Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessment reports carried out for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence appraisal system

Health Technology Assessment

Volumn 7, Issue 34, 2003, Pages

  Royle, P ^a   Waugh, N ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; BIOSIS; COCHRANE LIBRARY; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DATA ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; DEVICE; DIAGNOSTIC TEST; DOCUMENTATION; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EMBASE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERNET; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDLINE; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; METHODOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); UNITED KINGDOM; UTILIZATION REVIEW;

ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING AS TOPIC; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; GREAT BRITAIN; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL INFORMATICS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 85045797561     PISSN: 13665278     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3310/hta7340     Document Type: Review

References (41)

1. Mulrow CD. The medical review article: State of the science. Ann Intern Med 1987;106:485-8.
2. Clarke M, Oxman AD, editors. Cochrane Reviewer's Handbook 4.1.6 (updated January 2003). http://www.cochrane.dk/cochrane/handbook/handbook.htm. Accessed 23 April 2003.
3. Glasziou P, Irwig L, Bain C, Colditz G. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambrige University Press; 2001.
4. Cochrane Collaboration. http://www.cochrane.de
5. Antes G, Oxman AD. The Cochrane Collaboration in the 20th century. In Egger M, Davey SG, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books; 2001. pp. 447-73.
6. Jadad AR, Cook DJ, Jones A, Klassen TP, Tugwell P, Moher M, et al. Methodology and reports of systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A comparison of Cochrane reviews with articles published in paper-based journals. JAMA 1998;280:278-80.
7. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. http://www.nice.org.uk
8. Best L, Stevens A, Colin Jones D. Rapid and responsive health technology assessment: The development and evaluation process in the South and West region of England. Journal Clinical Efficiency 1997;2:51-6.
9. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C, Holenstein F, Sterne J. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:1-76.
10. Egger M. Davey SG, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books; 2001.
11. Song F, Eastwood AJ, Gilbody S, Duley L, Sutton AJ. Publication and related biases. Health Technol Assess 2000;4(10):1-115.
12. Egger M, Dickersin K, Davey SG. Problems and limitations in conducting systematic reviews. In Egger M, Davey SG, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books; 2001. pp. 43-68.
13. Campanario JM. Consolation for the scientist - Sometimes it is hard to publish papers that are later highly-cited. Social Studies of Science 1993;23:342-62.
14. Spier RE. Peer review and innovation. Sci Eng Ethics 2002;8:99-108.
15. Pittler MH, Abbot NC, Harkness EF, Ernst E. Location bias in controlled clinical trials of complementary/alternative therapies. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:485-9.
16. Lee KP, Schotland M, Bacchetti P, Bero LA. Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles. JAMA 2002;287:2805-8.
17. Hill DR, Stickell HN. Brandon/Hill selected list of print books and journals for the small medical library. Bulletin of the Medical Libraries Association 2001;89:131-53.
18. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M. Grey literature in meta-analyses or randomized trials of health care interventions (Cochrane Methodology Review). In The Cochrane Library (Issue 1). Oxford: Update Software; 2003.
19. Scherer RW, Langenberg P. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts (Cochrane Methodology Review). Cochrane Library. Oxford: Update Software; 2001.
20. MacLean CH, Morton SC, Ofman JJ, Roth EA, Shekelle PG. How useful are unpublished data from the Food and Drug Administration in meta-analysis? J Clin Epidemiol 2003;56:44-51.
21. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Ryan G, Clifton J, Buckingham L, Willan A, et al. Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. JAMA 1993;269:2749-53.
22. Jefferson TO, Alderson P, Davidoff F, Wager E. Editorial peer-review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies (Cochrane Methodology Review). In The Cochrane Library (Issue 1). Oxford: Update Software; 2003.
23. Savoie I, Helmer D, Green CJ, Kazanjian A. Beyond medline: Reducing bias through extended systematic review search. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003;19:168-78.
24. Sampson M, Campbell K, Ajiferuke I, Moher D. Randomized controlled trials in pediatric complementary and alternative medicine: Where can they be found? BMC Pediatr 2003;3:1.
25. Avenell A, Handoll HHG, Grant AM. Lessons for search strategies from a systematic review, in The Cochrane Library, of nutritional supplementation trials in patients after hip fracture. Am J Clin Nutr 2001;73:505-10.
26. Suarez-Almazor ME, Belseck E, Homik J, Dorgan M, Ramos-Remus C. Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: MEDLINE alone is not enough. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:476-87.
27. Royle P, Milne R. Literature searching for randomised controlled trials used in Cochrane reviews: Rapid versus exhaustive searches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003; in press.
28. Cook AM, Finlay IG, Edwards AG, Hood K, Higginson IJ, Goodwin DM, et al. Efficiency of searching the grey literature in palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manage 2001;22:797-801.
29. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996;17:1-12.
30. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ 1996;313:275-83.
31. Lefebvre C, Clarke MJ. Identifying randomised trials. In Egger M, Davey SG, Altman DG, editors. Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-analysis in Context. London: BMJ Books; 2001. pp. 69-86.
32. Egger M, Ebrahim S, Smith GD. Where now for meta-analysis? Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:1-5.
33. NICE. Compilation - Summary of guidance issued to the NHS in England and Wales. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence; October 2002 (Issue 5).
34. Juni P, Holenstein F, Sterne J, Bartlett C, Egger M. Direction and impact of language bias in meta-analyses of controlled trials: Empirical study. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:115-23.
35. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissimenation. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). Improving Access to Cost-effectiveness Information for Health Care Decision Making: The NHS Economic Evaluation Database. CRD Report 6. 2nd ed. York: University of York; 2001.
36. Eady A. Secondary publications: Economic analyses. In McKibbon A, editor. PDQ Evidence-based Principles and Practice. Hamilton: Decker; 1999. pp. 173-86.
37. Sassi F, Archard L, McDaid D. Searching literature database for health care economic evaluations: How systematic can we afford to be? Med Care 2002;40:387-94.
38. Clarke M, Oxman AD, editors. Locating and selecting studies. Cochrane Reviewers Handbook 4.1.6 (updated January 2003) Section 5. In The Cochrane Library (Issue 2). Oxford: Update Software; 2003.
39. Topfer LA, Parada A, Menon D, Noorani H, Perras C, Serra-Prat M. Comparison of literature searches on quality and costs for health technology assessment using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1999;15:297-303.
40. Royle P. Literature searching for randomised controlled trials used in Cochrane reviews: Rapid versus exhaustive searches [dissertation]. Southampton: University of Southampton; 2001.
41. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Stewart L, Tierney J. Time to publication for results of clinical trials (Cochrane Methodology Review). In The Cochrane Library (Issue 1). Oxford: Update Software; 2003.