我国中医药大学冠名为“系统评价/Meta分析”的博硕士论文文献检索现状

Retrieval status of master and doctorial dissertations entitled "systematic review / meta analysis" in domestic universities of traditional Chinese medicine

目的:分析我国中医药大学以"系统评价/Meta分析"冠名的博硕士论文检索现状。方法:检索中国学位论文全文数据库,纳入符合条件的系统评价/Meta分析,提取系统评价的基本资料,输入Excel、SPSS 17.0进行统计分析。结果:最终纳入423篇学位论文,其中71.9%检索了中英文数据库,27.7%只检索了中文数据库,82.8%检索了2个及以上中文库,54.1%检索了2个及以上英文库。检索频率较高的中文数据库依次是CNKI、VIP、CBM、万方数据库,英文库依次是Pub Med、Cochrane Library、EMBASE和OVID。结论:目前中医药大学名为"系统评价/Meta分析"的学位论文存在中医药专业数据库使用率低的问题,博士论文和"211"中医药大学学位论文在检索资源和检索结果呈现与硕士论文和非"211"中医药大学学位论文无差异。

Objective To analyze the retrieval of master and doctorial dissertations entitled ＂systematic review/meta analysis＂ in domestic universities of traditional Chinese medicine. Methods Master and doctorial dissertations entitled ＂ systematic review / meta analysis＂ in domestic universities of traditional Chinese medicine retrieved from ＂ China Dissertation Full-text Database＂ were analyzed using Excel and SPSS 17. 0,respectively. Results Of the 423 master and doctorial dissertations included in this study,71. 9% were retrieved from both Chinese and English databases,27. 7% were retrieved from Chinese databases,82. 8% were retrieved from two or more Chinese databases,54. 1%were retrieved from two or more English databases. The most frequently retrieved Chinese database was CKNI,followed by VIP,CBM and Wanfang. The most frequently retrieved English database was Pub Med,followed by Cochrane Library,EMBASE and OVID. Conclusion The low use of traditional Chinese medicine databases is the main problem in retrieval of master and doctorial dissertations entitled ＂ systematic review / meta analysis＂ in domestic universities of traditional Chinese medicine. No significant difference is found in retrieved doctorial dissertations and master dissertations between ＂ 211＂ and ＂ non-211＂ universities of traditional Chinese medicine.