Search Strategies for Clinical Practice Guidelines
Author Information
Author(s): Andrea Haase, Markus Follmann, Guido Skipka, Hanna Kirchner
Primary Institution: Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG)
Hypothesis
Can search strategies in SUMSearch and Google Scholar efficiently identify relevant clinical practice guidelines?
Conclusion
SUMSearch is more effective than Google Scholar for finding clinical practice guidelines.
Supporting Evidence
- SUMSearch detected 105 relevant guidelines, while Google Scholar detected 48.
- The search strategy including 'guideline' yielded the highest sensitivity in SUMSearch.
- Google Scholar required more time to find relevant guidelines compared to SUMSearch.
- Strategies including 'practice guideline' had the lowest number needed to read (NNR) in both search engines.
- SUMSearch's meta-search capabilities enhance its retrieval performance.
Takeaway
This study shows that using SUMSearch helps doctors find important medical guidelines faster than Google Scholar.
Methodology
The study compared retrieval performance of search strategies in SUMSearch and Google Scholar using a manual review as a reference standard.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the iterative nature of the methodology and lack of blinding.
Limitations
The study's findings may not be applicable to other search engines or databases, and reviewers were not blinded to the search engine used.
Participant Demographics
Clinicians searching for clinical practice guidelines.
Statistical Information
Confidence Interval
95% confidence intervals calculated for performance parameters.
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website