Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “MEDLINE”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 91 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Identifying relevant diagnostic studies in MEDLINE. The diagnostic value of the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and dipstick as an example.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine sensitivity and positive predictive value of MEDLINE searching for diagnostic studies, relevant for the primary health care setting. METHOD: Results of MEDLINE searches were compared with a reference standard collection of studies on two subjects, the diagnostic value of ESR in discriminating between 'pathology' and 'no pathology', and the dipstick method in diagnosing urinary tract infections. The main outcome measures were sensitivity (proportion of the total number of reference standard diagnostic studies that could be identified by the search) and positive predictive value (proportion of the total number of publications retrieved by MEDLINE that were incorporated in the reference standard). RESULTS: The combined MeSH and freetext search was more sensitive than MeSH term searching only, for both the ESR and the dipstick search. With this combined search sensitivities of 0.91 and 0.98 and predictive values of 0.10 and 0.68 were found for ESR and dipstick respectively. By restricting the search with keywords describing the primary health care setting the predictive values increased to 0.72 and 1.00 but sensitivity dropped to 0.10 and 0.07 (ESR and dipstick respectively). CONCLUSION: Combining freetext and MeSH term searching, without restriction to the primary health care setting, is a valuable strategy in systematically searching for available evidence on the value of a diagnostic test in the scope of a specific disease. The predictive value seems to depend on the breadth of the disease area. MEDLINE should provide a term such as 'diagnostic evaluation study' to be used in the limit field Publication Type to specify diagnostic studies.

Blood Sedimentation↗
PubMed2004

Automatic extraction of mutations from Medline and cross-validation with OMIM.

Mutations help us to understand the molecular origins of diseases. Researchers, therefore, both publish and seek disease-relevant mutations in public databases and in scientific literature, e.g. Medline. The retrieval tends to be time-consuming and incomplete. Automated screening of the literature is more efficient. We developed extraction methods (called MEMA) that scan Medline abstracts for mutations. MEMA identified 24,351 singleton mutations in conjunction with a HUGO gene name out of 16,728 abstracts. From a sample of 100 abstracts we estimated the recall for the identification of mutation-gene pairs to 35% at a precision of 93%. Recall for the mutation detection alone was >67% with a precision rate of >96%. This shows that our system produces reliable data. The subset consisting of protein sequence mutations (PSMs) from MEMA was compared to the entries in OMIM (20,503 entries versus 6699, respectively). We found 1826 PSM-gene pairs to be in common to both datasets (cross-validated). This is 27% of all PSM-gene pairs in OMIM and 91% of those pairs from OMIM which co-occur in at least one Medline abstract. We conclude that Medline covers a large portion of the mutations known to OMIM. Another large portion could be artificially produced mutations from mutagenesis experiments. Access to the database of extracted mutation-gene pairs is available through the web pages of the EBI (refer to http://www.ebi. ac.uk/rebholz/index.html).

Animals↗
PubMed1995

MEDLINE training for medical students integrated into the clinical curriculum.

This study was initiated in response to the availabilty of unlimited access to MEDLINE via the PaperChase interface at the host institution. The goal of the study was to analyse the usage of MEDLINE by medical students during their third-year clinical clerkship in paediatrics. This was achieved by first giving them a formal demonstration of MEDLINE and then longitudinally administering a structured questionnaire at several points during their paediatric clerkship. Since medical students were required to write a thesis for this clerkship, which included an analysis of the primary literature, there was an identified need for using the system. This study analyses the students' perceptions and searching activities after formal training and upon having unlimited access to MEDLINE.

Clinical Clerkship↗
PubMed2000

Assessment of MEDLINE search strategies for randomized controlled trials in prosthodontics.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, and precision of MEDLINE search strategies for detecting randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in prosthodontics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A list of RCTs was obtained by hand-searching the International Journal of Prosthodontics, Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, and Journal of Prosthodontics published between 1988 and 1997. RCTs identified served as the "gold standard" with which different MEDLINE search strategies were compared. Subject headings, keywords, MEDLINE checktags, publication types, and combinations thereof were used, and their results were compared with the "gold standard". RESULTS: Sensitivity ranged from 9% to 67%, specificity was at least 96% for all searches, and precision ranged from 22% to 59%. The most productive searches were by publication type clinical trial and publication type randomized controlled trial. Combining search terms did not improve sensitivity for detecting RCTs published in prosthodontic journals (p > .10). CONCLUSION: These findings support the need for more detailed reporting of trial methodologies to facilitate accurate indexing of prosthodontic articles in MEDLINE.

