Alison C Bethel1, Morwenna Rogers2, Rebecca Abbott3. 1. a.bethel@exeter.ac.uk, Information Specialist, Evidence Synthesis Team, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom. 2. morwenna.rogers@exeter.ac.uk, Evidence Synthesis Team, National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom. 3. r.a.abbott@exeter.ac.uk, Evidence Synthesis Team, National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula,, University of Exeter Medical School, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are comprehensive, robust, inclusive, transparent, and reproducible when bringing together the evidence to answer a research question. Various guidelines provide recommendations on the expertise required to conduct a systematic review, where and how to search for literature, and what should be reported in the published review. However, the finer details of the search results are not typically reported to allow the search methods or search efficiency to be evaluated. CASE PRESENTATION: This case study presents a search summary table, containing the details of which databases were searched, which supplementary search methods were used, and where the included articles were found. It was developed and published alongside a recent systematic review. This simple format can be used in future systematic reviews to improve search results reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Publishing a search summary table in all systematic reviews would add to the growing evidence base about information retrieval, which would help in determining which databases to search for which type of review (in terms of either topic or scope), what supplementary search methods are most effective, what type of literature is being included, and where it is found. It would also provide evidence for future searching and search methods research.
BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews are comprehensive, robust, inclusive, transparent, and reproducible when bringing together the evidence to answer a research question. Various guidelines provide recommendations on the expertise required to conduct a systematic review, where and how to search for literature, and what should be reported in the published review. However, the finer details of the search results are not typically reported to allow the search methods or search efficiency to be evaluated. CASE PRESENTATION: This case study presents a search summary table, containing the details of which databases were searched, which supplementary search methods were used, and where the included articles were found. It was developed and published alongside a recent systematic review. This simple format can be used in future systematic reviews to improve search results reporting. CONCLUSIONS: Publishing a search summary table in all systematic reviews would add to the growing evidence base about information retrieval, which would help in determining which databases to search for which type of review (in terms of either topic or scope), what supplementary search methods are most effective, what type of literature is being included, and where it is found. It would also provide evidence for future searching and search methods research.
Authors: Heather L Colquhoun; Danielle Levac; Kelly K O'Brien; Sharon Straus; Andrea C Tricco; Laure Perrier; Monika Kastner; David Moher Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2014-07-14 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Beverley J Shea; Barnaby C Reeves; George Wells; Micere Thuku; Candyce Hamel; Julian Moran; David Moher; Peter Tugwell; Vivian Welch; Elizabeth Kristjansson; David A Henry Journal: BMJ Date: 2017-09-21
Authors: Paul Garner; Sally Hopewell; Jackie Chandler; Harriet MacLehose; Holger J Schünemann; Elie A Akl; Joseph Beyene; Stephanie Chang; Rachel Churchill; Karin Dearness; Gordon Guyatt; Carol Lefebvre; Beth Liles; Rachel Marshall; Laura Martínez García; Chris Mavergames; Mona Nasser; Amir Qaseem; Margaret Sampson; Karla Soares-Weiser; Yemisi Takwoingi; Lehana Thabane; Marialena Trivella; Peter Tugwell; Emma Welsh; Ed C Wilson; Holger J Schünemann Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-07-20
Authors: Chris Cooper; Andrew Booth; Jo Varley-Campbell; Nicky Britten; Ruth Garside Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2018-08-14 Impact factor: 4.615
Authors: Rebecca Whear; Rebecca A Abbott; Alison Bethel; David A Richards; Ruth Garside; Emma Cockcroft; Heather Iles-Smith; Pip A Logan; Ann Marie Rafferty; Maggie Shepherd; Holly V R Sugg; Anne Marie Russell; Susanne Cruickshank; Susannah Tooze; G J Melendez-Torres; Jo Thompson Coon Journal: J Adv Nurs Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 3.057