Link to the University of Pittsburgh Homepage
Link to the University Library System Homepage Link to the Contact Us Form

Evaluating the MEDLINE Core Clinical Journals filter: Data-driven evidence assessing clinical utility

Klein-Fedyshin, M and Ketchum, AM and Arnold, RM and Fedyshin, PJ (2014) Evaluating the MEDLINE Core Clinical Journals filter: Data-driven evidence assessing clinical utility. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 20 (6). 837 - 843. ISSN 1356-1294

[img] Microsoft Word (Manuscript)
Accepted Version
Available under License : See the attached license file.

Download (46kB)
[img] Plain Text (licence)
Available under License : See the attached license file.

Download (1kB)

Abstract

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Rationale, aims and objectives MEDLINE offers the Core Clinical Journals filter to limit to clinically useful journals. To determine its effectiveness for searching and patient-centric decision making, this study compared literature used for Morning Report in Internal Medicine with journals in the filter. Method An EndNote library with references answering 327 patient-related questions during Morning Report from 2007 to 2012 was exported to a file listing variables including designated Core Clinical Journal, Impact Factor, date used and medical subject. Bradford's law of scattering was applied ranking the journals and reflecting their clinical utility. Recall (sensitivity) and precision of the Core Morning Report journals and non-Core set was calculated. This study applied bibliometrics to compare the 628 articles used against these criteria to determine journals impacting decision making. Results Analysis shows 30% of clinically used articles are from the Core Clinical Journals filter and 16% of the journals represented are Core titles. When Bradford-ranked, 55% of the top 20 journals are Core. Articles <5 years old furnish 63% of sources used. Among the 63 Morning Report subjects, 55 have <50% precision and 41 have <50% recall including 37 subjects with 0% precision and 0% recall. Conclusions Low usage of publications within the Core Clinical Journals filter indicates less relevance for hospital-based care. The divergence from high-impact medicine titles suggests clinically valuable journals differ from academically important titles. With few subjects demonstrating high recall or precision, the MEDLINE Core Clinical Journals filter may require a review and update to better align with current clinical needs.


Share

Citation/Export:
Social Networking:
Share |

Details

Item Type: Article
Status: Published
Creators/Authors:
CreatorsEmailPitt UsernameORCID
Klein-Fedyshin, M
Ketchum, AMketchum@pitt.eduKETCHUM0000-0002-4384-1294
Arnold, RMrabob@pitt.eduRABOB
Fedyshin, PJ
Contributors:
ContributionContributors NameEmailPitt UsernameORCID
AuthorKlein-Fedyshin, Michelekleinf@pitt.eduKLEINF0000-0003-4519-1472
AuthorKetchum, Andrea M.ketchum@pitt.eduKETCHUM0000-0002-4384-1294
AuthorArnold, Robert M.rabob@pitt.eduRABOB0000-0003-1610-8932
AuthorFedyshin, Peter J.UNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIEDUNSPECIFIED
Centers: Other Centers, Institutes, Offices, or Units > Alzheimer's Disease Research Center
Date: 1 January 2014
Date Type: Publication
Journal or Publication Title: Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice
Volume: 20
Number: 6
Page Range: 837 - 843
DOI or Unique Handle: 10.1111/jep.12190
Schools and Programs: School of Medicine > Medicine
Refereed: Yes
ISSN: 1356-1294
MeSH Headings: Clinical Medicine; Databases, Bibliographic; Evidence-Based Medicine; Information Dissemination; Information Storage and Retrieval*; Journal Impact Factor; MEDLINE; Medical Informatics; Periodicals as Topic; Quality Control
PubMed ID: 24904958
Date Deposited: 28 Oct 2016 19:00
Last Modified: 04 Feb 2019 16:55
URI: http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/30018

Metrics

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Altmetric.com


Actions (login required)

View Item View Item