132 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26976054)
1. Complementary approaches to searching MEDLINE may be sufficient for updating systematic reviews.
Sampson M; de Bruijn B; Urquhart C; Shojania K
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Oct; 78():108-115. PubMed ID: 26976054
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. The efficiency of database searches for creating systematic reviews was improved by search filters.
Budhram D; Navarro-Ruan T; Haynes RB
J Clin Epidemiol; 2018 Mar; 95():1-6. PubMed ID: 29191446
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders?
Aagaard T; Lund H; Juhl C
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2016 Nov; 16(1):161. PubMed ID: 27875992
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Surveillance search techniques identified the need to update systematic reviews.
Sampson M; Shojania KG; McGowan J; Daniel R; Rader T; Iansavichene AE; Ji J; Ansari MT; Moher D
J Clin Epidemiol; 2008 Aug; 61(8):755-62. PubMed ID: 18586179
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Taking advantage of the explosion of systematic reviews: an efficient MEDLINE search strategy.
Shojania KG; Bero LA
Eff Clin Pract; 2001; 4(4):157-62. PubMed ID: 11525102
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. A comparison of the performance of seven key bibliographic databases in identifying all relevant systematic reviews of interventions for hypertension.
Rathbone J; Carter M; Hoffmann T; Glasziou P
Syst Rev; 2016 Feb; 5():27. PubMed ID: 26862061
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study.
Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kramer BM
Syst Rev; 2016 Mar; 5():39. PubMed ID: 26932789
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Retrieval of overviews of systematic reviews in MEDLINE was improved by the development of an objectively derived and validated search strategy.
Lunny C; McKenzie JE; McDonald S
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Jun; 74():107-18. PubMed ID: 26723872
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study.
Bramer WM; Rethlefsen ML; Kleijnen J; Franco OH
Syst Rev; 2017 Dec; 6(1):245. PubMed ID: 29208034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Identifying studies for systematic reviews. An example from medical imaging.
Berry E; Kelly S; Hutton J; Harris KM; Smith MA
Int J Technol Assess Health Care; 2000; 16(2):668-72. PubMed ID: 10932431
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An alternative to the hand searching gold standard: validating methodological search filters using relative recall.
Sampson M; Zhang L; Morrison A; Barrowman NJ; Clifford TJ; Platt RW; Klassen TP; Moher D
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Jul; 6():33. PubMed ID: 16848895
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Prospective comparison of search strategies for systematic reviews: an objective approach yielded higher sensitivity than a conceptual one.
Hausner E; Guddat C; Hermanns T; Lampert U; Waffenschmidt S
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Sep; 77():118-124. PubMed ID: 27256930
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Can electronic search engines optimize screening of search results in systematic reviews: an empirical study.
Sampson M; Barrowman NJ; Moher D; Clifford TJ; Platt RW; Morrison A; Klassen TP; Zhang L
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2006 Feb; 6():7. PubMed ID: 16504110
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. The pitfalls of a systematic MEDLINE review in palliative medicine: symptom assessment instruments.
O'Leary N; Tiernan E; Walsh D; Lucey N; Kirkova J; Davis MP
Am J Hosp Palliat Care; 2007; 24(3):181-4. PubMed ID: 17601840
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: good relative recall and precision are not enough.
Boeker M; Vach W; Motschall E
BMC Med Res Methodol; 2013 Oct; 13():131. PubMed ID: 24160679
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Optimal literature search for systematic reviews in surgery.
Goossen K; Tenckhoff S; Probst P; Grummich K; Mihaljevic AL; Büchler MW; Diener MK
Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2018 Feb; 403(1):119-129. PubMed ID: 29209758
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews.
Bramer WM; Giustini D; Kramer BM; Anderson P
Syst Rev; 2013 Dec; 2():115. PubMed ID: 24360284
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Testing search strategies for systematic reviews in the Medline literature database through PubMed.
Volpato ES; Betini M; El Dib R
J Eval Clin Pract; 2014 Apr; 20(2):117-20. PubMed ID: 24754051
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey.
Montori VM; Wilczynski NL; Morgan D; Haynes RB;
BMJ; 2005 Jan; 330(7482):68. PubMed ID: 15619601
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20.
; ; . PubMed ID:
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
