Embedded Files
Appraisal of: Frandsen et al (2021) Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 133, 24-31.
Appraisal of: Frandsen et al (2021) Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 133, 24-31.
Reviewer(s):
Sophie Robinson
Naomi Shaw
Full Reference:
Frandsen et al (2021) Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 133, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.12.022
Short description:
The authors sought to analyse the coverage of Embase as a supplement to PubMed. To this end they examined all Cochrane reviews from 2012-16, to determine the coverage in Embase of studies not covered by PubMed. The included publications and studies are more effectively supplemented by Embase searches in some Cochrane specialities than in others. However it is not possible to generalise the benefit of this due to variations in subject coverage over time. Results show that Medline coverage varies from 79% to 96% (with differences in results for different disciplines); adding Embase increases coverage to a range of 87% to 99%. Supplementing PubMed with Embase searches increases coverage of included publications by 6.8%, and the coverage of studies increases by 5.5%. The authors found that searching both PubMed and Embase does not retrieve all relevant publications. Over 10% of included studies are not covered by either database, therefore searching other databases should always be considered.
Limitations stated by the author(s):
The study only examines Embase as a supplement to PubMed and does not examine exclusive coverage of Embase.
The publication does not examine the effect of poor indexing or poor searching skills on retrieval.
The study may have missed publications present in Embase.
The effect of the indexing policies of different journals is not considered.
The study does not determine how the additional studies retrieved may have affected the results of the Cochrane systematic reviews or meta-analyses.
Variation in coverage rates for different Cochrane review groups may depend on a variety of other factors such as thoroughness of searching, inclusion of unpublished material, intervention, review type or study design.
Limitations stated by the reviewer(s):
No additional limitations detected by the reviewers.
Study Type:
Single study
Related Chapters:
Clinical Effectiveness
Tags:
PubMed
Embase
Page updated
Report abuse