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
. 2016 Jul;104(3):221-5.
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.3.007.

Effectiveness of adverse effects search filters: drugs versus medical devices

Kelly Farrah, Monika Mierzwinski-Urban, Karen Cimon

Effectiveness of adverse effects search filters: drugs versus medical devices

Kelly Farrah et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: The study tested the performance of adverse effects search filters when searching for safety information on medical devices, procedures, and diagnostic tests in MEDLINE and Embase.

Methods: The sensitivity of 3 filters was determined using a sample of 631 references from 131 rapid reviews related to the safety of health technologies. The references were divided into 2 sets by type of intervention: drugs and nondrug health technologies. Keyword and indexing analysis were performed on references from the nondrug testing set that 1 or more of the filters did not retrieve.

Results: For all 3 filters, sensitivity was lower for nondrug health technologies (ranging from 53%-87%) than for drugs (88%-93%) in both databases. When tested on the nondrug health technologies set, sensitivity was lower in Embase (ranging from 53%-81%) than in MEDLINE (67%-87%) for all filters. Of the nondrug records that 1 or more of the filters missed, 39% of the missed MEDLINE records and 18% of the missed Embase records did not contain any indexing terms related to adverse events. Analyzing the titles and abstracts of nondrug records that were missed by any 1 filter, the most commonly used keywords related to adverse effects were: risk, complications, mortality, contamination, hemorrhage, and failure.

Conclusions: In this study, adverse effects filters were less effective at finding information about the safety of medical devices, procedures, and tests compared to information about the safety of drugs.

Keywords: Bibliographic Databases; Controlled Vocabulary; Equipment and Supplies; Information Storage and Retrieval; Sensitivity and Specificity.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Derry S, Loke YK, Aronson JK. Incomplete evidence: the inadequacy of databases in tracing published adverse drug reactions in clinical trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2001;1:7. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Golder S, McIntosh HM, Duffy S, Glanville J. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and UK Cochrane Centre Search Filters Design Group. Developing efficient search strategies to identify reports of adverse effects in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Health Inf Libr J. 2006 Mar;23(1):3–12. - PubMed
    1. Golder S, Loke YK. Sensitivity and precision of adverse effects search filters in MEDLINE and EMBASE: a case study of fractures with thiazolidinediones. Health Inf Libr J. 2012 Mar;29(1):28–38. - PubMed
    1. Golder S, Loke YK. The performance of adverse effects search filters in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Health Inf Libr J. 2012 Jun;29(2):141–51. - PubMed
    1. Golder S, Wright K, Rodgers M. Failure or success of search strategies to identify adverse effects of medical devices: a feasibility study using a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2014;3:113. - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources