Grey literature searching for health sciences systematic reviews: A prospective study of time spent and resources utilized

Evidence Based Library and Information Practice

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2014, Pages 28-50

  Saleh, Ahlam A ^a   Ratajeski, Melissa A ^b   Bertolet, Marnie ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH GRADUATE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84907152613     PISSN: None     EISSN: 1715720X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.18438/b8dw3k     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Adams, C. E., Power, A., Frederick, K., & Lefebvre, C. (1994). An investigation of the adequacy of MEDLINE searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of mental health care. Psychological Medicine, 24(3), 741-748. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291700027896
2. Al-Maskari, A., & Sanderson, M. (2011). The effect of user characteristics on search effectiveness in information retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 47(5), 719-729. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2011.03.002
3. Allen, I. E., & Olkin, I. (1999). Estimating time to conduct a meta-analysis from number of citations retrieved. Journal of the American Medical Association, 282(7), 634-635.
4. Armstrong, R., Jackson, N., Doyle, J., Waters, E., & Howes, F. (2005). It's in your hands: the value of handsearching in conducting systematic reviews of public health interventions. Journal of Public Health, 27(4), 388-391. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdi056
5. Bidwell, S., & Jensen, M. F. (2003). Using a search protocol to identify sources of information: the COSI model. Etext on Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Information Resources. In National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology (NICHSR). Retrieved from http://www.nlm.nih.gov/archive/20060905/nichsr/ehta/chapter3.html.
6. Boekhorst, A. K., Farace, D. J., & Frantzen, J. (2005). Grey literature survey 2004: A research project tracking developments in the field of grey literature.In D.J. Farace & J. Frantzen (Eds). Proceedings from Sixth International Conference on Grey Literature: Work on Grey in Progress, 6-7 December 2004. (pp. 1-9). Amsterdam: TextRelease.
7. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. (2013). Grey matters: a practical deep-web search tool for evidence-based medicine, Retrieved from http://www.cadth.ca/media/pdf/Grey-Matters_A-Practical-Search-Tool-for-Evidence-Based-Medicine.doc
8. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. (2009). Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. Retrieved from http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/pdf/Systematic_Reviews.pdf
9. Chandler, J., Churchill, R., Higgins, J., Lasserson, T., & Tovey, D. (2013). Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews. In Cochrane Editorial Unit (Ed.) Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR) | Retrieved from http://www.editorial-unit.cochrane.org/sites/editorial-unit.cochrane.org/files/uploads/MECIR_conduct_standards%202.3%2002122013.pdf
10. Cochrane Collaboration. (2011). In J. P. T. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.) Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Retrieved from http://www.cochrane-handbook.org
11. Cook, D. J., Guyatt, G. H., Ryan, G., Clifton, J., Buckingham, L., Willan, A., McIlroy, W., Oxman, A. D. (1993). Should unpublished data be included in meta-analyses? Current convictions and controversies. Journal of the American Medical Association, 269(21), 2749-2753. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1993.03500210049030
12. Cook, D. J., Mulrow, C. D., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine, 126(5), 376-380. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006
13. Cooper, I. D., & Crum, J. A. (2013). New activities and changing roles of health sciences librarians: a systematic review, 1990-2012. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 101(4), 268-277. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.101.4.008
14. Croft, A. M., Vassallo, D. J., & Rowe, M. (1999). Handsearching the Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps for trials. Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps, 145(2), 86-88. doi: dx.doi.org/10.1136/jramc-145-02-09
15. Crum, J. A., & Cooper, I. D. (2013). Emerging roles for biomedical librarians: a survey of current practice, challenges, and changes. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 101(4), 278-286. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.101.4.009
16. Crumley, E. T., Wiebe, N., Cramer, K., Klassen, T. P., & Hartling, L. (2005). Which resources should be used to identify RCT/CCTs for systematic reviews: a systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 5, 24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-5-24
17. Debowski, S. (2001). Wrong way: go back¡ An exploration of novice search behaviours while conducting an information search. The Electronic Library, 19(6), 371-382.
18. Dobbins, M.,Robeson, P,Jentha, N., & DesMeules , M (2008). Grey Literature: A methodology for searching the grey literature for effectiveness evidence syntheses related to public health: A report from Canada.Health Inform , 17(1), 9-12.
19. Farace, D. J. (1998). Forward. In D.J. Farace (ed.). GL'97 Conference Proceedings: Perspectives on the Design and Transfer of Scientific and Technical Information, Amsterdam: TransAtlantic.
20. Fenichel, C. H. (1981). Online searching: Measures that discriminate among users with different types of experiences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 32(1), 23-32. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630320104
21. Friedrich, M. J. (2013). The Cochrane Collaboration turns 20: Assessing the evidence to inform clinical care. Journal of the American Medical Association, 309(18), 1881-1882. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.1827
22. Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005). Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. British Medical Journal, 331(7524), 1064-1065. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
23. GreyNet International. (2013). Document types in grey literature. Retrieved 07/09/2013, from http://www.greynet.org/greysourceindex/documenttypes.html
24. Guise, J.-M., & Viswanathan, M. (2011). Overview of best practices in conducting comparative-effectiveness reviews. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 90(6), 876-882. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/clpt.2011.239
25. Hopewell, S., Clarke, M.J., Lefebvre, C., & Scherer, R.W. (2007). Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials. In Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MR000001. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000001.pub2
26. Hopewell, S., Clarke, M.J., Stewart, L., & Tierney, J. (2007). Time to publication for results of clinical trials. In Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MR000011. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000011.pub2
27. Hopewell, S., McDonald, S., Clarke, M.J., & Egger, M. (2007). Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. In Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, MR000010. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000010.pub3
28. Hsieh-Yee, I. (1993). Effects of search experience and subject knowledge on the search tactics of novice and experienced searchers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 44(3), 161-174. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(199304)44:3<161::AID-ASI5>3.0.CO;2-8
29. Institute of Medicine. (2011). Finding what works in health care: Standards for systematic reviews. Washington DC: National Academies PressRetrieved from www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13059
30. Jadad, A. R., Carroll, D., Moore, A., & McQuay, H. (1996). Developing a database of published reports of randomised clinical trials in pain research. Pain, 66(2-3), 239-246.
31. Kuhlthau, C. C. (1999). The role of experience in the information search process of an early career information worker: Perceptions of uncertainty, complexity, construction, and sources. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 50(5), 399-412. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(Sici)1097-4571(1999)50:5<399::Aid-Asi3>3.0.Co;2-L
32. Reed, D. A., Cook, D. A., Beckman, T. J., Levine, R. B., Kern, D. E., & Wright, S. M. (2007).Association between funding and quality of published medical education research. Journal of the American Medical Association, 298(9), 1002-1009. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.298.9.1002
33. Riaz, M., Sulayman, M., Salleh, N., & Mendes, E. (2010). Experiences conducting systematic reviews from novices' perspective. In M. Turner & M. Niazi (Eds.) Proceedings of the 14th international conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering. (pp. 44-53). Swinton: British Computer Society.
34. Savoie, I., Helmer, D., Green, C. J., & Kazanjian, A. (2003). Beyond Medline: Reducing bias through extended systematic review search. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19(1), 168-178. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0266462303000163
35. Steinberg, K. K., Smith, S. J., Stroup, D. F., Olkin, I., Lee, N. C., Williamson, G. D., & Thacker, S. B. (1997). Comparison of effect estimates from a meta-analysis of summary data from published studies and from a meta-analysis using individual patient data for ovarian cancer studies. American Journal of Epidemiology, 145(10), 917-925.
36. Tabatabai, D., & Shore, B. M. (2005). How experts and novices search the Web. Library & Information Science Research, 27(2), 222-248. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lisr.2005.01.005
37. Tetzlaff, J., Moher, D., Pham, B., & Altman, D. (2006, October). Survey of views on including grey literature in systematic reviews. XIV Cochrane Colloquium, Dublin, Ireland.
38. Tyndall, J. (2008, September). How low can you go? Toward a hierarchy of grey literature. Dreaming08: Australian Library and Information Association Biennial Conference, Alice Springs, Australia.
39. Wright, J. M., Cottrell, D. J., & Mir, G. (2014). Searching for religion and mental health studies required health, social science, and grey literature databases. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(7), 800-810. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.02.017