MEDLINE Versus EMBASE and CINAHL for Telemedicine Searches

被引:27
作者
Bahaadinbeigy, Kambiz [1 ,2 ]
Yogesan, Kanagasingam [2 ]
Wootton, Richard [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Western Australia, Lions Eye Inst, Perth, WA 6009, Australia
[2] Australian e Hlth Res Ctr, CSIRO, Perth, WA, Australia
[3] Norwegian Ctr Integrated Care & Telemed, Tromso, Norway
来源
TELEMEDICINE JOURNAL AND E-HEALTH | 2010年 / 16卷 / 08期
关键词
telehealth; telemedicine; information management; bibliographic databases; DATABASES;
D O I
10.1089/tmj.2010.0046
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
100404 [儿少卫生与妇幼保健学];
摘要
Introduction: Researchers in the domain of telemedicine throughout the world tend to search multiple bibliographic databases to retrieve the highest possible number of publications when conducting review projects. Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) are three popular databases in the discipline of biomedicine that are used for conducting reviews. Access to the MEDLINE database is free and easy, whereas EMBASE and CINAHL are not free and sometimes not easy to access for researchers in small research centers. Objective: This project sought to compare MEDLINE with EMBASE and CINAHL to estimate what proportion of potentially relevant publications would be missed when only MEDLINE is used in a review project, in comparison to when EMBASE and CINAHL are also used. Methods: Twelve simple keywords relevant to 12 different telemedicine applications were searched using all three databases, and the results were compared. Results: About 9%-18% of potentially relevant articles would have been missed if MEDLINE had been the only database used. Conclusions: It is preferable if all three or more databases are used when conducting a review in telemedicine. Researchers from developing countries or small research institutions could rely on only MEDLINE, but they would loose 9%-18% of the potentially relevant publications. Searching MEDLINE alone is not ideal, but in a resource-constrained situation, it is definitely better than nothing.
引用
收藏
页码:916 / 919
页数:4
相关论文
共 10 条
[1]
Selecting a database for literature searches in nursing: MEDLINE or CINAHL? [J].
Brazier, H ;
Begley, CM .
JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING, 1996, 24 (04) :868-875
[2]
BRENNER SH, 1989, B MED LIBR ASSOC, V77, P366
[3]
Brettle AJ, 2001, B MED LIBR ASSOC, V89, P353
[4]
Burnham Judy, 1993, Medical Reference Services Quarterly, V12, P45, DOI 10.1300/J115V12N03_04
[5]
Hersh W R, 2001, Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ), P1
[6]
Publication output in telemedicine during the period January 1964 to July 2003 [J].
Moser, PL ;
Hauffe, H ;
Lorenz, IH ;
Hager, M ;
Tiefenthaler, W ;
Lorenz, HM ;
Mikuz, G ;
Soegner, P ;
Kolbitsch, C .
JOURNAL OF TELEMEDICINE AND TELECARE, 2004, 10 (02) :72-77
[7]
*NAT LIB MED, TEL MESH
[8]
A nursing qualitative systematic review required MEDLINE and CINAHL for study identification [J].
Subirana, M ;
Solá, I ;
Garcia, JM ;
Gich, I ;
Urrútia, G .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 2005, 58 (01) :20-25
[9]
Comparison of literature searches on quality and costs for health technology assessment using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases [J].
Topfer, LA ;
Parada, A ;
Menon, D ;
Noorani, H ;
Perras, C ;
Serra-Prat, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 1999, 15 (02) :297-303
[10]
Wilkins Thad, 2005, Can Fam Physician, V51, P848