Search

Background: Electronic bibliographic databases are important tools when searching for medical information. The selected databases have an important effect on the potential results achieved. Studies about comparison of databases provide useful information to help determine which databases or set of databases are useful for a particular topic. Aims: The aim of this study is to examine the coverage and overlap of three commonly used databases in mental health research. Methods: We performed systematic database searches on four topics (ADHD prevalence, schizotypal personality, brain MRI studies in schizophrenia, recovery in schizophrenia) in three databases (PubMed, Web of Science and PsycINFO). We also studied the effect of publication year and language on database coverage. Results: PubMed was the most comprehensive database in ADHD (85% coverage of total results of the three databases) and MRI studies (71%), whereas PsycINFO was most effective in recovery (62%) and schizotypal personality (72%). The most comprehensive combination of two databases found 77–94% of the articles on the different topics. Publication year and language affected the coverage in some cases. Conclusions: When choosing databases, the extent of coverage and topic should be taken into account, as there is no single database that covers all information needs. In the case of interdisciplinary topics, the Web of Science or PsycINFO should be considered; PsycINFO should be included especially on topics related to psychology. The use of several relevant bibliographic databases, including others than those used here, is recommended. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Development of psychiatric research methods requires systematic review of their status. This study describes the frequency with which various statistical research designs and methods are reported in general psychiatric journals. All original research articles in four psychiatric journals in 1996 were reviewed: The American Journal of Psychiatry (AJP), The Archives of General Psychiatry (AGP), The British Journal of Psychiatry (BJP) and the Nordic Journal of Psychiatry (NJP). Evaluation included 448 regular articles, which reported original research findings based on systematic collection and statistical analysis of research data. Aspects measured were research design, statistical methodology, description of procedures and presentation of results. Percentage frequencies of reported statistical procedures were compared between the journals. The policy of determining statistical significance was still the most generally used method of conducting research. Compared to earlier reviews, readers of psychiatric reports in 1996 more frequently encountered computer-dependent multivariate techniques. There were differences in the utilization and reporting of statistical procedures among the journals. The authors of psychiatric journals might apply these results in designing their psychiatric research to present intelligible and compact analysis combined with a high quality presentation technique, thus being in line with the policy and presentation of the leading psychiatric journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]