0
Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

À¯Ä¡µµ´¢°ü °¨¿°¿¹¹æ °¡À̵å¶óÀο¡ °üÇÑ Ã¼°èÀû ¹®Çå°Ë»ö »ç·Ê-Part II: Ovid MEDLINE ÀÌ¿ë

Systematic Search for Guidelines to Prevent Catheter-associated Urinary Tract Infections-Part II: Using the Ovid MEDLINE

°£È£ÇàÁ¤ÇÐȸÁö 2015³â 21±Ç 1È£ p.64 ~ 76
KMID : 0614820150210010064
¹ÚÇö¿µ ( Park Hyun-Young ) - È£³²´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú

Àå±Ý¼º ( Jang Keum-Seong ) - Àü³²´ëÇб³ °£È£´ëÇÐ
ÃÖÀÚÀ± ( Choi Ja-Yun ) - Àü³²´ëÇб³ °£È£´ëÇÐ
±èÀ±Èñ ( Kim Yun-Hee ) - ±¹¸³¸ñÆ÷´ëÇб³ °£È£Çаú

Abstract

Purpose: To implement evidence-based nursing, it is important to know where and how to find the best available evidence. This study was conducted to identify the results of a search from Ovid MEDLINE and to compare the results from Ovid MEDLINE with those from PubMed MEDLINE.

Methods: Four different approaches via Ovid MEDLINE were used to search for guidelines on preventing catheter-associated urinary tract infections. Outcomes of this study were the number of records and relevant literature, and the sensitivity and precision of the search methods via Ovid MEDLINE.

Results: The number of retrieved items ranged 23 to 6,005 and that of relevant studies, 5 to 8 of 8. Simple searches resulted in the highest sensitivity of 100.0%. When using MeSH terms and limits feature, the precision was highest (21.7%) among four approaches for literature searches. Simple searches in Ovid had higher sensitivity and lower precision than those in PubMed.

Conclusion: Simple searches in Ovid may be inefficient for busy clinicians compared to PubMed. However, to ensure a comprehensive and systematic literature search, using Ovid MEDLINE in addition to PubMed is recommended.
KeyWords
±Ù°Å±â¹Ý°£È£, °¡À̵å¶óÀÎ, µµ´¢°ü, ¿ä·Î°¨¿°
Evidence-based nursing, Ovid, Guidelines, Urinary catheterization, Urinary tract infections
¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸
  
µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸
ÇмúÁøÈïÀç´Ü(KCI) KoreaMed