Pubmed Prompts on Errors in your Searches

When conducting searches in Pubmed, a searcher may make errors, either by omission or by mistyping. In many cases (but not all) Pubmed alerts you to the error and helps you identify it.

When are you alerted to an error?

Sometimes, it happens that a searcher omits one of a pair of parentheses or double quotes, which may result in the search done not as you’ve intended and producing different results. If you made such an error, the “first line of defense” that Pubmed offers would be a message that appears right above the search results.

For example, your intended search strategy was: “lung carcinogenesis” AND (cell* OR molecular)
Instead, you typed “lung carcinogenesis AND cell* OR molecular). In that case you will see, right above the search results: The following terms were ignored: “, )

The “second line of defense” could be found in Advanced Search. Details next to your Query in Advanced Search always display how your Query, or the exact search strategy you entered in the search box, was “translated” by Pubmed, i.e. what was actually processed and searched upon. So, when trying to get more details about the error and the exact place in the search where the error has occurred (especially in the case of complex and lengthy search strategies) you can go to Advanced Search and look at the Details for the search Query in question. A red Warnings icon with an Exclamation Mark would alert you to the problems and by clicking the caret symbol next to it you will see the unmatched quotes and parentheses in red in the search you entered.

Another example: you are searching with the keyword “breast” in the title or abstract fields of the Pubmed record but instead of breast[tiab], where [tiab] is a combined title/abstract field, you mistyped it as breast[taib]. You will see the following message above the search results Unknown field was ignored: [taib] and in the Advanced Search>Details you will see more details related to how Pubmed “translated” your search strategy, as shown below:

In some cases, when you enclose a phrase in double quotes intending to find references that include exactly same phrase, Pubmed actually does not find such references despite the fact that some of them do exist. That’s because Pubmed does not index all phrases and in this it differs from other databases, such as Embase, Scopus, etc. For example, if you type “chemoradiotherapy side effect*” you will be alerted by Pubmed that Quoted phrase not found: “chemoradiotherapy side effect*”. In fact, such references may be present in Pubmed but the search for this exact phrase will be “translated” by Pubmed as a broader query. Pubmed would parse the phrase and search on its components combining them with a Boolean Operator “AND”, behind the scenes. The details of how it was done can be found in Advanced Search>Details.

When are you not alerted to an error?

There are some instances where your error by omission or mistyping may go undetected. If your search includes the Boolean operator “OR” and you omitted it in error, Pubmed will not alert you to it. That’s because a space (in place of the “OR” that you’ve omitted) is treated by Pubmed as a Boolean Operator “AND”. So, your search will produce totally different results, but the error will go unnoticed.

Also, if you mistyped but the term you entered in error is still a legitimate term Pubmed would not detect anything as incorrect. In the first example, if you omit an asterisk in the keyword cell*, where the asterisk was used for truncation, allowing retrieval of references with words with different endings (e.g. cell, cells, cellular), Pubmed will process the search without noticing your error as the noun cell is a legitimate term.

Of course, if you made an error not by omission or mistyping but because of the lack of expertise, e.g. you incorrectly used an “AND” operator or a space instead of an “OR” between the terms in the same category or synonyms, Pubmed will not detect this error either. The takeaway for minimizing the chance of making such an error is taking a Library Pubmed class or, if you feel that the search results are not what you expected, consulting a Research Informationist at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Library.

Changes Coming to Pubmed’s My NCBI Account Sign In

Experienced Pubmed users are enjoying the convenience of saving their search strategies and search results to their personal My NCBI accounts. We have promoted the use of these accounts and explained their features in previous blog posts.

In June 2021 the change will come to how the users log in to their personal My NCBI account. The National Library of Medicine stated its concern for user privacy as the reason for the coming change. The users will no longer be able to log in their My NCBI account with their “NCBI-managed credentials”, i.e. username and password they created specifically for MY NCBI account access.

The detailed instruction on how to change the way you log in to My NCBI using your linked accounts such as Google (your gmail credentials) and their credentials (called “federated account credentials”) can be found in the National Library of Medicine publication called NLM Technical Bulletin.

Once you have linked your account you can then log in to My NCBI using the linked account credentials. Click on Log In button in the right upper corner on the Pubmed page

and you will be prompted with a screen similar to the one below (depending on what account you would choose to link):

Enjoy using My NCBI!

Finding Clinical Trials

Searching efficiently for clinical trials is often challenging for researchers. The majority of clinical trials are not published in peer-review publications. Therefore, the results are never reported and disseminated (1). Additionally, there are multiple clinical trial registries with considerable overlap (2).

While the aim of the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), launched in 2007 by the World Health Organisation (WHO) (3), is to act as a single platform to search for clinical trials, it has been reported by Glanville and Knelangen that “even though ClinicalTrials.gov is included in the WHO ICTRP Search Portal, not all ClinicalTrials.gov records can be successfully retrieved via searches of the ICTRP Search Portal”(4). To be comprehensive when searching for clinical trials, we will need to search across multiple registers.

Here are some steps that may be helpful when searching for clinical trials:

Finding clinical trials from registries:

Finding clinical trials with published results:

  • PubMed clinical queries
    A broad therapy search will retrieve clinical trials, if you are interested in Randomized Clinical trials only, you can change the scope from broad to specific/narrow.

  • The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL)
    The records are pulled mainly from the databases PubMed and Embase.

  • ClinicalTrials.gov
    In the advanced search, you can select “Studies with Results” to retrieve only studies where the results have been reported:

Finding clinical trials for COVID-19:

For information on clinical trials at MSKCC, please visit the following page: https://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/clinical-trials

References

  1. DeVito NJ, Bacon S and Goldacre B. Compliance with legal requirement to report clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cohort study. The Lancet 2020; 395: 361-369. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)33220-9.
  2. van Valkenhoef G, Loane RF and Zarin DA. Previously unidentified duplicate registrations of clinical trials: an exploratory analysis of registry data worldwide. Systematic Reviews 2016; 5: 116. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-016-0283-8.
  3. Karam G and Ross AL. The WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: Providing global clinical trial information to all. On Medicine. 2020.
  4. Lefebvre C GJ, Briscoe S, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, Noel-Storr A, Rader T, Shokraneh F, Thomas J, Wieland LS. . Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. In: Higgins JPT TJ, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (ed) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 61 (updated September 2020). Cochrane, 2020.
  •