Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 16, 2026
Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
[Comparison Between a Semi-Automated Method and a Traditional Search for Identifying Studies to Inform GES Clinical
Viviana Araya1, Camila Ávila2, Francisca Verdugo-Paiva2
1Facultad de Medicina y Ciencias de la Salud, Universidad Central de Chile, Chile.
Abstract:
Recently, there has been a surge in technological tools designed to automate tasks across various areas of health sciences, including the identification of evidence used in the development of evidence syntheses that inform clinical practice guideline (CPG) recommendations. Simultaneously, there has been a significant increase in the production of systematic reviews, meaning that much of the relevant evidence is already included in existing reviews.
Aim:
To compare the performance of the semi-automated Epistemonikos Evidence Matrix tool with that of a traditional manual literature search in identifying studies for the development of clinical practice guidelines.
Materials And Methods:
During the development of three CPGs (focused on HIV/AIDS, pediatric asthma management, and stroke management), we compared studies identified through a traditional search strategy in MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library with those found using a strategy based on existing systematic reviews, via the Epistemonikos database. The traditional search employed keyword-based strategies and a specific filter for randomized controlled trials. In contrast, the Epistemonikos-based strategy relied on the semi-automated Evidence Matrix tool, which identifies studies shared across two or more systematic reviews.
Results:
Across the three guidelines, 8,466 potentially relevant articles were identified using the traditional method, compared to 6,771 using the Epistemonikos-based method. Of these, 155 studies (1.8%) were deemed truly relevant in the traditional search, versus 103 (1.5%) in the Epistemonikos-based approach (p= 0.14). The approach based on existing reviews demonstrated significantly higher precision (94% vs. 78%, p<0.01) but lower sensitivity (58% vs. 88%, p<0.01) compared to the traditional search.
Conclusions:
The evidence search strategy based on existing systematic reviews is an efficient and reliable alternative for identifying relevant studies to support evidence-based decision-making.
More Related Videos
04:34Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
Published on: February 17, 2023
06:26Meta-analysis of Voxel-Based Neuroimaging Studies using Seed-based d Mapping with Permutation of Subject Images SDM-PSI
Published on: November 27, 2019
Related Concept Videos
01:20Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:26Introduction to Epidemiology
01:20Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
01:25Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
01:11Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...