Social Work Literature Searching: Current Issues With Databases and Online Search Engines

Research on Social Work Practice

Volumn 26, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 266-277

  McGinn, Tony ^a   Taylor, Brian ^a   McColgan, Mary ^a   McQuilkan, Janice ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ULSTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

bibliographic; databases; domestic violence; evidence based practice; information storage and retrieval; intimate partner violence; review literature as topic; systematic literature searching

Indexed keywords

DATA BASE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; OFFENDER; PARTNER VIOLENCE; SEARCH ENGINE; SOCIAL WORK; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

EID: 84963546230     PISSN: 10497315     EISSN: 15527581     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1049731514549423     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. T.D.AkoensiJ.A.KoehlerF.LöselD.K.Humphreys (2012). Domestic violence perpetrator programs in Europe, Part II: A systematic review of the state of evidence. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology. 57, 1206–1225.
2. J.C.BabcockC.E.GreenC.Robie (2004). Does batterers’ treatment work? A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment. Clinical Psychology Review, 23, 1023–1053.
3. D.E.BronsonT.S.Davis (2011). Finding and evaluating evidence: Systematic reviews and evidence-based practice. Oxford, England: University Press.
4. S.BurdettL.A.StewartJ.F.Tierney (2003). Publication bias and meta-analyses. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 19, 129–134.
5. J.ChandlerR.ChurchillJ.HigginsT.LassersonD.Tovey (2013). Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews (Version 2.3). Retrieved fromhttp://www.editorial-unit.cochrane.org/sites/editorial-unit.cochrane.org/files/uploads/MECIR_conduct_standards%202.3%2002122013.pdf
6. J.Clapton (2010). Bibliographic databases for social care searching. Social Care Institute for Excellence. Retrieved fromhttp://www.scie.org.uk/publications/reports/report34.asp
7. H.Cooper (2010). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach (4th ed., Vol. 2). London, England: Sage.
8. C.De BrúnN.Pearce-Smith (2013). Searching skills toolkit: Finding the evidence. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
9. T.Debbonaire (2012). Respect response to criticisms about our approach to accreditation of domestic violence perpetrator programmes. Retrieved fromhttp://www.respect.uk.net/data/files/Briefingpapers/final_respect_briefing_paper_responding_to_our_critics_18th_january_2012___for_newsletter_and_for_website.pdf
10. M.Dixon-WoodsR.Fitzpatrick (2001). Qualitative research in systematic reviews: Has established a place for itself. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 323, 765–766. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1121325/
11. D.G.DuttonK.Corvo (2007). The Duluth model: A data-impervious paradigm and a failed strategy. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12, 658–667. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2007.03.002
12. C.EckhardtA.Holtzworth-MunroeB.NorlanderA.SibleyM.Cahill (2008). Readiness to change, partner violence subtypes, and treatment outcomes among men in treatment for partner assault. Violence and Victims, 23, 446–475.
13. D.Evans (2002). Database searches for qualitative research. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 90, 290.
14. L.FederD.B.WilsonS.Austin (2008). Court-mandated interventions for individuals convicted of domestic violence. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 12, 1–49.
15. M.FisherH.QureshiW.HardymanJ.Homewood (2006). Using qualitative research in systematic reviews: Older people’s views of hospital discharge. London, England: Social Care Institute for Excellence. Retrieved fromhttp://www.scie.org.uk/publications/reports/report09d.pdf
16. R.K.FlatleyR.LillaJ.Widner (2007). Choosing a database for social work: A comparison of social work abstracts and social service abstracts. The Journal of academic librarianship, 33, 47–55.
17. M.J.Grant (2004). How does your searching grow? A survey of search preferences and the use of optimal search strategies in the identification of qualitative research. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 21, 21–32.
18. L.GraysonA.Gomersall (2003). A difficult business: Finding the evidence for social science reviews. London, England: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Queen Mary University of London. Retrieved fromhttps://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/politicaleconomy/research/cep/pubs/papers/assets/wp19.pdf
19. J.HigginsS.Green (2009). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2. West Sussex, England: The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved fromwww.cochrane-handbook.org.
20. G.HoldenK.BarkerL.Covert-VailG.RosenbergS.A.Cohen (2008). Does social work abstracts work?Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 487–499.
21. M.J.Holosko (2010). An overview of qualitative research methods. In (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 263–272). London, England: Sage.
22. W.W.HoodC.S.Wilson (2001). The scatter of documents over databases in different subject domains: How many databases are needed?Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 52, 1242–1254.
23. K.Lasserre (2012). Expert searching in health librarianship: A literature review to identify international issues and Australian concerns. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 29, 3–15. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2011.00974.x
24. J.H.LittellJ.Corcoran (2010). Systematic reviews. In (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (p. 313). London, England: Sage.
25. P.McFaddenB.J.TaylorA.CampbellJ.McQuilkin (2012). Systematically identifying relevant research: Case study on child protection social workers’ resilience. Research on Social Work Practice, 22, 626–636.
26. K.A.McKibbonN.L.WilczynskiR.B.Haynes (2006). Developing optimal search strategies for retrieving qualitative studies in PsycINFO. Evaluation and the Health Professions, 29, 440–454.
27. D.MoherA.LiberatiJ.TetzlaffD.G.Altman (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151, 264–269.
28. E.NourbakhshR.NugentH.WangC.CevikK.Nugent (2012). Medical literature searches: A comparison of Pub Med and Google Scholar. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 29, 214–222. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2012.00992.x
29. D.OgilvieV.HamiltonM.EganM.Petticrew (2005). Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 1. Finding the evidence: How far should you go?Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, 59, 804–808.
30. D.PapaioannouA.SuttonC.CarrollA.BoothR.Wong (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27, 114–122. doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00863.x
31. J.R.Parra-CardonaA.R.Escobar-ChewK.HoltropG.CarpenterR.GuzmánD.HernêndezE.ZamudioD.González Ramírez2013. “En el grupo tomas conciencia (In group you become aware)”: Latino immigrants’ satisfaction with a culturally informed intervention for men who batter. Violence against women19, 107–132.
32. E.PenceM.Paymar (1983). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. New York, NY: Springer.
33. M.PetticrewH.Roberts (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. London, England: Blackwell.
34. D.L.L.PolaschekR.M.Collie (2004). Rehabilitating serious violent adult offenders: An empirical and theoretical stocktake. Psychology, Crime & Law, 10, 321–334.
35. J.G.ReedP.M.Baxter (2009). Using reference databases. In (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed., pp. 73–102). New York, NY: Russell Sage.
36. H.R.RothsteinA.J.SuttonM.Borenstein (2006). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. London, England: Wiley.
37. D.RutterJ.FrancisE.CorenM.Fisher (2010). SCIE systematic research reviews: Guidelines (2nd edition) SCIE systematic research reviews. London, England: Social Care Institute for Excellence. Retrieved fromhttp://www.scie.org.uk/publications/researchresources/rr01.asp
38. M.SainiA.Shlonsky (2012). Systematic synthesis of qualitative research. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
39. J.SchöpfelD.J.Farace (2010). Grey literature. In (Eds.), Encyclopedia of library and information sciences (3rd ed., pp. 2029–2039). London, England: CRC Press.
40. R.L.ShawA.BoothA.J.SuttonT.MillerJ.A.SmithB.YoungM.Dixon-Woods (2004). Finding qualitative research: An evaluation of search strategies. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 4, 5.
41. K.A.SheehanS.ThakorD.E.Stewart (2012). Turning points for perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 13, 30–40. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1524838011426016
42. D.T.Shek (2008). Comprehensiveness of social work abstracts as a database for research ers and practitioners. Research on Social Work Practice, 18, 500–506.
43. C.A.SimmonsP.LehmannS.Collier-Tenison (2008). Men’s Use of controlling behaviors: A comparison of reports by women in a domestic violence shelter and women in a domestic violence offender program. Journal of Family Violence, 23, 387–394.
44. G.SmedslundT.K.DalsbøA.K.SteiroA.WinsvoldJ.Clench-Aas (2012). Cognitive behavioural therapy for men who physically abuse their female partner. Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CD006048. Retrieved fromhttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006048.pub2/pdf/standard
45. M.E.Smith (2012). Self-deception among men who are mandated to attend a batterer intervention program. Perspectives in Psychiatric Care, 43, 193–203.
46. C.StansfieldJ.KavanaghR.ReesA.GomersallJ.Thomas (2012). The selection of search sources influences the findings of a systematic review of people’s views: A case study in public health. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, 55.
47. H.StarksS.B.Trinidad (2007). Choose your method: A comparison of phenomenology, discourse analysis, and grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1372–1380.
48. T.SugavanamG.MeadC.BulleyM.DonaghyF.van Wijck (2013). The effects and experiences of goal setting in stroke rehabilitation: A systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 35, 177–190. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2012.690501
49. B.Taylor (2014). Book review: Practitioner’s guide to using research for evidence-based practice. Research on Social Work Practice, 24, 377–378. doi:10.1177/1049731513512155
50. B.TaylorE.WylieM.DempsterM.Donnelly (2007). Systematically retrieving research: A case study evaluating seven databases. Research on Social Work Practice, 17, 697–706.
51. B.J.Taylor (2009). Invited commentary on papers by Holden et al. and Shek on the quality of social work abstracts. Research on Social Work Practice, 19, 366–369. doi:10.1177/1049731508321560
52. B.J.TaylorM.DempsterM.Donnelly (2003). Hidden gems: Systematically searching electronic databases for research publications for social work and social care. British Journal of Social Work, 33, 423–439.
53. E.van TeijlingenV.Hundley (2001). The importance of pilot studies. Social Research Update, 35, 1–4.
54. R.Vlais (2011). Typologies of men who present to men’s behaviour change programmes. NTV Notes: Research Corner. Retrieved fromhttp://ntv.org.au/wp-content/uploads/docs/resources/2011-ntv-research-corner-typologies-jun11.pdf