Are men difficult to find?

Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase

Fiona Stewart, Cynthia Fraser, Clare Robertson, Alison Avenell, Daryll Archibald, Flora Douglas, Pat Hoddinott, Edwin van Teijlingen, Dwayne Boyers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)
26 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often investigate the effectiveness of interventions for one sex. However, identifying interventions with data presented according to the sex of study participants can be challenging due to suboptimal indexing in bibliographic databases and poor reporting in titles and abstracts. The purposes of this study were to develop a highly sensitive search filter to identify literature relevant to men's health and to assess the performance of a range of sex-specific search terms used individually and in various combinations.

METHODS: Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken across a range of databases to inform a series of systematic reviews investigating obesity management for men. The included studies formed a reference standard set. A set of sex-specific search terms, identified from database-specific controlled vocabularies and from natural language used in the titles and abstracts of relevant papers, was investigated in MEDLINE and Embase. Sensitivity, precision, number needed to read (NNR) and percent reduction in results compared to searching without sex-specific terms were calculated.

RESULTS: The reference standard set comprised 57 papers in MEDLINE and 63 in Embase. Seven sex-specific search terms were identified. Searching without sex-specific terms returned 31,897 results in MEDLINE and 37,351 in Embase and identified 84% (MEDLINE) and 83% (Embase) of the reference standard sets. The best performing individual sex-specific term achieved 100%/98% sensitivity (MEDLINE/Embase), NNR 544/609 (MEDLINE/Embase) and reduced the number of results by 18%/17% (MEDLINE/Embase), relative to searching without sex-specific terms. The best performing filter, compromising different combinations of controlled vocabulary terms and natural language, achieved higher sensitivity (MEDLINE and Embase 100%), greater reduction in number of results (MEDLINE/Embase 24%/20%) and greater reduction in NNR (MEDLINE/Embase 506/578) than the best performing individual sex-specific term.

CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MEDLINE and Embase filters achieved high sensitivity and a reduction in the number of search results and NNR, indicating that they are useful tools for efficient, comprehensive literature searching but their performance is partially dependent on the appropriate use of database controlled vocabularies and index terms.

Original languageEnglish
Article number78
JournalSystematic reviews
Volume3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 18 Jul 2014

Fingerprint

MEDLINE
Controlled Vocabulary
Databases
Language
Bibliographic Databases
Men's Health
Obesity

Keywords

  • bibliographic databases
  • search filters
  • information retrieval
  • gender
  • systematic reviews

Cite this

Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase. / Stewart, Fiona; Fraser, Cynthia; Robertson, Clare; Avenell, Alison; Archibald, Daryll; Douglas, Flora; Hoddinott, Pat; van Teijlingen, Edwin; Boyers, Dwayne.

In: Systematic reviews , Vol. 3, 78, 18.07.2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Stewart, Fiona ; Fraser, Cynthia ; Robertson, Clare ; Avenell, Alison ; Archibald, Daryll ; Douglas, Flora ; Hoddinott, Pat ; van Teijlingen, Edwin ; Boyers, Dwayne. / Are men difficult to find? Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase. In: Systematic reviews . 2014 ; Vol. 3.
@article{870e54353f84417d828da39f326268ba,
title = "Are men difficult to find?: Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase",
abstract = "BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often investigate the effectiveness of interventions for one sex. However, identifying interventions with data presented according to the sex of study participants can be challenging due to suboptimal indexing in bibliographic databases and poor reporting in titles and abstracts. The purposes of this study were to develop a highly sensitive search filter to identify literature relevant to men's health and to assess the performance of a range of sex-specific search terms used individually and in various combinations.METHODS: Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken across a range of databases to inform a series of systematic reviews investigating obesity management for men. The included studies formed a reference standard set. A set of sex-specific search terms, identified from database-specific controlled vocabularies and from natural language used in the titles and abstracts of relevant papers, was investigated in MEDLINE and Embase. Sensitivity, precision, number needed to read (NNR) and percent reduction in results compared to searching without sex-specific terms were calculated.RESULTS: The reference standard set comprised 57 papers in MEDLINE and 63 in Embase. Seven sex-specific search terms were identified. Searching without sex-specific terms returned 31,897 results in MEDLINE and 37,351 in Embase and identified 84{\%} (MEDLINE) and 83{\%} (Embase) of the reference standard sets. The best performing individual sex-specific term achieved 100{\%}/98{\%} sensitivity (MEDLINE/Embase), NNR 544/609 (MEDLINE/Embase) and reduced the number of results by 18{\%}/17{\%} (MEDLINE/Embase), relative to searching without sex-specific terms. The best performing filter, compromising different combinations of controlled vocabulary terms and natural language, achieved higher sensitivity (MEDLINE and Embase 100{\%}), greater reduction in number of results (MEDLINE/Embase 24{\%}/20{\%}) and greater reduction in NNR (MEDLINE/Embase 506/578) than the best performing individual sex-specific term.CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MEDLINE and Embase filters achieved high sensitivity and a reduction in the number of search results and NNR, indicating that they are useful tools for efficient, comprehensive literature searching but their performance is partially dependent on the appropriate use of database controlled vocabularies and index terms.",
keywords = "bibliographic databases, search filters, information retrieval, gender, systematic reviews",
author = "Fiona Stewart and Cynthia Fraser and Clare Robertson and Alison Avenell and Daryll Archibald and Flora Douglas and Pat Hoddinott and {van Teijlingen}, Edwin and Dwayne Boyers",
year = "2014",
month = "7",
day = "18",
doi = "10.1186/2046-4053-3-78",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
journal = "Systematic reviews",
issn = "2046-4053",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Are men difficult to find?

