Trip Database Blog

Liberating the literature

Search suggestions

In our recent poll the feature most users wanted to see was a search suggestions function.  Well, we’ve delivered on that and it is freely available on Trip.

Search suggestions

In the image above you’ll see the search suggestions to the right of the search box. The user has done a simple search and we’ve made a number of suggestions to help the user formulate a more focused search.  Clicking on one of those suggestions, for example, ‘breast cancer’ results in a new search for ‘breast cancer’ and further search suggestions, the top ones being:

  • breast cancer screening
  • negative breast cancer
  • breast cancer therapy
  • breast cancer treatment
  • triple negative breast cancer
  • breast cancer metastatic
  • breast cancer risk
  • breast cancer radiotherapy

So, it’s a really simple system to get better search results.  In addition our system is available as you start typing your search in the search box.

The search results system has been created as part of our involvement in the KConnect project (funded via the EU Horizon 2020 scheme).  The team at the Institute of Software Technology and Interactive Systems, Technische Universität Wien (Vienna University of Technology) have taken search suggestions from two sources:

  • PubMed – they have a system which we’ve used for a number of years (but restricted to a user typing in the search box).  This has never been satisfactory and always seemed a bit ‘dry’ – hence wanting to improve on it.
  • The Trip search logs.  Users search Trip thousands of times a day and we start to build up a picture of terms that go together.  We can mine this data to come up with potential search suggestions.

And, being evidence-based, we’re mixing the search suggestions and recording which get clicked.  So, will our users prefer PubMed or search log suggestions?  Either way, the results will help inform future developments of the system.  But, as it stands, the mix is already much better than the PubMed suggestions alone.

The one obvious improvement to make is the design – as it’s fairly poor.  But that will have to wait till we roll out our next new feature – mis-spelling (the second most wanted new feature requested in the poll).  This is near to being released and again has been created with the help of the team at the Institute of Software Technology and Interactive Systems as part of the KConnect project.  When that’s released we’ll get our designer involved to make it look seamless.

Trip, making search simple!

New feature: automated assessment of bias

I love it when we roll out new features and few have been as significant and innovative as this one.  Over the last few months I’ve been working with the wonderful team at RobotReviewer to introduce two major improvements to Trip.

Identification of RCTs.

Trip has featured a search results category called ‘Controlled trials’ for years.  To identify trials we used a filter to highlight trials in PubMed and imported them in to Trip.  This used a series of keywords and was good at identifying trials but was also prone to identifying a number of other articles that were not trials.  In other words there were a number of false positives (ie noise) and we invariably missed a few trials as well.

RobotReviewer used machine learning to identify trials from Trip and it works brilliantly.  In internal tests our controlled trials is about 97% accurate, which is amazing.  The total ‘count’ of trials has dropped by over 200,000 which means they were incorrectly identified by the filter.  So, when using the controlled trials filter you’re significantly more likely to just find trials and avoid the noise of incorrectly identified trials!

Automatic assessment of bias.

Last year the RobotReviewer team published RobotReviewer: evaluation of a system for automatically assessing bias in clinical trials.  The paper concluded:

Risk of bias assessment may be automated with reasonable accuracy. Automatically identified text supporting bias assessment is of equal quality to the manually identified text in the CDSR. This technology could substantially reduce reviewer workload and expedite evidence syntheses.

In short their techniques pretty much matched human ability in assessing bias.  Now, in conjunction with Trip, they have extended their techniques to work on the controlled trials that Trip has: abstracts.  With very little loss of accuracy we have just released this feature (see their blog for more technical details).  In this first image it shows what to expect:


The ‘Estimate of bias…’ is clickable to reveal:


This is a significant moment for Trip and I’m delighted that we have this feature.  Assessment of bias is not most people’s idea of fun and if we can help reduce the barriers to using evidence – which we have with this feature – then everyone should be delighted.

Quick update

There are lots of things going on in the background and these will start to become visible over the next six months (some very soon).  To give a flavour of what we’re currently working on:

  • Using machine learning to better identify controlled trials for inclusion in Trip.
  • Using machine learning to assess for potential bias in controlled trials included in Trip.
  • The answer engine is slowly creeping towards a robust testing version.  Version 1 was available 4 months ago but we wanted to make it even better so we have re-built it from the bottom up.  I’m confident it’ll be worth the wait.
  • Search suggestions – an improved drop-down search suggestion feature PLUS a new post-search search suggestions feature.  So, if you conduct a search we’ll display a number of related searches that you might prefer to use to give a more focused search.
  • Improved search algorithm – this is a really exciting development and we’ll be using a number of cutting edge technologies to improve the search results.  These will all be tested to ensure we get the optimal balance.

And, when the above are all finished, we’ll move on to our Q&A community idea….!

Poll results

With just shy of 500 respondents the results of our poll are as follows:

Question 1: Why do you use Trip? (showing all results that scored at least 10%)

  • To find out what the latest research is for a given topic – 24%
  • To answer a clinical Q (raised by patient care but not answered at same time) – 18%
  • I’m an information specialist using Trip to support a health professional – 16%
  • To answer a clinical Q at the point of care – 12%
  • I’m an information specialist carrying out a review (eg to find latest evidence) – 11%
  • I’m a researcher undertaking a review to support a paper and/or research bid – 10%

Question 2: How would you best like to pay for Trip Pro?

  • I’ll get my institute to pay – 34%
  • I’ll never pay for Pro – 32%
  • Annual payment (currently the only option for personal use) – 23%
  • Monthly payment (a proposed alternative for personal subscribers) – 11%

Question 3: What new features would you like to see on Trip?

  • Search suggestions (after a search we suggest additional search terms to help focus the search)? – 35%
  • Mis-spelling function (to detect and correct spelling mistakes)? – 19%
  • Better point of care support (eg adverse drug event, interactions) – 14%
  • Better search results – 10%


Question 1: Surprised by the proportion that use Trip as a point of care tool.  Also, the top reason for using Trip is to locate the latest evidence.  I think we can improve on that!

Question 2: No surprises!

Question 3: Delighted with the top four as we’re working on all 4 of these.  In fact we should be testing the top one shortly.

Question time

Every now and then we like to reach out to our users to try and get insight in to what can help make Trip better.  So, if you don’t mind can you answer these few questions below (tick all the boxes that apply).

These user surveys are important as they help understand how our users would like Trip to develop.  Trip is so much better with user input!


Why you use Trip


New features


Payments for Trip Pro


Finally, we are exploring creating a Trip Community Q&A system.  So, if a user can’t find an answer via Trip they would be able to post the question to the Trip Community.  If you are interested in helping develop this idea then please contact us via  This will not involved much work, simply a way for us to ask your views on how we can best develop a useful system.


Images – easily find articles that are free to use

Medical images on Trip has just got even more useful!  A Twitter user suggested a great feature would be to restrict the images to those that are freely available to use.  In other words, those with liberal (or no) copyright restrictions.  As you’ll see in the image below we have a new tick box, “Only show images that are free to modify, share and use


NOTE: Pro feature only.

Combination search

The combination search is back (for Pro users)!

It went missing when we moved to the new design and it’s taken a while to put it back and integrate it.

Combination search

Each search on Trip (in a single session) is given a number eg #1, #2 etc.  You can then combine these via the ‘Recent’ tab (see image above).  It allows users to fairly easily build up complex searches.

I’m very glad it’s back.


How to use Trip

We have now produced a number of very nice videos on how to get the best out of Trip.  They cover a range of topics such as how to refine your search, PICO search etc.  The full list can be seen on our YouTube Channel.  But I’ve pasted a few examples below.

These videos have already been a big success and so I’m planning to add to these in two main ways:

  • Additional ‘how to’ guides.  If there’s anything you’d like to see then drop me a line or leave a comment.
  • Guided topic search.  ‘How to’ guides are great but sometimes working through an actual search example adds an extra insight.  So, I need some example searches.  I can make my own up but it might be nice to accept searches that people have tried and possibly had sub-optimal results. So, if you have a search you’d like me to work through then again drop me a line or leave a comment.

Now, the example videos…:

Refining your search

The Star function

Regulatory Guidance

Regulatory guidance is content typically published by national (or European) government agencies e.g. FDA, NICE, IQWiG, European Medicines Agency EMA).  It’s a fairly new category of evidence, released in the new design, and most of the content relates to pharmaceutical drugs.  It works like every other category, you search and then click on the ‘Regulatory Guidance’ link in the ‘Refine’ box on the right hand side of the results page, see the two images below.

This is an incredibly powerful feature.  Searching sites like the FDA and EMA can be challenging to say the least and Trip makes it easy.  This content is really useful, featuring additional content not included in journal articles (e.g. see this Brexpiprazole review) and has typically been rigorously assessed by the relevant agency.

Why not try it now with these two canned searches (just click on the link):

Trip – making evidence easy

Reg guidance 1

Reg guidance

Blog at

Up ↑


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.