MEDLINE Versus EMBASE and CINAHL for Telemedicine Searches

作者
Kambiz Bahaadinbeigy,Kanagasingam Yogesan,Richard Wootton
出处
期刊:Telemedicine Journal and E-health [Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.]
卷期号:16 (8): 916-919 被引量:39
标识
DOI:10.1089/tmj.2010.0046
摘要

There are multiple bibliographic databases for use in telemedicine research. These include Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), which are easy to use, easily accessible, and, in some cases, fee based. The authors compared these three to estimate what proportion of potentially relevant publications would be missed when only MEDLINE was used. Each of these three was found to be not 100% identical. The implication was that some valuable literature may not be cited, as it was not found by the researchers when they were doing a search. Researchers should consider multiple choices for their literature searches to ensure a comprehensive review. 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.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
想吃见手青完成签到 ,获得积分10
刚刚
1秒前
乐乐应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
1秒前
Ava应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
1秒前
1秒前
1秒前
科目三应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
1秒前
1秒前
丘比特应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
丰富语蕊应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
SciGPT应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
ding应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2秒前
上官若男应助71采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
JamesPei应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
3秒前
搜集达人应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
3秒前
3秒前
田様应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
3秒前
w8816完成签到,获得积分10
3秒前
烟花应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
3秒前
今后应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
3秒前
白芷发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
4秒前
NexusExplorer应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
tqdwxawa发布了新的文献求助10
4秒前
酷波er应助欣喜的嘉熙采纳,获得10
4秒前
4秒前
研友_VZG7GZ应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
慕青应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
5秒前
丰富语蕊应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
5秒前
彭泽阳完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
5秒前
乐乐应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
5秒前
pinghu完成签到,获得积分10
5秒前
6秒前
赘婿应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
6秒前
冬雨发布了新的文献求助10
6秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Principles of town planning: translating concepts to applications 1000
Management and the Arts 510
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 510
核安全综合知识2024版 500
Photothermal Science and Techniques 500
Digital Displacement Hydrostatic Transmission for Rotorcraft and Distributed Propulsion 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7712140
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 9268328
关于积分的说明 20070932
捐赠科研通 7288717
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3297428
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2451906
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2304566