Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author da Conceicao, Maria Analia [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.author Chiquetto da Silva, Maria Regina [UNIFESP]
dc.contributor.author Tello, German Eduardo
dc.contributor.author Torloni, Maria Regina
dc.date.accessioned 2020-08-04T13:40:14Z
dc.date.available 2020-08-04T13:40:14Z
dc.date.issued 2017
dc.identifier http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2318-08892017000300008
dc.identifier.citation Transinformacao. Campinas, v. 29, n. 3, p. 311-322, 2017.
dc.identifier.issn 0103-3786
dc.identifier.uri https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/57388
dc.description.abstract Systematic reviews are considered the highest level of evidence for decision making in health care issues. One of the first steps of a SR involves identifying all relevant clinical trials on the topic of interest. However, the retrieval of clinical trials in a database partially depends on the article indexing quality. The aim of this article is to evaluate the adequacy of indexing of clinical trials as a publication type in the LILACS database in a sample of articles published in cardiology journals. This cross-sectional study analyzed the indexing quality of clinical trials published between 2008 and 2009 in cardiology journals indexed in LILACS. Two independent reviewers identified and reclassified all original studies published in these journals as being clinical trials or other types of studies. The result of their classification was compared with the indexing publication type produced by LILACS. A total of 721 articles published in 11 cardiology journals were included. The reviewers classified 63 articles as clinical trials en
dc.description.abstract 44 of these were correctly indexed in LILACS, while 19 were indexed as other types of studies (false negatives). The reviewers classified 658 articles as non-clinical trials en
dc.description.abstract 651 were correctly indexed and 7 were incorrectly indexed in LILACS as being clinical trials (false positives). The sensitivity, specificity and global accuracy of LILACS indexing were 69.8%, 98.9% and 96.4% (695/721), respectively. Almost one third of the clinical trials published in LILACS-indexed Cardiology journals are not adequately indexed. The indexing quality of the studies published in these journals must be improved. en
dc.format.extent 311-322
dc.language.iso eng
dc.publisher Pontificia Universidade Catolica Campinas
dc.relation.ispartof Transinformacao
dc.rights Acesso aberto
dc.subject Indexing as topic en
dc.subject Bibliographic databases en
dc.subject Clinical trials as topic en
dc.subject Quality control en
dc.subject Periodicals as topic en
dc.title Indexing of clinical trials in LILACS: Assessment of 721 articles published in cardiology journals en
dc.type Artigo
dc.description.affiliation Univ Fed São Paulo, Escola Paulista Medicina, Prog Pós-Grad Saúde Baseada Evidência. R. Botucatu, 740, Vila Clementino, 04023-062, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
dc.description.affiliation Minist Publ Uniao, Minist Publ Trabalho, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
dc.description.affiliation NIH, Natl Lib Med, Washington, DC USA
dc.description.affiliationUnifesp Univ Fed São Paulo, Escola Paulista Medicina, Prog Pós-Grad Saúde Baseada Evidência. R. Botucatu, 740, Vila Clementino, 04023-062, São Paulo, SP, Brasil
dc.identifier.file S0103-37862017000300311.pdf
dc.identifier.scielo S0103-37862017000300311
dc.identifier.doi 10.1590/2318-08892017000300008
dc.description.source Web of Science
dc.identifier.wos WOS:000418537800008
dc.coverage Campinas
dc.citation.volume 29
dc.citation.issue 3



File

Name: S0103-37862017000300311.pdf
Size: 186.9Kb
Format: PDF
Description:
Open file

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Search


Browse

Statistics

My Account