Do clinical experts rely on the Cochrane Library?

David A. Grimes, Melody Hou, Laureen M. Lopez, Kavita Nanda

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In part because of limited public access, Cochrane reviews are underused in the United States compared with other developed nations. To assess use of these reviews by opinion leaders, we examined citation of Cochrane reviews in the Clinical Expert Series of Obstetrics & Gynecology from inception through June of 2007. We reviewed all 54 articles for mention of Cochrane reviews, then searched for potentially relevant Cochrane reviews that the authors could have cited. Thirty-six of 54 Clinical Expert Series articles had one or more relevant Cochrane reviews published at least two calendar quarters before the Clinical Expert Series article. Of these 36 articles, 19 (53%) cited one or more Cochrane reviews. We identified 187 instances of relevant Cochrane reviews, of which 40 (21%) were cited in the Clinical Expert Series articles. No temporal trends were evident in citation of Cochrane reviews. Although about one half of Clinical Expert Series articles cited relevant Cochrane reviews, most eligible reviews were not referenced. Wider use of Cochrane reviews could strengthen the scientific basis of this popular series.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)420-422
Number of pages3
JournalObstetrics and Gynecology
Volume111
Issue number2 PART 1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Gynecology
Developed Countries
Libraries
Obstetrics
Calendars

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Obstetrics and Gynecology

Cite this

Do clinical experts rely on the Cochrane Library? / Grimes, David A.; Hou, Melody; Lopez, Laureen M.; Nanda, Kavita.

In: Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 111, No. 2 PART 1, 02.2008, p. 420-422.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Grimes, David A. ; Hou, Melody ; Lopez, Laureen M. ; Nanda, Kavita. / Do clinical experts rely on the Cochrane Library?. In: Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008 ; Vol. 111, No. 2 PART 1. pp. 420-422.
@article{caeb16510b1d4901b31590989ce48099,
title = "Do clinical experts rely on the Cochrane Library?",
abstract = "In part because of limited public access, Cochrane reviews are underused in the United States compared with other developed nations. To assess use of these reviews by opinion leaders, we examined citation of Cochrane reviews in the Clinical Expert Series of Obstetrics & Gynecology from inception through June of 2007. We reviewed all 54 articles for mention of Cochrane reviews, then searched for potentially relevant Cochrane reviews that the authors could have cited. Thirty-six of 54 Clinical Expert Series articles had one or more relevant Cochrane reviews published at least two calendar quarters before the Clinical Expert Series article. Of these 36 articles, 19 (53{\%}) cited one or more Cochrane reviews. We identified 187 instances of relevant Cochrane reviews, of which 40 (21{\%}) were cited in the Clinical Expert Series articles. No temporal trends were evident in citation of Cochrane reviews. Although about one half of Clinical Expert Series articles cited relevant Cochrane reviews, most eligible reviews were not referenced. Wider use of Cochrane reviews could strengthen the scientific basis of this popular series.",
author = "Grimes, {David A.} and Melody Hou and Lopez, {Laureen M.} and Kavita Nanda",
year = "2008",
month = "2",
doi = "10.1097/01.AOG.0000300558.51373.ae",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "111",
pages = "420--422",
journal = "Obstetrics and Gynecology",
issn = "0029-7844",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "2 PART 1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Do clinical experts rely on the Cochrane Library?

AU - Grimes, David A.

AU - Hou, Melody

AU - Lopez, Laureen M.

AU - Nanda, Kavita

PY - 2008/2

Y1 - 2008/2

N2 - In part because of limited public access, Cochrane reviews are underused in the United States compared with other developed nations. To assess use of these reviews by opinion leaders, we examined citation of Cochrane reviews in the Clinical Expert Series of Obstetrics & Gynecology from inception through June of 2007. We reviewed all 54 articles for mention of Cochrane reviews, then searched for potentially relevant Cochrane reviews that the authors could have cited. Thirty-six of 54 Clinical Expert Series articles had one or more relevant Cochrane reviews published at least two calendar quarters before the Clinical Expert Series article. Of these 36 articles, 19 (53%) cited one or more Cochrane reviews. We identified 187 instances of relevant Cochrane reviews, of which 40 (21%) were cited in the Clinical Expert Series articles. No temporal trends were evident in citation of Cochrane reviews. Although about one half of Clinical Expert Series articles cited relevant Cochrane reviews, most eligible reviews were not referenced. Wider use of Cochrane reviews could strengthen the scientific basis of this popular series.

AB - In part because of limited public access, Cochrane reviews are underused in the United States compared with other developed nations. To assess use of these reviews by opinion leaders, we examined citation of Cochrane reviews in the Clinical Expert Series of Obstetrics & Gynecology from inception through June of 2007. We reviewed all 54 articles for mention of Cochrane reviews, then searched for potentially relevant Cochrane reviews that the authors could have cited. Thirty-six of 54 Clinical Expert Series articles had one or more relevant Cochrane reviews published at least two calendar quarters before the Clinical Expert Series article. Of these 36 articles, 19 (53%) cited one or more Cochrane reviews. We identified 187 instances of relevant Cochrane reviews, of which 40 (21%) were cited in the Clinical Expert Series articles. No temporal trends were evident in citation of Cochrane reviews. Although about one half of Clinical Expert Series articles cited relevant Cochrane reviews, most eligible reviews were not referenced. Wider use of Cochrane reviews could strengthen the scientific basis of this popular series.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=40749121778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=40749121778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.AOG.0000300558.51373.ae

DO - 10.1097/01.AOG.0000300558.51373.ae

M3 - Article

VL - 111

SP - 420

EP - 422

JO - Obstetrics and Gynecology

JF - Obstetrics and Gynecology

SN - 0029-7844

IS - 2 PART 1

ER -