MEDLINE versus EMBASE and CINAHL for telemedicine searches

Bahaadinbeigy, Kambiz, Yogesan, Kanagasingam and Wootton, Richard (2010) MEDLINE versus EMBASE and CINAHL for telemedicine searches. Telemedicine and e-Health, 16 8: 916-919. doi:10.1089/tmj.2010.0046

Author Bahaadinbeigy, Kambiz
Yogesan, Kanagasingam
Wootton, Richard
Title MEDLINE versus EMBASE and CINAHL for telemedicine searches
Journal name Telemedicine and e-Health   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1530-5627
Publication date 2010-10-01
Year available 2010
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1089/tmj.2010.0046
Open Access Status
Volume 16
Issue 8
Start page 916
End page 919
Total pages 4
Place of publication New Rochelle, NY United States
Publisher Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Publishers
Collection year 2010
Language eng
Subject 2700 Medicine
2718 Health Informatics
3605 Health Information Management
Abstract Introduction: Researchers in the domain of telemedicine throughout the world tend to search multiple bibliographic databases to retrieve the highest possible number of publications when conducting review projects. Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) are three popular databases in the discipline of biomedicine that are used for conducting reviews. Access to the MEDLINE database is free and easy, whereas EMBASE and CINAHL are not free and sometimes not easy to access for researchers in small research centers. Objective: This project sought to compare MEDLINE with EMBASE and CINAHL to estimate what proportion of potentially relevant publications would be missed when only MEDLINE is used in a review project, in comparison to when EMBASE and CINAHL are also used. Methods: Twelve simple keywords relevant to 12 different telemedicine applications were searched using all three databases, and the results were compared. Results: About 9%-18% of potentially relevant articles would have been missed if MEDLINE had been the only database used. Conclusions: It is preferable if all three or more databases are used when conducting a review in telemedicine. Researchers from developing countries or small research institutions could rely on only MEDLINE, but they would loose 9%-18% of the potentially relevant publications. Searching MEDLINE alone is not ideal, but in a resource-constrained situation, it is definitely better than nothing.
Keyword Bibliographic databases
Information management
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Medicine Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 7 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 2 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Fri, 16 May 2014, 18:38:06 EST by System User on behalf of School of Medicine