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
. 2013 Oct 26:13:131.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-13-131.

Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: good relative recall and precision are not enough

Affiliations

Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: good relative recall and precision are not enough

Martin Boeker et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: Recent research indicates a high recall in Google Scholar searches for systematic reviews. These reports raised high expectations of Google Scholar as a unified and easy to use search interface. However, studies on the coverage of Google Scholar rarely used the search interface in a realistic approach but instead merely checked for the existence of gold standard references. In addition, the severe limitations of the Google Search interface must be taken into consideration when comparing with professional literature retrieval tools.The objectives of this work are to measure the relative recall and precision of searches with Google Scholar under conditions which are derived from structured search procedures conventional in scientific literature retrieval; and to provide an overview of current advantages and disadvantages of the Google Scholar search interface in scientific literature retrieval.

Methods: General and MEDLINE-specific search strategies were retrieved from 14 Cochrane systematic reviews. Cochrane systematic review search strategies were translated to Google Scholar search expression as good as possible under consideration of the original search semantics. The references of the included studies from the Cochrane reviews were checked for their inclusion in the result sets of the Google Scholar searches. Relative recall and precision were calculated.

Results: We investigated Cochrane reviews with a number of included references between 11 and 70 with a total of 396 references. The Google Scholar searches resulted in sets between 4,320 and 67,800 and a total of 291,190 hits. The relative recall of the Google Scholar searches had a minimum of 76.2% and a maximum of 100% (7 searches). The precision of the Google Scholar searches had a minimum of 0.05% and a maximum of 0.92%. The overall relative recall for all searches was 92.9%, the overall precision was 0.13%.

Conclusion: The reported relative recall must be interpreted with care. It is a quality indicator of Google Scholar confined to an experimental setting which is unavailable in systematic retrieval due to the severe limitations of the Google Scholar search interface. Currently, Google Scholar does not provide necessary elements for systematic scientific literature retrieval such as tools for incremental query optimization, export of a large number of references, a visual search builder or a history function. Google Scholar is not ready as a professional searching tool for tasks where structured retrieval methodology is necessary.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Sampson M, McGowan J. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1057.e1–1057.e9. - PubMed
    1. Maggio LAM, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. Reproducibility of literature search reporting in medical education reviews. Acad Med Aug 2011. 2011;86:1049–1054. - PubMed
    1. Boeker M, Vach W, Motschall E. Semantically equivalent PubMed and Ovid-MEDLINE queries: different retrieval results because of database subset inclusion. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012;65:915–916. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2012.01.015. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vanopstal K, Buysschaert J, Laureys G, Vander Stichele R. Lost in PubMed. Factors influencing the success of medical information retrieval. Expert Syst Appl. 2013;40:4106–4114. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2013.01.036. - DOI
    1. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME guide No. 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education–part 2: constructing searches. Med Teach. 2003;25:463. doi: 10.1080/01421590310001608667. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources