***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Objective To evaluate the ability of  international point of care information summaries  to up date evidence relevant to medical practice . Design Prospect i ve cohort bibliometric analysis . Setting Top  five point of care information summaries ( Clinical Evidence , EBM Guidelines , eMedicine , Dynamed , UpTo Date ) ranked for coverage of medical conditions , editorial quality , and evidence based methodology . Main outcome measures From June 2009 to May 2010 we measured the incidence of research findings relating to potentially eligible newsworthy evidence . As sample s , we chose  systematic review s rated as relevant by international research networks ( such as , Evidence -Based Medicine , ACP Journal Club , and the Cochrane Collaboration ) . Every month we assessed whether each sample d review was cited in at least one chapter of the five summaries . The cumulative updating rate was analysed with Kaplan-Meier curves . Results From April to December 2009 , 128 review s were retrieved ; 53 % ( 68 ) from the literature surveillance journals and 47 % ( 60 ) from the Cochrane Library . At nine months , Dynamed had cited 87 % of the sample d review s , while the other summaries had cited less than 50 % . The updating speed of Dynamed clearly led the others . For instance , the hazard ratios for citations in EBM Guidelines and Clinical Evidence versus the top performer were 0.22 ( 95 % confidence interval 0.17 to 0.29 ) and 0.03 ( 0.01 to 0.05 ) . Conclusions Point of care information summaries include evidence relevant to practice at different speeds . A qualitative analysis of updating mechanisms is needed to determine whether greater speed corresponds to more appropriate incorporation of new information Background The use of PubMed to answer daily medical care questions is limited because it is challenging to retrieve a small set of relevant articles and time is restricted . Knowing what aspects of queries are likely to retrieve relevant articles can increase the effectiveness of PubMed search es . The objectives of our study were to identify queries that are likely to retrieve relevant articles by relating PubMed search techniques and tools to the number of articles retrieved and the selection of articles for further reading . Methods This was a prospect i ve observational study of queries regarding patient-related problems sent to PubMed by residents and internists in internal medicine working in an Academic Medical Centre . We analyzed  queries , search results , query tools ( Mesh , Limits , wildcards , operators ) , selection of abstract and full-text  for further reading , using a portal that mimics PubMed . Results PubMed was used to solve 1121 patient-related problems , result ing in 3205 distinct queries .  Abstract s were viewed in 999 ( 31 % ) of these queries , and in 126 ( 39 % ) of 321 queries using query tools . The average term count per query was 2.5 . Abstract s were selected in more than 40 % of queries using four or five terms , increasing to 63 % if the use of four or five terms yielded 2–161 articles . Conclusion Queries sent to PubMed by physicians at our hospital during daily medical care contain fewer than three terms . Queries using four to five terms , retrieving less than 161 article titles , are most likely to result in abstract viewing . PubMed search tools are used infrequently by our population and are less effective than the use of four or five terms . Methods to facilitate the formulation of precise queries , using more relevant terms , should be the focus of education and research OBJECTIVES The research sought to determine the value of PubMed filters and combinations of filters in literature selected for systematic review s on therapy-related clinical questions . METHODS References to 35,281 included and 48,514 excluded articles were extracted from 2,629 review s published prior to January 2008 in the Cochrane Data base of Systematic Review s and sent to PubMed with and without filters .  Sensitivity , specificity , and precision were calculated from the percentages of unfiltered and filtered references retrieved for each review and averaged over all review s. RESULTS Sensitivity of the Sensitive Clinical Queries filter was reasonable ( 92.7 % , 92.1 - 93.3 ) ; specificity ( 16.1 % , 15.1 - 17.1 ) and precision were low ( 49.5 % , 48.5 - 50.5 ) . The Specific Clinical Queries and the Single Term Medline Specific filters performed comparably ( sensitivity , 78.2 % , 77.2 - 79.2 vs. 78.0 % ; 77.0 - 79.0 ; specificity , 52.0 % , 50.8 - 53.2 vs. 52.3 % , 51.1 - 53.5 ; precision , 60.4 % , 59.4 - 61.4 vs. 60.6 % , 59.6 - 61.6 ) . Combining the Abridged Index Medicus ( AIM ) and Single Term Medline Specific ( 65.2 % , 63.8 - 66.6 ) , Two Terms Medline Optimized ( 64.2 % , 62.8 - 65.6 ) , or Specific Clinical Queries filters ( 65.0 % , 63.6 - 66.4 ) yielded the highest precision . CONCLUSIONS Sensitive and Specific Clinical Queries filters used to answer questions about therapy will result in a list of clinical trials but can not be expected to identify only method ologically sound trials . The Specific Clinical Queries