The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: A cross-sectional study

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 16, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Hartling, Lisa ^a,b   Featherstone, Robin ^b   Nuspl, Megan ^b   Shave, Kassi ^b   Dryden, Donna M ^b   Vandermeer, Ben ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Bias; Knowledge synthesis; Literature searching; Meta analysis; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

EID: 84988683782     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0232-1     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JP, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [Internet]. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011 [cited 2016 Jun 7]. Available from: http://handbook.cochrane.org/.
2. Chandler J, Churchill R, Higgins J, Lasserson T, Tovey D. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR): Methodological standards for the conduct of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews [Internet]. Cochrane Collaboration; 2013 [cited 2016 Jun 7]. Available from: http://editorial-unit.cochrane.org/mecir.
3. Institute of Medicine. Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews [Internet]. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011 [cited 2016 Jun 7]. Available from: http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/Reports/2011/Finding-What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews.aspx.
4. McDonald S, Taylor L, Adams C. Searching the right database. A comparison of four databases for psychiatry journals. Health Libr Rev. 1999;16(3):151-6. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10620849.
5. Suarez-Almazor ME, Belseck E, Homik J, Dorgan M, Ramos-Remus C. Identifying clinical trials in the medical literature with electronic databases: MEDLINE alone is not enough. Control Clin Trials. 2000;21(5):476-87. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11018564.
6. Royle P, Milne R. Literature searching for randomized controlled trials used in Cochrane reviews: rapid versus exhaustive searches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19(4):591-603. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15095765.
7. Royle P, Waugh N. Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessment reports carried out for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence appraisal system. Health Technol Assess. 2003;7(34):iii. ix-x, 1-51. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14609481.
8. Savoie I, Helmer D, Green CJ, Kazanjian A. Beyond Medline: reducing bias through extended systematic review search. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19(1):168-78. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12701949.
9. Stevinson C, Lawlor DA. Searching multiple databases for systematic reviews: added value or diminishing returns? Complement Ther Med. 2004;12(4):228-32. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15649836.
10. Betran AP, Say L, Gulmezoglu AM, Allen T, Hampson L. Effectiveness of different databases in identifying studies for systematic reviews: experience from the WHO systematic review of maternal morbidity and mortality. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5(1):6. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15679886.
11. Lemeshow AR, Blum RE, Berlin JA, Stoto MA, Colditz GA. Searching one or two databases was insufficient for meta-analysis of observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005;58(9):867-73. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16085190.
12. Ogilvie D, Hamilton V, Egan M, Petticrew M. Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 1. Finding the evidence: how far should you go? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(9):804-8. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16100321/.
13. Royle P, Bain L, Waugh N. Systematic reviews of epidemiology in diabetes: finding the evidence. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:2. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15638944/.
14. Whiting P, Westwood M, Burke M, Sterne J, Glanville J. Systematic reviews of test accuracy should search a range of databases to identify primary studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(4):357-64. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18313560.
15. Slobogean GP, Verma A, Giustini D, Slobogean BL, Mulpuri K. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane index most primary studies but not abstracts included in orthopedic meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(12):1261-7. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19364634.
16. Golder S, Loke YK. The contribution of different information sources for adverse effects data. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(2):133-7. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22559754.
17. Beyer FR, Wright K. Can we prioritise which databases to search? A case study using a systematic review of frozen shoulder management. Health Info Libr J. 2013;30(1):49-58. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23413793.
18. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BM, Anderson P. The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2013;2:115. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24360284.
19. Kwon Y, Powelson SE, Wong H, Ghali WA, Conly JM. An assessment of the efficacy of searching in biomedical databases beyond MEDLINE in identifying studies for a systematic review on ward closures as an infection control intervention to control outbreaks. Syst Rev. 2014;3:135. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25387523.
20. Lorenzetti DL, Topfer LA, Dennett L, Clement F. Value of databases other than medline for rapid health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30(2):173-8. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24774535.
21. Westphal A, Kriston L, Holzel LP, Harter M, von Wolff A. Efficiency and contribution of strategies for finding randomized controlled trials: a case study from a systematic review on therapeutic interventions of chronic depression. Public Health Res. 2014;3(2):177. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25343133.
22. Gargon E, Williamson PR, Clarke M. Collating the knowledge base for core outcome set development: developing and appraising the search strategy for a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15(1):26. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25888523.
23. Sampson M, Barrowman NJ, Moher D, Klassen TP, Pham B, Platt R, et al. Should meta-analysts search Embase in addition to Medline? J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(10):943-55. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14568625.
24. Royle PL, Bain L, Waugh NR. Sources of evidence for systematic reviews of interventions in diabetes. Diabet Med. 2005;22(10):1386-93. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16176201.
25. Halladay CW, Trikalinos TA, Schmid IT, Schmid CH, Dahabreh IJ. Using data sources beyond PubMed has a modest impact on the results of systematic reviews of therapeutic interventions. J Clin Epidemio. 2015;68(9):1076-84. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26279401.
26. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews. PLoS Med. 2007;4(3):e78. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17388659.
27. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):e1002028. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27218655.
28. Bow S, Klassen J, Chisholm A, Tjosvold L, Thomson D, Klassen TP, et al. A descriptive analysis of child-relevant systematic reviews in the Cochrane database of systematic reviews. BMC Pediatr. 2010;10(1):1-8. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20487565.
29. Mathie RT, Frye J, Fisher P. Homeopathic Oscillococcinum® for preventing and treating influenza and influenza-like illness. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;28(1):CD001957. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001957.pub6.
30. Jiang L, Deng L, Wu T. Chinese medicinal herbs for influenza. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;28(3):CD004559. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004559.pub4.
31. Livingstone N, Macdonald G, Carr N. Restorative justice conferencing for reducing recidivism in young offenders (aged 7 to 21). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;28(2):CD008898. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008898.pub2.
32. Geretsegger M, Elefant C, Mössler KA, Gold C. Music therapy for people with autism spectrum disorder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;(6):CD004381. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004381.pub3.
33. Lucas PJ, McIntosh K, Petticrew M, Roberts HM, Shiell A. Financial benefits for child health and well-being in low income or socially disadvantaged families in developed world countries. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;16(2):CD006358. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006358.pub2.
34. Straus SE, Tetroe JM, Graham ID. Knowledge translation is the use of knowledge in health care decision making. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):6-10. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19926445.
35. Ganann R, Ciliska D, Thomas H. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implement Sci. 2010;5:56. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20642853.
36. Khangura S, Polisena J, Clifford TJ, Farrah K, Kamel C. Rapid review: an emerging approach to evidence synthesis in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30(1):20-7. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24451157.
37. Hartling L, Guise J-M, Kato E, Anderson J, Belinson S, Berliner E, et al. A taxonomy of rapid reviews links report types and methods to specific decision-making contexts. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015;68(12):1451-62. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26278023.
38. Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, Strifler L, Ghassemi M, Ivory J, et al. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Med. 2015;13:224. Available from Medline: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26377409.
39. Hartling L, Guise JM, Hempel S, Featherstone R, Mitchell MD, Motu'apuaka ML, et al. EPC methods: AHRQ End-user perspectives of rapid reviews. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2016. Contract No.: 16-EHC014-EF. Available from NCBI Bookshelf: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK362003/.
40. Fortier KJ, Kiss N, Tongbram V. What is the optimal search engine for results from embase and medline: ovid or embase.com? Value Health. 2013;1(6):A1-298.