Literature DB >> 19158999

Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews.

Adriana Yoshii1, Daphne A Plaut, Kathleen A McGraw, Margaret J Anderson, Kay E Wellik.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions provides instructions for documenting a systematic review's electronic database search strategy, listing elements that should be in the description. Complete documentation of the search strategy allows readers to evaluate the search when critically appraising a review's quality.
OBJECTIVE: The research analyzed recently published Cochrane reviews to determine whether instructions for describing electronic database search strategies were being followed.
METHODS: Eighty-three new reviews added to the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews in the first quarter of 2006 were selected for analysis. Eighteen were subsequently excluded because their searches were conducted only in the specialized registers of Cochrane review groups. The remaining sixty-five reviews were analyzed for the seven elements of an electronic database search strategy description listed in the Cochrane Handbook, using dual review with consensus.
RESULTS: Of the 65 reviews analyzed, none included all 7 recommended elements. Four reviews (6%) included 6 elements. Thirty-two percent (21/65) included 5 or more elements, with 68% (44/65) including 4 or fewer. Three included only 2 elements. The 65 reviews represented 41 different Cochrane review groups.
CONCLUSION: The instructions from the Cochrane Handbook for reporting search strategies are not being consistently employed by groups producing Cochrane reviews.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19158999      PMCID: PMC2605027          DOI: 10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc        ISSN: 1536-5050


  25 in total

Review 1.  Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses.

Authors:  D Moher; D J Cook; S Eastwood; I Olkin; D Rennie; D F Stroup
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1999-11-27       Impact factor: 79.321

2.  Systematic reviews and meta-analyses on treatment of asthma: critical evaluation.

Authors:  A R Jadad; M Moher; G P Browman; L Booker; C Sigouin; M Fuentes; R Stevens
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-02-26

3.  A comparison of the quality of Cochrane reviews and systematic reviews published in paper-based journals.

Authors:  Beverley Shea; David Moher; Ian Graham; Ba Pham; Peter Tugwell
Journal:  Eval Health Prof       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 2.651

4.  Beyond Medline: reducing bias through extended systematic review search.

Authors:  Isabelle Savoie; Diane Helmer; Carolyn J Green; Arminée Kazanjian
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.188

5.  The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study.

Authors:  C A Beverley; A Booth; P A Bath
Journal:  Health Info Libr J       Date:  2003-06

6.  Evidence-based retrieval in evidence-based medicine.

Authors:  Timothy B Patrick; George Demiris; Lillian C Folk; David E Moxley; Joyce A Mitchell; Donghua Tao
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2004-04

7.  Validation of an index of the quality of review articles.

Authors:  A D Oxman; G H Guyatt
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 6.437

8.  Guidelines for reading literature reviews.

Authors:  A D Oxman; G H Guyatt
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  1988-04-15       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  The medical review article: state of the science.

Authors:  C D Mulrow
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1987-03       Impact factor: 25.391

10.  Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: MEDLINE alone is not enough.

Authors:  M E Suarez-Almazor; E Belseck; J Homik; M Dorgan; C Ramos-Remus
Journal:  Control Clin Trials       Date:  2000-10
View more
  28 in total

1.  Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews.

Authors:  Deborah Finfgeld-Connett; E Diane Johnson
Journal:  J Adv Nurs       Date:  2012-05-17       Impact factor: 3.187

Review 2.  Reporting quality of search methods in systematic reviews of HIV behavioral interventions (2000-2010): are the searches clearly explained, systematic and reproducible?

Authors:  Mary M Mullins; Julia B DeLuca; Nicole Crepaz; Cynthia M Lyles
Journal:  Res Synth Methods       Date:  2013-10-08       Impact factor: 5.273

Review 3.  Reconstruction options in pediatric population with hemi or total mandibulectomy defects: A systematic review.

Authors:  Adity Bansal; Shakil Ahmed Nagori; Ashi Chug; Ashutosh Dixit; Rebecca Chowdhry; Srinivas Gosla Reddy
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2022-03-16

Review 4.  The Impact of 5-HT3RA Use on Cost and Utilization in Patients with Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Systematic Review of the Literature.

Authors:  Michael S Broder; Claudio Faria; Annette Powers; Jehangeer Sunderji; Dasha Cherepanov
Journal:  Am Health Drug Benefits       Date:  2014-05

5.  Are systematic reviews up-to-date at the time of publication?

Authors:  Elaine M Beller; Joyce Kee-Hsin Chen; Una Li-Hsiang Wang; Paul P Glasziou
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-05-28

6.  Boolean versus ranked querying for biomedical systematic reviews.

Authors:  Sarvnaz Karimi; Stefan Pohl; Falk Scholer; Lawrence Cavedon; Justin Zobel
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2010-10-12       Impact factor: 2.796

7.  Use of recommended search strategies in systematic reviews and the impact of librarian involvement: a cross-sectional survey of recent authors.

Authors:  Jonathan B Koffel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-05-04       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews.

Authors:  Melissa L Rethlefsen; Shona Kirtley; Siw Waffenschmidt; Ana Patricia Ayala; David Moher; Matthew J Page; Jonathan B Koffel
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2021-04-01

9.  A new method for testing reproducibility in systematic reviews was developed, but needs more testing.

Authors:  Dawid Pieper; Simone Heß; Clovis Mariano Faggion
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  Methodological developments in searching for studies for systematic reviews: past, present and future?

Authors:  Carol Lefebvre; Julie Glanville; L Susan Wieland; Bernadette Coles; Alison L Weightman
Journal:  Syst Rev       Date:  2013-09-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.