Gray literature: An important resource in systematic reviews

Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine

Volumn 10, Issue 3, 2017, Pages 233-240

  Paez, Arsenio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

evidence; gray literature; publication bias; search; systematic review

Indexed keywords

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; ARTICLE; AWARENESS; CHRONIC TRAUMATIC ENCEPHALOPATHY; COST; DECISION MAKING; DEPRESSION; GROWTH HORMONE DEFICIENCY; HUMAN; HYPOPITUITARISM; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; LITERATURE; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH;

HUMANS; PUBLICATION BIAS; PUBLISHING; RESEARCH REPORT; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85028550920     PISSN: 17565383     EISSN: 17565391     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12266     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Mulrow CD. Systematic reviews: Rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309:597–599.
2. Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from http://handbook.cochrane.org.
3. da Costa BR, Juni P. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized trials: principles and pitfalls. Eur Heart J. 2014;35:3336–3345.
4. Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, et al. Users guide to medical literature: Vi. How to use an overview. JAMA. 1994;272:1367–1371.
5. van der Knaap LM, Leeuw FL, Bogaerts S, Nijssen LTJ. Combining Campbell standards and the realist evaluation approach: the best of two worlds? Am J Eval. 2008;29:48–57.
6. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination U of Y. Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, 2008. https://gate2.library.lse.ac.uk/login?url=http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2524.2003.00433.x/abstract%5Cnhttp://zw4gk5cr3l.search.serialssolutions.com?sid=CentralSearch:null&genre=article&atitle=Scoping+the+field&volume=11&issue=4&title=Hea (accessed August 18, 2016).
7. Royle P, Bain L, Waugh N. Systematic reviews of epidemiology in diabetes: finding the evidence. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:2.
8. Avenell A. Lessons for search strategies from a systematic review, in The Cochrane Library, of nutritional supplementation trials in patients. Am J Clin Nutr. 2001;73: 505–510.
9. Farquhar C, Vail A. Pitfalls in systematic reviews. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2006;18:433–439.
10. 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;58:867–873.
11. Mahood Q, van Eerd D, Irvin E. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5:221–234.
12. Conn VS, Valentine JC, Cooper HM, Rantz MJ. Grey literature in meta-analyses. Nurs Res. 2003;52:256–261.
13. Hopewell S, McDonald S, Clarke M, Egger M. Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;MR000010, https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000010.pub3.
14. Pappas C, Williams I. Grey literature: its emerging importance. J Hosp Librariansh. 2011;11:228–234.
15. Bellefontaine SP, Lee CM. Between black and white: examining grey literature in meta-analyses of psychological research. J Child Fam Stud. 2014;23:1378–1388.
16. Helmer D. How do various fugitive literature searching methods impact the comprehensiveness of literature uncovered for systematic review? How do various fugitive literature searching methods impact the comprehensive. 4th International Conference on Grey Literature, Washington, USA, 1999.
17. Mallet S, Hopewell S, Clarke M. The use of grey literature in the first 1000 Cochrane reviews. 4th Symposium on Systematic Reviews: Pushing the Boundaries, Oxford, UK, July 2–4, 2002. http://www.mrw.interscience.wiley.com/cochrane/clcmr/articles/CMR-4005/frame.html (accessed August 18, 2016).
18. McAuley L, Pham B, Tugwell P, Moher D. Does the inclusion of grey literature influence estimates of intervention effectiveness reported in meta-analyses? Lancet. 2000;356:1228–1231.
19. Benzies KM, Premji S, Hayden KA, Serrett K. State-of-the-evidence reviews: advantages and challenges of including grey literature. Worldviews Evid-Based Nurs. 2006;3:55–61.
20. Giustini D, Thompson D. Finding the hard to finds: Searching for grey literature. The University of British Columbia, 2006. http://blogs.ubc.ca/dean/files/2009/02/greylit_manual_may111.pdf (accessed August 20, 2016).
21. Riveros C, Dechartres A, Perrodeau E, Haneef R, Boutron I, Ravaud P. Timing and completeness of trial results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and published in journals. PLoS Med. 2013;10:1–12.
22. Dickersin K. The existence of publication bias and risk factors for its occurrence. JAMA. 1990;263:1385–1389.
23. Floyd RG, Cooley KM, Arnett JE, Fagan TK, Mercer SH, Hingle C. An overview and analysis of journal operations, journal publication patterns, and journal impact in school psychology and related fields. J School Psychol. 2011;49:617–647.
