Searching for Controlled Trials of Complementary and Alternative Medicine: A Comparison of 15 Databases
2011

Comparing Databases for Complementary and Alternative Medicine Trials

Sample size: 15 publication Evidence: moderate

Author Information

Author(s): Elise Cogo, Margaret Sampson, Ajiferuke Isola, Eric Manheimer, Kaitryn Campbell, Raymond Daniel, David Moher

Primary Institution: Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute

Hypothesis

This project aims to assess the utility of bibliographic databases beyond the three major ones for finding controlled trials of complementary and alternative medicine.

Conclusion

The study found that comprehensive searches for CAM literature require multiple databases due to low overlap between them.

Supporting Evidence

  • Five databases were found to be unproductive and did not yield any eligible records.
  • Only 10% of all included trials were found in more than one database.
  • Acubriefs and CINAHL were the most productive databases for finding CAM trials.

Takeaway

The study looked at 15 databases to see which ones are best for finding studies on alternative medicine. It found that you need to check many databases because they don't all have the same information.

Methodology

Fifteen databases were searched to identify controlled clinical trials of CAM not indexed in MEDLINE, using a highly sensitive search strategy.

Limitations

Some databases were found to be unproductive and had low precision in retrieving relevant trials.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.1093/ecam/nep038

Want to read the original?

Access the complete publication on the publisher's website

View Original Publication