首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the Medical Library Association : >Almost half of references in reports on new and emerging nondrug health technologies are grey literature
【24h】

Almost half of references in reports on new and emerging nondrug health technologies are grey literature

机译:关于新的和新兴的非药物保健技术的报告中几乎有一半是灰色文献

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Objective The research investigated how frequently grey literature is used in reports on new and emerging nondrug health technologies, which sources are most cited, and how grey literature searching is reported. Methods A retrospective review of references cited in horizon scanning reports on nondrug health technologies—including medical devices, laboratory tests, and procedures—was conducted. A quasi-random sample of up to three reports per agency was selected from a compilation of reports published in 2014 by international horizon scanning services and health organizations. Results Twenty-two reports from 8 agencies were included in the analysis. On average, 47% (288/617) of references listed in the bibliographies of the horizon scanning reports were grey literature. The most frequently cited type of grey literature was information from manufacturers (30% of all grey literature references), regulatory agencies (10%), clinical trial registries (9%), and other horizon scans or evidence synthesis reports (9%). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and ClincalTrials.gov were the most frequently cited specific sources, constituting 7% and 8% of grey literature references, respectively. Over two-thirds (15/22) of the analyzed reports provided some details on search methodology; all 15 of these reported searching some grey literature. Conclusions In this sample, grey literature represented almost half of the references cited in reports on new and emerging nondrug health technologies. Of these grey literature references, almost half came from three sources: the manufacturers, ClincalTrials.gov , and the FDA. There was wide variation in the other sources cited. Literature search methodology was often insufficiently reported for analysis.
机译:目的本研究调查了在新兴非药物卫生技术报告中使用灰色文献的频率,引用最多的来源以及如何报告灰色文献检索。方法对非药物健康技术(包括医疗设备,实验室测试和程序)的地平线扫描报告中引用的参考文献进行了回顾性审查。从国际视野扫描服务和卫生组织于2014年发布的报告汇总中选择了每个机构最多三份报告的准随机样本。结果分析包括来自8个机构的22份报告。平均而言,在地平线扫描报告书目中列出的参考文献中有47%(288/617)是灰色文献。最常引用的灰色文献类型是制造商(所有灰色文献参考文献的30%),监管机构(10%),临床试验注册机构(9%)以及其他范围扫描或证据综合报告(9%)的信息。美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)和ClincalTrials.gov是最常被引用的特定来源,分别占灰色文献参考文献的7%和8%。超过三分之二(15/22)的分析报告提供了有关搜索方法的一些详细信息;所有这15个报告都报告搜索了一些灰色文献。结论在该样本中,灰色文献几乎代表了有关新兴和新兴非药物保健技术的报告中引用的参考文献的一半。在这些灰色文献参考文献中,几乎有一半来自三个来源:制造商ClincalTrials.gov和FDA。引用的其他来源也有很大差异。文献检索方法学经常不足以进行分析。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号