Humans↗
PubMed2004

Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of diagnosis from Medline: analytical survey.

OBJECTIVE: To develop optimal search strategies in Medline for retrieving sound clinical studies on the diagnosis of health disorders. DESIGN: Analytical survey. SETTING: Medline, 2000. PARTICIPANTS: 170 journals for 2000 of which 161 were indexed in Medline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The sensitivity, specificity, precision ("positive predictive value"), and accuracy of 4862 unique terms in 17,287 combinations were determined by comparison with a hand search of all articles (the "gold standard") in 161 journals published during 2000 (49,028 articles). RESULTS: Only 147 (18.9%) of 778 articles about diagnostic tests met basic criteria for scientific merit. Combinations of search terms reached peak sensitivities of 98.6% at a specificity of 74.3%. Compared with best single terms, best multiple terms increased sensitivity for sound studies by 6.8% (absolute increase), while also increasing specificity (absolute increase 6.0%) when sensitivity was maximised. When terms were combined to maximise specificity, the single term, specificity.tw. (98.4%), outperformed combinations of terms. The strategies newly reported in this paper outperformed other validated search strategies except for one strategy that had slightly higher sensitivity (99.3% v 98.6%) but lower specificity (54.7% v 74.3%). CONCLUSION: New empirical search strategies in Medline can optimise retrieval of articles reporting high quality clinical studies of diagnosis.

Information Storage and Retrieval↗
PubMed2004

Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey.

OBJECTIVE: To develop optimal search strategies in Medline for retrieving systematic reviews. DESIGN: Analytical survey. DATA SOURCES: 161 journals published in 2000 indexed in Medline. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The sensitivity, specificity, and precision of retrieval of systematic reviews of 4862 unique terms in 782,485 combinations of one to five terms were determined by comparison with a hand search of all articles (the criterion standard) in 161 journals published during 2000 (49,028 articles). RESULTS: Only 753 (1.5%) of the 49,028 articles were systematic reviews. The most sensitive strategy included five terms and had a sensitivity of 99.9% (95% confidence interval 99.6% to 100%) and a specificity of 52% (51.6% to 52.5%). The strategy that best minimised the difference between sensitivity and specificity had a sensitivity of 98% (97% to 99%) and specificity of 90.8% (90.5% to 91.1%). Highest precision for multiterm strategies, 57% (54% to 60%), was achieved at a sensitivity of 71% (68% to 74%). The term "cochrane database of systematic reviews.jn." was the most precise single term search strategy (sensitivity of 56% (52% to 60%) and precision of 96% (94% to 98%)). These strategies are available through the "limit" screen of Ovid's search interface for Medline. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic reviews can be retrieved from Medline with close to perfect sensitivity or specificity, or with high precision, by using empirical search strategies.

Information Storage and Retrieval↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Performances of 27 MEDLINE systems tested by searches with clinical questions.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performances of online and compact-disc (CD-ROM) versions of the National Library of Medicine's (NLM) MEDLINE database. DESIGN: Analytic survey. INTERVENTION: Clinical questions were drawn from 18 searches originally conducted spontaneously by clinicians from wards and clinics who had used Grateful Med Version 4.0. Clinicians' search strategies were translated to meet the specific requirements of 13 online and 14 CD-ROM MEDLINE systems. A senior librarian and vendors' representatives constructed independent searches from the clinicians' questions. The librarian and clinician searches were run through each system, in command mode for the librarian and menu mode for clinicians, when available. Vendor searches were run through the vendors' own systems only. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Numbers of relevant and irrelevant citations retrieved, cost (for online systems only), and time. RESULTS: Systems varied substantially for all searches, and for librarian and clinician searches separately, with respect to the numbers of relevant and irrelevant citations retrieved (p < 0.001 for both) and the cost per relevant citation (p = 0.012), but not with respect to the time per search. Based on combined rankings for the highest number of relevant and the lowest number of irrelevant citations retrieved, the SilverPlatter CD-ROM MEDLINE clinical journal subset performed best for librarian searches, while the PaperChase online system worked best for clinician searches. For cost per relevant citation retrieved, Dialog's Knowledge Index performed best for both librarian and clinician searches. CONCLUSIONS: There were substantial differences in the performances of competing MEDLINE systems, and performance was affected by search strategy, which was conceived by a librarian or by clinicians.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Factors associated with success in searching MEDLINE and applying evidence to answer clinical questions.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the ability of medical and nurse practitioner students to use MEDLINE to obtain evidence for answering clinical questions and to identify factors associated with the successful answering of questions. METHODS: A convenience sample of medical and nurse practitioner students was recruited. After completing instruments measuring demographic variables, computer and searching attitudes and experience, and cognitive traits, the subjects were given a brief orientation to MEDLINE searching and the techniques of evidence-based medicine. The subjects were then given 5 questions (from a pool of 20) to answer in two sessions using the Ovid MEDLINE system and the Oregon Health & Science University library collection. Each question was answered using three possible responses that reflected the quality of the evidence. All actions capable of being logged by the Ovid system were captured. Statistical analysis was performed using a model based on generalized estimating equations. The relevance-based measures of recall and precision were measured by defining end queries and having relevance judgments made by physicians who were not associated with the study. RESULTS: Forty-five medical and 21 nurse practitioner students provided usable answers to 324 questions. The rate of correctness increased from 32.3 to 51.6 percent for medical students and from 31.7 to 34.7 percent for nurse practitioner students. Ability to answer questions correctly was most strongly associated with correctness of the answer before searching, user experience with MEDLINE features, the evidence-based medicine question type, and the spatial visualization score. The spatial visualization score showed multi-colinearity with student type (medical vs. nurse practitioner). Medical and nurse practitioner students obtained comparable recall and precision, neither of which was associated with correctness of the answer. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and nurse practitioner students in this study were at best moderately successful at answering clinical questions correctly with the assistance of literature searching. The results confirm the importance of evaluating both search ability and the ability to use the resulting information to accomplish a clinical task.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

A simple and practical dictionary-based approach for identification of proteins in Medline abstracts.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop a practical and efficient protein identification system for biomedical corpora. DESIGN: The developed system, called ProtScan, utilizes a carefully constructed dictionary of mammalian proteins in conjunction with a specialized tokenization algorithm to identify and tag protein name occurrences in biomedical texts and also takes advantage of Medline "Name-of-Substance" (NOS) annotation. The dictionaries for ProtScan were constructed in a semi-automatic way from various public-domain sequence databases followed by an intensive expert curation step. MEASUREMENTS: The recall and precision of the system have been determined using 1000 randomly selected and hand-tagged Medline abstracts. RESULTS: The developed system is capable of identifying protein occurrences in Medline abstracts with a 98% precision and 88% recall. It was also found to be capable of processing approximately 300 abstracts per second. Without utilization of NOS annotation, precision and recall were found to be 98.5% and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The developed system appears to be well suited for protein-based Medline indexing and can help to improve biomedical information retrieval. Further approaches to ProtScan's recall improvement also are discussed.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed1993

Comparison of CINAHL, EMBASE, and MEDLINE databases for the nurse researcher.

The purpose of this research was to determine which of three databases, CINAHL, EMBASE or MEDLINE, should be accessed when researching nursing topics. The three databases were searched for citations on topics selected by three nurse researchers and the results were compared. For the search of nursing care literature on a medical condition, it was helpful to search both CINAHL and MEDLINE. CINAHL provided the majority of relevant articles for the second search, on computers and privacy, but inclusion of MEDLINE and EMBASE enhanced retrieval somewhat. The search on substance abuse in pregnancy, not restricted to nursing literature, retrieved better results when searching both MEDLINE and EMBASE. Due to the nature and distribution of the nursing literature, it is especially important for the searcher to understand and respond to the focus of the researcher.

Clinical Nursing Research↗
PubMed1997

The MEDLINE experience at Yale: 1986-1996.

The Cushing/Whitney Medical Library began providing end-user access to MEDLINE in 1986 and switched to the OVID system in 1993. MEDLINE is a core service of the library, and the choice of delivery systems has had a significant impact throughout the Yale-New Haven Medical Center. This paper describes the user response to MEDLINE, discusses the effects of MEDLINE on other library services, and suggests ways in which technology, policy, and funding have influenced use. Yale's experience suggests that removing barriers in all three areas can dramatically expand the points of access, the number of users, and the amount of use with manageable effects on other library services.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed1998

Criteria for evaluating alternative MEDLINE search engines.

With so many options available for searching MEDLINE on the World Wide Web or as a component of an online service, evaluation criteria are suggested as a means of assisting librarians in determining the positive and negative aspects of alternative MEDLINE sites. A set of searches was utilized to systematically compare MEDLINE sites. Sites evaluated included Avicenna, America Online, HealthGate, PubMed, Medscape, and Physicians' Online. Some features used to evaluate these sites were: default fields; operators (default); access to MeSH; subheadings; stop words protected in MeSH; truncation; and stemming. This article will describe the group process used to arrive at the evaluation criteria, as well as some general conclusions which will help librarians in directing their users to a particular MEDLINE site.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMed1999

Identifying randomized controlled trials of cognitive therapy for depression: comparing the efficiency of Embase, Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic databases.

This study sought to compare the sensitivity and precision of Embase, Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic database searches for randomized controlled trials of cognitive therapy for depression. Searches in each database combined with a hand search in five selected journals formed the total pool against which each search was assessed. Sensitivities of standard searches (index terms only) were 68%, 84% and 38% in Embase, Medline and PsycINFO respectively. Sensitivities of expert searches (index and free text terms) were 76%, 97% and 65% for Embase, Medline and PsycINFO respectively. Medline appears to be the most efficient at identifying articles describing psychological treatment evaluation.

Cognitive Behavioral Therapy↗
PubMed2004

Optimal search strategies for detecting health services research studies in MEDLINE.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from health services research (HSR) is currently thinly spread through many journals, making it difficult for health services researchers, managers and policy-makers to find research on clinical practice guidelines and the appropriateness, process, outcomes, cost and economics of health care services. We undertook to develop and test search terms to retrieve from the MEDLINE database HSR articles meeting minimum quality standards. METHODS: The retrieval performance of 7445 methodologic search terms and phrases in MEDLINE (the test) were compared with a hand search of the literature (the gold standard) for each issue of 68 journal titles for the year 2000 (a total of 25,936 articles). We determined sensitivity, specificity and precision (the positive predictive value) of the MEDLINE search strategies. RESULTS: A majority of the articles that were classified as outcome assessment, but fewer than half of those in the other categories, were considered methodologically acceptable (no methodologic criteria were applied for cost studies). Combining individual search terms to maximize sensitivity, while keeping specificity at 50% or more, led to sensitivities in the range of 88.1% to 100% for several categories (specificities ranged from 52.9% to 97.4%). When terms were combined to maximize specificity while keeping sensitivity at 50% or more, specificities of 88.8% to 99.8% were achieved. When terms were combined to maximize sensitivity and specificity while minimizing the differences between the 2 measurements, most strategies for HSR categories achieved sensitivity and specificity of at least 80%. INTERPRETATION: Sensitive and specific search strategies were validated for retrieval of HSR literature from MEDLINE. These strategies have been made available for public use by the US National Library of Medicine at www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/hedges/search.html.

Costs and Cost Analysis↗
PubMedDate not supplied

[Medline criteria for scientific journals selection. Methodology and indicators. Application to Spanish medical journals paying special attention to public health].

Due to the strict selection process applied to its indexed journals, Medline is the most prestigious database in the Health and medicine field. The aim of this paper is both to analyze its selection criteria and translate into indicators that can be applied to Spanish medical journals willing to enter the Index Medicus. Analysis samples and methodology to apply obtained from the five groups of criteria considered by Medline (namely, Scope and coverage, Quality of contents, Quality of editorial work, Production quality and Audience) are proposed. A list of qualitative and quantitative indicators related to the five groups of criteria used by Medline is presented; namely, journal scientific output in the national and international context of the discipline, citation, analysis of the editorial committees, the editorial process and the peer-review system, indicators on compliance with the Vancouver guidelines, journal layout and informational quality, attractiveness, audience, journal visibility and interest as regards Medline goals.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed2000

Scientific publication productivity of Korean medical colleges: an analysis of 1988-1999 MEDLINE papers.

To identify where the quality research activity has been and is carried out in Korea, and to examine to what extents Korean medical colleges play leading roles in the production of international research papers, we investigated the publication productivity of Korean medical colleges and their medical departments as measured by the number of papers published in foreign journals indexed in MEDLINE. The 12-year period from 1988 to 1999 is covered. A total of 4,881 papers is published in MEDLINE foreign journals by the researchers in Korean medical colleges during the period. The production of MEDLINE papers are concentrated in a few universities. More than 60% of MEDLINE foreign journal papers is published by top five universities 25% by Seoul National University, and 15% by Yonsei University. The newly established medical colleges at the University of Ulsan and Sungkyunkwan University produced outstanding numbers of papers in less than ten years. Radiology has led the internationalization of Korean medical papers. It was the most productive specialty identified in this study. The productivity of Internal medicine is on the rise from the mid-1 990s, and the field began to produce the most number of papers since then.

Bibliometrics↗
PubMed1999

Comparison of literature searches on quality and costs for health technology assessment using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases.

Biomedical databases are an important source of information for health technology assessment. However, there is considerable variation in the costs of accessing commercial databases. We sought to measure the quality, amount of overlap, and costs of information retrieved from two of the main database sources--MEDLINE and EMBASE. Librarians at two health technology assessment agencies ran a total of eight literature searches on various medical technologies, using both databases. All search results were independently reviewed by two researchers. The researchers were asked to identify relevant references and to rank each of these according to a level of evidence scale. The results were tabulated to show the number of references identified by each database, the number of relevant references ranked by level of evidence, and the number of these references that were unique to one or the other database. The cost of retrieving references from each source was also calculated. Each database contained relevant references not available in the other. Because of the longer time lag for indexing in MEDLINE, many of the references that originally appeared to be unique to EMBASE were subsequently available in MEDLINE as well. Since our study was conducted, MEDLINE has been made available worldwide, free of charge, via the Internet. Hence, the cost difference between the databases is now even greater. However, notwithstanding the costs, it appears that literature searches that rely on only one or the other database will inevitably miss pertinent information.

Abstracting and Indexing↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Internet Medline providers.

Each database in this review has features that will appeal to some users. Each provides a credible interface to information available within the Medline database. The major differences are pricing and interface design. In this context, features that cost more and might seem trivial to the occasional searcher may actually save time and money when used by the professional. Internet Grateful Med is free, but Ms. Coady and I agree the availability of only three ANDable search fields is a major functional limitation. PubMed is also free but much more powerful. The command line interface that permits very sophisticated searches requires a commitment that casual users will find intimidating. Ms. Coady did not believe the feedback currently provided during a search was sufficient for sustained professional use. Paper Chase and Knowledge Finder are mature, modestly priced Medline search services. Paper Chase provides a menu-driven interface that is very easy to use, yet permits the user to search virtually all of Medline's data fields. Knowledge Finder emphasizes the use of natural language queries but fully supports more traditional search strategies. The impact of the tradeoff between fuzzy and Boolean strategies offered by Knowledge Finder is unclear and beyond the scope of this review. Additional software must be downloaded to use all of Knowledge Finders' features. Other providers required no software beyond the basic Internet browser, and this requirement prevented Ms. Coady from evaluating Knowledge Finder. Ovid and Silver Platter offer well-designed interfaces that simplify the construction of complex queries. These are clearly services designed for professional users. While pricing eliminates these for casual use, it should be emphasized that Medline citation access is only a portion of the service provided by these high-end vendors. Finally, we should comment that each of the vendors and government-sponsored services provided prompt and useful feedback to e-mail questions about usage. In conclusion, we would suggest you try the various services, determine which interface suits your style and budget, then perform simple searches until you learn the strengths and weaknesses of the service you select.

Humans↗