24. Easterbrook P, Gopalan R, Berlin J, Matthews D. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337:867–872.
25. Dickersin K. How important is publication bias? A synthesis of available data. AIDS Educ Prev. 1997;9:15–21.
26. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME guide no. 3: aystematic searching for evidence in medical education-part 2: constructing searches. Med Teach. 2003;25:463–484.
27. Wilczynski NL, Haynes RB. EMBASE search strategies achieved high sensitivity and specificity for retrieving methodologically sound systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:29–33.
28. Adams RJ, Smart P, Huff AS. Shades of grey: guidelines for working with the grey literature in systematic reviews for management and organizational studies. Int J Manage Rev. 2016:1–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12102.
29. INIST-CNRS. OpenGrey. System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe. https://http://www.opengrey.eu (accessed August 19, 2016).
30. Massengale LN. Cdc wonder. Choice Curr Rev Acad Libr. 2008;45:1979.
31. Elsevier. Scopus. SCOPUS. 2016. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus. Cited November 27, 2016.
32. U.S. National Institutes of Health. ClinicalTrials.gov. ClnicalTrials.gov. https://clinicaltrials.gov (accessed August 17, 2016).
33. ProQuest. Conference Papers Index-Proquest. http://www.proquest.com/products-services/cpi-set-c.html (accessed August 19, 2016).
34. Balshem H, Stevens A, Ansari M, et al. Finding grey literature evidence and assessing for outcome and analysis reporting biases when comparing medical interventions: AHRQ and the Effective Health Care Program. Methods Guid Comp Eff Rev. 2013;1–41.
35. Van Royen P, Sandholzer H, Griffiths F, et al. Are presentations of abstracts at EGPRN meetings followed by publication? Eur J Gen Pract. 2010;16:100–105.
36. Shekelle PG, Morton SC, Suttorp MJ, Buscemi N, Friesen C. Challenges in systematic reviews of complementary and alternative medicine topics. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142:1042–1047.
37. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ. 2010;340:c365.
38. Jamali HR, Asadi S. Google and the scholar: the role of Google in scientists’ information-seeking behaviour. Online Inf Rev. 2010;34:282–294.
39. Kousha K, Thelwall M. Google Scholar citations and google Web/URL citations: a multi-discipline exploratory analysis. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol. 2007;58:1055–1065.
40. Franceschet M. PageRank. Commun ACM. 2011;54:92–101.
41. Hamilton N. The mechanics of a deep net metasearch engine. Proceedings of the 12th International World Wide Web Conference. 2003. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:The+Mechanics+of+a+Deep+Net+Metasearch+Engine#0 (accessed August 27, 2016).
42. Mednar. Mednar. http://mednar.com/mednar/desktop/en/search.html. Cited January 1, 2016. (accessed November 27, 2016).
43. Kreber LA, Griesbach GS, Ashley MJ. Detection of growth hormone deficiency in adults with chronic traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2016;33:1607–1613.
44. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Report to Congress on Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States: Epidemiology and Rehabilitation. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; Division of Unintentional Injury Prevention, Atlanta, GA, 2015.
45. Schneider HJ, Kreitschmann-Andermahr I, Ghigo E, Stalla GK, Agha A. Hypothalamopituitary dysfunction following traumatic brain injury and aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: a systematic review. JAMA. 2007;298:1429–1438.
46. Gardner CJ, Mattsson AF, Daousi C, Korbonits M, Koltowska-Haggstrom M, Cuthbertson DJ. GH deficiency after traumatic brain injury: improvement in quality of life with GH therapy: analysis of the KIMS database. Eur J Endocrinol. 2015;172:371–381.
47. Powner DJ, Boccalandro C, Alp MS, Vollmer DG. Endocrine failure after traumatic brain injury in adults. Neurocrit Care. 2006;5:61–70.
48. Urban RJ. Anterior Pituitary Hormone Replacement in Traumatic Brain Injury, Galveston, Texas, 2016. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/0NCT00957671?term=traumatic+brain+injury+AND+growth+hormone&rank=1 (accessed August 19, 2016).
49. Masel BE. Rehabilitation and hypopituitarism after traumatic brain injury. Growth Horm IGF Res. 2004;14:S108–113.
50. Kelestimur F. Growth hormone deficiency after traumatic brain injury in adults: when to test and how to treat? Pediatr Endocrinol Rev. 2009;6:534–539.
51. Lefaivre BC. American Society of Neurorehabilitation and Translational and Computational Motor Control Annual Meeting, Carmichael ST, editor, Chicago, IL; 2015.
52. Cook AM, Finlay IG, Edwards AGK, et al. Efficiency of searching the grey literature in palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;22:797–801.