authors: Stewart, Fiona
Fraser, Cynthia
Robertson, Clare
Avenell, Alison
Archibald, Daryll
Douglas, Flora
Hoddinott, Pat
van, Teijlingen Edwin
Boyers, Dwayne
Contact Email: p.m.hoddinott@stir.ac.uk
Keywords: Bibliographic databases
Search filters
Information retrieval
Gender
Systematic reviews
Issue Date: Jul-2014
Publisher: BioMed Central
Citation: Stewart F, Fraser C, Robertson C, Avenell A, Archibald D, Douglas F, Hoddinott P, van Teijlingen E & Boyers D (2014) Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase, Systematic Reviews, 3, Art. No.: 78.
Abstract: Background: Systematic reviews often investigate the effectiveness of interventions for one sex. However, identifying interventions with data presented according to the sex of study participants can be challenging due to suboptimal indexing in bibliographic databases and poor reporting in titles and abstracts. The purposes of this study were to develop a highly sensitive search filter to identify literature relevant to men's health and to assess the performance of a range of sex-specific search terms used individually and in various combinations. Methods: Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken across a range of databases to inform a series of systematic reviews investigating obesity management for men. The included studies formed a reference standard set. A set of sex-specific search terms, identified from database-specific controlled vocabularies and from natural language used in the titles and abstracts of relevant papers, was investigated in MEDLINE and Embase. Sensitivity, precision, number needed to read (NNR) and percent reduction in results compared to searching without sex-specific terms were calculated. Results: The reference standard set comprised 57 papers in MEDLINE and 63 in Embase. Seven sex-specific search terms were identified. Searching without sex-specific terms returned 31,897 results in MEDLINE and 37,351 in Embase and identified 84% (MEDLINE) and 83% (Embase) of the reference standard sets. The best performing individual sex-specific term achieved 100%/98% sensitivity (MEDLINE/Embase), NNR 544/609 (MEDLINE/Embase) and reduced the number of results by 18%/17% (MEDLINE/Embase), relative to searching without sex-specific terms. The best performing filter, compromising different combinations of controlled vocabulary terms and natural language, achieved higher sensitivity (MEDLINE and Embase 100%), greater reduction in number of results (MEDLINE/Embase 24%/20%) and greater reduction in NNR (MEDLINE/Embase 506/578) than the best performing individual sex-specific term. Conclusions: The proposed MEDLINE and Embase filters achieved high sensitivity and a reduction in the number of search results and NNR, indicating that they are useful tools for efficient, comprehensive literature searching but their performance is partially dependent on the appropriate use of database controlled vocabularies and index terms.
Type: Journal Article
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/1893/21107
DOI Link: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-78
Rights: © 2014 Stewart et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
Affiliation: University of Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
University of Aberdeen
HS Research - Stirling
Bournemouth University
University of Aberdeen

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Systematic Reviews 2014.pdf1.05 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is protected by original copyright



Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact library@stir.ac.uk providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.