T2 - Identifying male-specific studies in MEDLINE and Embase

AU - Stewart, Fiona

AU - Fraser, Cynthia

AU - Robertson, Clare

AU - Avenell, Alison

AU - Archibald, Daryll

AU - Douglas, Flora

AU - Hoddinott, Pat

AU - van Teijlingen, Edwin

AU - Boyers, Dwayne

PY - 2014/7/18

Y1 - 2014/7/18

N2 - BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often investigate the effectiveness of interventions for one sex. However, identifying interventions with data presented according to the sex of study participants can be challenging due to suboptimal indexing in bibliographic databases and poor reporting in titles and abstracts. The purposes of this study were to develop a highly sensitive search filter to identify literature relevant to men's health and to assess the performance of a range of sex-specific search terms used individually and in various combinations.METHODS: Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken across a range of databases to inform a series of systematic reviews investigating obesity management for men. The included studies formed a reference standard set. A set of sex-specific search terms, identified from database-specific controlled vocabularies and from natural language used in the titles and abstracts of relevant papers, was investigated in MEDLINE and Embase. Sensitivity, precision, number needed to read (NNR) and percent reduction in results compared to searching without sex-specific terms were calculated.RESULTS: The reference standard set comprised 57 papers in MEDLINE and 63 in Embase. Seven sex-specific search terms were identified. Searching without sex-specific terms returned 31,897 results in MEDLINE and 37,351 in Embase and identified 84% (MEDLINE) and 83% (Embase) of the reference standard sets. The best performing individual sex-specific term achieved 100%/98% sensitivity (MEDLINE/Embase), NNR 544/609 (MEDLINE/Embase) and reduced the number of results by 18%/17% (MEDLINE/Embase), relative to searching without sex-specific terms. The best performing filter, compromising different combinations of controlled vocabulary terms and natural language, achieved higher sensitivity (MEDLINE and Embase 100%), greater reduction in number of results (MEDLINE/Embase 24%/20%) and greater reduction in NNR (MEDLINE/Embase 506/578) than the best performing individual sex-specific term.CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MEDLINE and Embase filters achieved high sensitivity and a reduction in the number of search results and NNR, indicating that they are useful tools for efficient, comprehensive literature searching but their performance is partially dependent on the appropriate use of database controlled vocabularies and index terms.

AB - BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews often investigate the effectiveness of interventions for one sex. However, identifying interventions with data presented according to the sex of study participants can be challenging due to suboptimal indexing in bibliographic databases and poor reporting in titles and abstracts. The purposes of this study were to develop a highly sensitive search filter to identify literature relevant to men's health and to assess the performance of a range of sex-specific search terms used individually and in various combinations.METHODS: Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken across a range of databases to inform a series of systematic reviews investigating obesity management for men. The included studies formed a reference standard set. A set of sex-specific search terms, identified from database-specific controlled vocabularies and from natural language used in the titles and abstracts of relevant papers, was investigated in MEDLINE and Embase. Sensitivity, precision, number needed to read (NNR) and percent reduction in results compared to searching without sex-specific terms were calculated.RESULTS: The reference standard set comprised 57 papers in MEDLINE and 63 in Embase. Seven sex-specific search terms were identified. Searching without sex-specific terms returned 31,897 results in MEDLINE and 37,351 in Embase and identified 84% (MEDLINE) and 83% (Embase) of the reference standard sets. The best performing individual sex-specific term achieved 100%/98% sensitivity (MEDLINE/Embase), NNR 544/609 (MEDLINE/Embase) and reduced the number of results by 18%/17% (MEDLINE/Embase), relative to searching without sex-specific terms. The best performing filter, compromising different combinations of controlled vocabulary terms and natural language, achieved higher sensitivity (MEDLINE and Embase 100%), greater reduction in number of results (MEDLINE/Embase 24%/20%) and greater reduction in NNR (MEDLINE/Embase 506/578) than the best performing individual sex-specific term.CONCLUSIONS: The proposed MEDLINE and Embase filters achieved high sensitivity and a reduction in the number of search results and NNR, indicating that they are useful tools for efficient, comprehensive literature searching but their performance is partially dependent on the appropriate use of database controlled vocabularies and index terms.

KW - bibliographic databases

KW - search filters

KW - information retrieval

KW - gender

KW - systematic reviews

U2 - 10.1186/2046-4053-3-78

DO - 10.1186/2046-4053-3-78

M3 - Article

VL - 3

JO - Systematic reviews

JF - Systematic reviews

SN - 2046-4053

M1 - 78

ER -