filters are not suitable for questions regarding therapy that can not be answered with r and omized controlled trials . Combining AIM with specific PubMed filters yields the highest precision in the Cochrane data set Background Supporting 21st century health care and the practice of evidence -based medicine ( EBM ) requires ubiquitous access to clinical information and to knowledge-based re sources to answer clinical questions . Many questions go unanswered , however , due to lack of skills in formulating questions , crafting effective search strategies , and accessing data bases to identify best levels of evidence . Methods This r and omized trial was design ed as a pilot study to measure the relevancy of search results using three different interfaces for the PubMed search system . Two of the search interfaces utilized a specific framework called PICO , which was design ed to focus clinical questions and to prompt for publication type or type of question asked . The third interface was the st and ard PubMed interface readily available on the Web . Study subjects were recruited from interns and residents on an inpatient general medicine rotation at an academic medical center in the US . Thirty-one subjects were r and omized to one of the three interfaces , given 3 clinical questions , and asked to search PubMed for a set of relevant articles that would provide an answer for each question . The success of the search results was determined by a precision score , which compared the number of relevant or gold st and ard articles retrieved in a result set to the total number of articles retrieved in that set . Results Participants using the PICO templates ( Protocol A or Protocol B ) had higher precision scores for each question than the participants who used Protocol C , the st and ard PubMed Web interface . ( Question 1 : A = 35 % , B = 28 % , C = 20 % ; Question 2 : A = 5 % , B = 6 % , C = 4 % ; Question 3 : A = 1 % , B = 0 % , C = 0 % ) 95 % confidence intervals were calculated for the precision for each question using a lower boundary of zero . However , the 95 % confidence limits were overlapping , suggesting no statistical difference between the groups . Conclusion Due to the small number of search es for each arm , this pilot study could not demonstrate a statistically significant difference between the search protocol s. However there was a trend towards higher precision that needs to be investigated in a larger study to determine if PICO can improve the relevancy of search results Background Search filters or hedges play an important role in evidence -based medicine but their development depends on the availability of a " gold st and ard " – a reference st and ard against which to establish the performance of the filter . We demonstrate the feasibility of using relative recall of included studies from multiple systematic review s to vali date method ological search filters as an alternative to validation against a gold st and ard formed through h and search ing . Methods We identified 105 Cochrane review s that used the Highly Sensitive Search Strategy ( HSSS ) , included r and omized or quasi-r and omized controlled trials , and reported their included studies . We measured the ability of two published and one novel variant of the HSSS to retrieve the MEDLINE -index studies included in these review s. Results The systematic review s were comprehensive in their search es . 72 % of included primary studies were indexed in MEDLINE . Relative recall of the three strategies ranged from .98 to .91 across all review s and more comprehensive strategies showed higher recall . Conclusion An approach using relative recall instead of a h and search ing gold st and ard proved feasible and produced recall figures that were congruent with previously published figures for the HSSS . This technique would permit validation of a method ological filter using a collection of approximately 100 studies of the chosen design drawn from the included studies of multiple systematic review s that used comprehensive search strategies Background The explosion of biomedical information has led to an ‘ information paradox’—the volume of biomedical information available has made it increasingly difficult to find relevant information when needed . It is thus increasingly critical for physicians to acquire a working knowledge of biomedical informatics . Aim To evaluate four search tools commonly used to answer clinical questions , in terms of accuracy , speed , and user confidence . Methods From December 2008 to June 2009 , medical students , resident physicians , and attending physicians at the authors ' institution were asked to answer a set of four anaesthesia and /or critical care based clinical questions , within 5 min , using Google , Ovid , PubMed , or UpTo Date ( only one search tool per question ) . At the end of each search , participants rated their results on a four point confidence scale . One to 3 weeks after answering the initial four questions , users were r and omised to one of the four search tools , and asked to answer eight questions , four of which were repeated . The primary outcome was defined as a correct