The method was first developed with the Microsoft Windows version of EndNote X3 and has been fairly consistent until the current version, X8. The steps will be identical in any recent version of EndNote. Here, we describe the process in step-by-step detail.
#Endnote word not updating update
Another group has previously alluded to a similar process: “download all references from the update search and directly de-duplicate them with the references from the initial search (e.g., using Endnote)”. By subtracting records found in the original search from the current results through EndNote’s customizable de-duplication feature, only records that were not screened in the original search will remain in the library. The technique uses two EndNote files: one containing the current results as they are downloaded from the complete set of databases, as if it were a first search and one with the results of the previous or original search. The authors have developed a method for updating existing reviews that uses EndNote reference management software. Hence, to many authors, updating a search can seem to be a complicated and uncertain task.
These novel terms need to be searched in all the databases that were queried in the original search from the original starting date, thus requiring even more complicated search structures and date ranges.
For instance, new words may have been added to the original search strategy, based on relevant terms found in studies included in the original review. In such cases, searchers can use publication date and a safe overlapping period, resulting in extensive duplication with records retrieved in the original search.Ĭomplicating matters further, the search may have been modified since the last search date. However, some interfaces, such as Web of Science, do not provide record dates that could guide updating.
The MeSH date field (MHDA in PubMed), which is the date the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms were added to the record, also has some advantages. For example, the National Library of Medicine recommends using the Create date (CRDT in PubMed) field for its databases. The user can choose from the thesaurus date (i.e., the date that the thesaurus terms were added), the date of the last metadata change, or the date of entry into the database. The date that the record became accessible through searching, rather than the publication date, is the relevant field for updating. The Cochrane handbook mentions in chapter 3.4.2.1 (“Re-executing the search”) using the last date of the original search as the beginning date for the update, which is common practice, but chapter 6.4.12 (“Updating searches”) does not describe a clear method. provided practical guidance on refining the original search in their appendix 2. Such efficiencies included refinements based on the yield of the original search and incorporation of technological advances in searching. Recent guidance from an international panel of authors, editors, clinicians, statisticians, information specialists, other methodologists, and guideline developers considered various aspects of updating reviews, including efficient searching. Many handbooks and guidelines for performing systematic reviews state that search strategies should be updated regularly to keep track of newly added references on the topic. The Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) standards requires: “Rerun or update searches for all relevant databases within 12 months before publication”. To maximize the currency of a review, an update of the search is recommended before submission for publication. More recently, an examination of 182 systematic reviews performed at Erasmus Medical Centre showed that the median time between the first search and the appearance of the resulting review in PubMed was 89 weeks (interquartile range, 63–126 weeks). In the same cohort of reviews, 7% were out of date at the time of publication. In a cohort of journal-published systematic reviews, Cochrane reviews, and health technology assessment reports, the median time lag between the stated last search date and publication was 61 weeks (interquartile range, 33–87 weeks). Performing, writing, and publishing a systematic review take a long time.
0 kommentar(er)
