Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2001 Oct;89(4):353-62.

Comparison of bibliographic databases for information on the rehabilitation of people with severe mental illness

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of bibliographic databases for information on the rehabilitation of people with severe mental illness

A J Brettle et al. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 2001 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: The research sought to examine the overlap in coverage between several health-related databases, thus enabling the identification of the most important sources for searching for information on the rehabilitation of people with severe mental illness.

Methods: The literature was searched within a systematic review. Several health-related databases were retrieved (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, PsycLIT, Sociofile, and Social Science Citation Index), noting their source and comparing results retrieved from each database.

Findings: The total number of studies retrieved from each database varied. Almost a third of the papers retrieved from each database were unique to that source. Forty-two percent of the papers were only found in one database. Restricting a search to one database alone would miss many papers and could affect the results of a systematic review. PsycLIT was the most useful database for this topic area, containing 44% of the papers. MEDLINE, the database of first choice for many health professionals, held only 29%.

Conclusions: No database was determined to be significantly more useful than any other--each warranted inclusion in the study. Reliance cannot be placed on one database alone, and other methods such as hand searching should also be used. Although this may not be new information for information professionals, it is likely to be new for health professionals and researchers who are increasingly performing their own literature searches. Information professionals have an important role to play in conveying this message to those outside their profession.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Number of databases from which papers were retrieved
Figure 2
Figure 2
Overlapping databases

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ. 2001 Jan13; 322(7278):98–101. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Contributors to the Cochrane Collaboration and the Campbell Collaboration. Evidence from systematic reviews of research relevant to implementing the wider public health agenda. [Web document]. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, August 2000. <http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/wph.htm>.
    1. The Campbell Collaboration. . [Web document]. [cited March 2001]. <http://campbell.gse.upenn.edu>.
    1. Macdonald G, Sheldon B, and Gillespie J. Contemporary studies of the effectiveness of social work. Brit J Soc Work. 1992 Dec; 22(6):615–43.
    1. Alderson P, Brill S, Chalmers I, Fuller R, Hinkley-Smith P, Macdonal G, Newman T, Oakley A, Roberts H, and Ward H. What works: effective interventions in child welfare. Ilford, U.K.: Barnados, 1996.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources