Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 439

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey

Open access
Haynes, R Brian, McKibbon, K Ann, Wilczynski, Nancy L, Walter, Stephen D, Werre, Stephen R·2005·BMJ

Abstract

Abstract Objective To develop and test optimal Medline search strategies for retrieving sound clinical studies on prevention or treatment of health disorders. Design Analytical survey. Data sources 161 clinical journals indexed in Medline for the year 2000. Main outcome measures Sensitivity, specificity, precision, and accuracy of 4862 unique terms in 18 404 combinations. Results Only 1587 (24.2%) of 6568 articles on treatment met criteria for testing clinical interventions. Combinations of search terms reached peak sensitivities of 99.3% (95% confidence interval 98.7% to 99.8%) at a specificity of 70.4% (69.8% to 70.9%). Compared with best single terms, best multiple terms increased sensitivity for sound studies by 4.1% (absolute increase), but with substantial loss of specificity (absolute difference 23.7%) when sensitivity was maximised. When terms were combined to maximise specificity, 97.4% (97.3% to 97.6%) was achieved, about the same as that achieved by the best single term (97.6%, 97.4% to 97.7%). The strategies newly reported in this paper outperformed other validated search strategies except for two strategies that had slightly higher specificity (98.1% and 97.6% v 97.4%) but lower sensitivity (42.0% and 92.8% v 93.1%). Conclusion New empirical search strategies have been validated to optimise retrieval from Medline of articles reporting high quality clinical studies on prevention or treatment of health disorders.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.38446.498542.8f

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 439

Metadata

Authors
Haynes, R. B., McKibbon, K. A., Wilczynski, N. L., Walter, S. D., & Werre, S. R.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2005-05-13
Volume
330
Issue
7501
Pages
1179
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W4229668175
Cited by
439
References
0
FWCI
30.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.38446.498542.8f
The paper
Haynes, R. B., McKibbon, K. A., Wilczynski, N. L., Walter, S. D., & Werre, S. R. (2005). Optimal search strategies for retrieving scientifically strong studies of treatment from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38446.498542.8f

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.