4.4 Review

What are the highest yielding search strategy terms for systematic reviews in atopic dermatitis? A systematic review

Journal

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Volume 313, Issue 9, Pages 737-750

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-020-02165-z

Keywords

Atopic dermatitis; Eczema; Evidence-based medicine; Neurodermatitis; Meta-analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study found that search strategies for systematic reviews (SR) of atopic dermatitis (AD) were diverse, with varying numbers of search terms leading to different hit rates.
The impact of search strategies on systematic reviews (SR) of atopic dermatitis (AD) is unknown. The purpose of this review was to evaluate search strategies used in SR of AD and their impact on the frequency of manuscripts identified. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for SR related to AD. Simulations were performed by running combinations of search terms in MEDLINE and EMBASE. Overall, 250 SR met inclusion criteria, of which 225 specified search strategies. SR using 5-6 terms (20.0% to 12.1%) or >= 7 (40.0% to 18.8%) terms decreased, whereas SR using 3-4 terms numerically increased (18.8% to 30.2%) and 1-2 terms remained similar (37.5% to 38.9%) from 1999-2009 to 2015-2019. The most commonly searched terms were atopic dermatitis (n = 166), followed by eczema (n = 156), dermatitis atopic' (n = 81), atopic eczema (n = 74), neurodermatitis (n = 59), Besniers prurigo (n = 29), infantile eczema (n = 27), and childhood eczema (n = 19). Simulations revealed that eczema and atopic dermatitis yielded the most hits. The number of search terms that maximized hits in MEDLINE and EMBASE was 5 and 4, respectively. Search strategies for AD were heterogeneous, with high proportions of search strategies providing few search hits. Future studies should use standardized and optimized search terms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available