The Cochrane Library“New search”图标的特点及相关检索策略分析

Analyzing the Characteristics of the Flag New Search and the Correlative Search Strategies in The Cochrane Library

目的对标有"New search"的Cochrane系统评价在检索方面的特点和检索策略进行统计分析,探讨这些特点和检索策略是否对更新系统评价有帮助。方法在John Wiley&Sons公司2009年第1期The Cochrane Library的"Advanced Search"检索模块,选择"New search"选项进行检索,并将检索结果转入到ProCite参考文献管理软件,然后逐一浏览The Cochrane Library中每一检索结果的"What’snew"、"History"及"Appendix"部分,并将此部分内容加到ProCite参考文献管理软件的相关字段中以便统计分析。结果共检出140条标注有"New search"图标的系统评价,其中新检索总频次274次,平均1.96次/篇;两年内至少进行一次新检索的有58篇(41.43%);有61篇(43.57%)附有检索策略,其中检索最多的数据库是MEDLINE,共56篇(91.80%),其次是EMBASE47篇(77.05%)、CENTRAL 45篇(73.77%)。在将检索策略作为附件的系统评价中,多数没有正确标注针对各个数据库最近一次检索时间和所检数据库的时间范围。结论虽然有些Cochrane系统评价更新时存在更新不及时、检索策略标注相关信息不完善等问题,但部分内容对系统评价员更新检索仍有帮助。

Objective To search through the Cochrane database of systematic reviews using the flag new search option to find out whether this strategy helps update revivews. Methods We chose the New search option in the advanced search in The Cochrane Library on Wiley InterScience （Issue 1, 2009）, and input all hit citations to the ProCite software. We then looked through the What＇s new＇,＇History＇, as well as ＂Appendices＂ on hit reviews in the Cochrane library one by one, and then added these related contents to thef ield of the ProCite in order to analyze the results. Results A total of 140 systematic reviews had the flag new search. Among them, the total new search frequency were 274, meaning frequency was 1.96/1; updated within two years were 58 （41.43）; there were 61 reviews with ＂Appendices＂ （43.57%）. The status of the chosen database among the 61 reviews with ＂Appendices＂ was as follows： most were from MEDLINE （56 reviews, 91.80%）, next EMBASE （47 reviews, 77.05 %）, and finally CENTRAL （45 reviews, 73.7%）. Among the reviews with Appendices, most of them were not correctly labeled. Conclusion Although some Cochrane systematic reviews are updated in a timely fashion, there is some incomplete information, although it may be still helpful for researchers to look for new studies.