Abstract
Systematic reviews are instances of a critically important search task in medicine and health services research. Along with large and well conducted randomised control trials, they provide the highest levels of clinical evidence. We provide a brief overview of the methodologies used to conduct systematic reviews, and report on our recent experience of conducting a meta-review – i.e. a systematic review of reviews – of preoperative assessment. We discuss issues associated with the large manual effort currently necessary to conduct systematic reviews when using available search engines. We then suggest ways in which more dedicated and sophisticated information retrieval tools may enhance the efficiency of systematic searches and increase the recall of results. Finally, we discuss the development of tests collections for systematic reviews, to permit the development of enhanced search engines for this task.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Evans, D.: Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. Journal of Clinical Nursing 12(1), 77–84 (2003)
NICE: The guideline development process - an overview for stakeholders, the public and the NHS (3rd ed.). National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2007)
Doyle, J., Waters, E., Yach, D., McQueen, D., De Francisco, A., Stewart, T., Reddy, P., Gulmezoglu, A.M., Galea, G., Portela, A.: Global priority setting for Cochrane systematic reviews of health promotion and public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59(3), 193–197 (2005)
Chan, A.W., Hróbjartsson, A., Haahr, M.T., Gøtzsche, P.C., Altman, D.G.: Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 291(20), 2457–2465 (2004)
Sterne, J.A.C., Egger, M., Smith, G.D.: Investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta-analysis. BMJ 323(7304), 101–105 (2001)
Kirkham, J.J., Dwan, K.M., Altman, D.G., Gamble, C., Dodd, S., Smyth, R., Williamson, P.R.: The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 340 (2010)
NHS-CRD: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination’s guidance for undertaking systematic reviews in health care. University of York (2009), http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/
Liberati, A., Altman, D.G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P.C., Ioannidis, J.P., Clarke, M., Devereaux, P., Kleijnen, J., Moher, D.: The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 62(10), e1–e34 (2009)
Moher, D., Cook, D.J., Eastwood, S., Olkin, I., Rennie, D., Stroup, D.F.: the QUOROM Group: Improving the quality of report of meta-analyses or randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. The Lancet 354, 1896–1900 (1999)
Moher, D., Tetzlaff, J., Tricco, A.C., Sampson, M., Altman, D.G.: Epidemiology & reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Medicine 4(3), e78 (2007)
Liu, Y.H.: On the potential search effectiveness of MeSH (medical subject headings) terms. In: Proceedings of IIiX 2010, pp. 225–234 (2010)
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G.: The PRISMA Group: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews & meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine 6(7) (2009)
World Health Organization: Safe surgery saves lives. WHO world alliance for patient safety. WHO report (2008)
NHS Modernisation Agency: National good practice guidance on pre-operative assessment for in patient surgery (2003)
Bouamrane, M.-M., Gallacher, K., Marlborough, H., Jani, B., Kinsella, J., Richards, R., van Klei, W., Mair, F.S.: Processes of preoperative assessment in elective surgery: a systematic review of reviews (2011), under review
Beahler, C.C., Sundheim, J.J., Trapp, N.I.: Information retrieval in systematic reviews: Challenges in public health arena. American Journal on Preventative Medicine 18, 6–10 (2000)
Golder, S., McIntosh, H., Loke, Y.: Identifying systematic reviews of the adverse effects of health care interventions. BMC Medical Research Methodology 6(1), 22 (2006)
Oard, D.W., Baron, J.R., Lewis, D.D.: Some lessons learned to date from the TREC Legal track (2006-2009). Technical Report, University of Maryland (2010)
Lupu, M., Huang, J., Zhu, J., Tait, J.: TREC-CHEM: large scale chemical information retrieval evaluation at TREC. SIGIR Forum 43, 63–70 (2009)
Pohl, S., Zobel, J., Moffat, A.: Extended Boolean retrieval for systematic biomedical reviews. In: Proceedings of ACCS 2010, pp. 117–126 (2010)
Zhang, L., Ajiferuke, I., Sampson, M.: Optimizing search strategies to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE. BMC Medical Research Methodology 6(23) (2006)
Arampatzis, A., Kamps, J., Robertson, S.: Where to stop reading a ranked list?: threshold optimization using truncated score distributions. In: Proceedings of SIGIR 2009, pp. 524–531 (2009)
Kwok, K.L., Grunfeld, K., Chan, M., Dinstl, N., Cool, C.: TREC-7 ad-hoc, high precision & filtering experiments using PIRCS. In: Proceedings of TREC-7 (1998)
Liu, T.Y.: Learning to rank for information retrieval. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 3(3), 225–331 (2009)
Roberts, P.M., Cohen, A.M., Hersh, W.R.: Tasks, topics and relevance judging for the TREC Genomics track: five years of experience evaluating biomedical text information retrieval systems. Inf. Retr. 12(1), 81–97 (2009)
Cohen, A., Hersh, W., Peterson, K., Yen, P.Y.: Reducing workload in systematic review preparation using automated citation classification. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 13(2), 206–219 (2006)
Pang, B., Lee, L.: Opinion mining and sentiment analysis. Foundations and Trends in Information Retrieval 2(1-2), 1–135 (2008)
Macdonald, C., Santos, R.L.T., Ounis, I., Soboroff, I.: Blog track research at TREC. SIGIR Forum 44 (2010)
Hearst, M., Elliott, A., English, J., Sinha, R., Swearingen, K., Yee, K.P.: Finding the flow in web site search. Commun. ACM 45, 42–49 (2002)
Boudin, F., Nie, J.Y., Dawes, M.: Deriving a test collection for clinical information retrieval from systematic reviews. In: Proceedings of DTMBIO 2010, pp. 57–60 (2010)
Oard, D.W., Hedin, B., Tomlinson, S., Baron, J.R.: Overview of the TREC 2008 Legal track. In: Proceedings of TREC 2008 (2008)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bouamrane, MM., Macdonald, C., Ounis, I., Mair, F. (2011). Protocol-Driven Searches for Medical and Health-Sciences Systematic Reviews. In: Amati, G., Crestani, F. (eds) Advances in Information Retrieval Theory. ICTIR 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6931. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23318-0_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23318-0_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-23317-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-23318-0
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)