answer with the highest level of confidence . Results Google was the most popular search tool . Users of Google and UpTo Date were more likely than users of PubMed to answer questions correctly . Subjects had the most confidence in UpTo Date . Search es with Google and UpTo Date were faster than search es with PubMed or Ovid . Conclusion Non- Medline based search tools are not inferior to Medline based search tools for purpose s of answering evidence based anaesthesia and critical care questions Background Rather than search ing the entire MEDLINE data base , clinicians can perform search es on a filtered set of articles where relevant information is more likely to be found . Members of our team previously developed two types of MEDLINE filters . The ' methods ' filters help identify clinical research of high method ological merit . The ' content ' filters help identify articles in the discipline of renal medicine . We will now test the utility of these filters for physician MEDLINE search ing . HypothesisWhen a physician search es MEDLINE , we hypothesize the use of filters will increase the number of relevant articles retrieved ( increase ' recall , ' also called sensitivity ) and decrease the number of non-relevant articles retrieved ( increase ' precision , ' also called positive predictive value ) , compared to the performance of a physician 's search unaided by filters . Methods We will survey a r and om sample of 100 nephrologists in Canada to obtain the  MEDLINE search  that they would first perform themselves for a focused clinical question . Each question we provide to a nephrologist will be based on the topic of a recently published , well-conducted systematic review . We will examine the performance of a physician 's unaided MEDLINE search . We will then apply a total of eight filter combinations to the search ( filters used in isolation or in combination ) . We will calculate the recall and precision of each search . The filter combinations that most improve on unaided physician search es will be identified and characterized . Discussion If these filters improve search performance , physicians will be able to search MEDLINE for renal evidence more effectively , in less time , and with less frustration . Additionally , our methodology can be used as a proof of concept for the evaluation of search filters in other disciplines Purpose Many educational programs seek to develop skills in evidence -based medicine ( EBM ) . The authors examined the efficacy of teaching the EBM skill of efficiently search ing the research literature . They compared students who received brief training in EBM search ing skills with those who did not , and assessed the quality of literature search ing one month after that training . Method The authors used a nonr and omized control group study design to quantify the impact of a single , brief ( two-hour ) instructional intervention on EBM-based techniques for search ing Medline for evidence related to a clinical problem provided to the students . Ninety-two fourth-year medical students ( 34 intervention , 58 control ) at the University of Michigan participated in a four-week EBM elective between 2001 and 2003 . The authors conducted a preintervention assessment of search ing skills , followed by a repeat assessment one month after the intervention . Search quality was judged by medical librarians using a structured clinical scenario and scoring algorithm . Results Data for 30 intervention and 40 control students could be analyzed . Intervention students had fewer search errors and correspondingly higher quality search es than did control students . The educational intervention accounted for approximately 8 % of the variance in both of these outcomes . The most common search errors were a lack of Medical Subject Headings ( MeSH ) explosion , missing MeSH terms , lack of appropriate limits , failure to search for best evidence , and inappropriate combination of all search concepts . Conclusions This study provides evidence that a single , brief training session can have a marked beneficial effect on the quality of subsequent , short-term EBM literature search ing performance outcomes Background To practice Evidence -Based Medicine ( EBM ) , physicians must quickly retrieve evidence to inform medical decisions . Internal Medicine ( IM ) residents receive little formal education in electronic data base search ing , and have identified poor search ing skills as a barrier to practicing EBM . Objective To design and implement a data base search ing tutorial for IM residents on inpatient rotations and to evaluate its impact on residents ’ skill and comfort search ing MEDLINE and filtered EBM re sources . Design R and omized controlled trial . Residents r and omized to the search ing tutorial met 
    Output:
    
Results The performance of the search strategies varied widely according to the clinical question .
This benefit was consistent for most clinical questions .
Conclusions The Clinical Queries narrow filter , along with well-formulated queries based on the PICO framework , provided the greatest aid in retrieving relevant clinical trials within the 2 first PubMed pages .