A comparison of results of empirical studies of supplementary search techniques and recommendations in review methodology handbooks: A methodological review

Systematic Reviews

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Cooper, Chris ^a   Booth, Andrew ^b   Britten, Nicky ^a   Garside, Ruth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Author contact; Citation searching; Handbooks; Handsearching; Information science; Supplementary searching; Systematic reviews; Trial searching; Web searching

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; CITATION ANALYSIS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; DATA EXTRACTION; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE CENTER; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; RESOURCE MANAGEMENT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); TIME FACTOR; WEB BROWSER; HUMAN; LITERATURE; PROCEDURES; SEARCH ENGINE; STANDARDS; UNITED KINGDOM;

DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SEARCH ENGINE; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85035120064     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20464053     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0625-1     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Levay P, Ainsworth N, Kettle R, Morgan A. Identifying evidence for public health guidance: a comparison of citation searching with Web of Science and Google Scholar. Res Synth Methods. 2016;7(1):34-45.
2. Hinde S, Spackman E. Bidirectional citation searching to completion: an exploration of literature searching methods. PharmacoEconomics. 2015;33(1):5-11.
3. Papaioannou D, Sutton A, Carroll C, Booth A, Wong R. Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Inf Libr J. 2010;27(2):114-22.
4. Pearson M, Moxham T, Ashton K. Effectiveness of search strategies for qualitative research about barriers and facilitators of program delivery. Eval Health Prof. 2011;34(3):297-308.
5. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R. Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ. 2005;331(7524):1064-5.
6. McManus RJ, Wilson S, Delaney BC, Fitzmaurice DA, Hyde CJ, Tobias RS, Jowett S, Hobbs FDR. Review of the usefulness of contacting other experts when conducting a literature search for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1998;317(7172):1562-3.
7. 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. J Public Health Res. 2014;3(2):177.
8. 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.
9. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J: Chapter 6: searching for studies. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Edited by Higgins JPT, Green S (editors); 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed July 2016
10. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD): Systematic reviews-CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2009.
11. Hammerstrøm K, Wade Am Jørgensen A. Searching for studies: a guide to information retrieval for Campbell Systematic Reviews. Campbell Systematic Reviews. 2010;(Supplement 1)
12. NICE: Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. 2013.
13. Higgins JPT, Deeks JJ (eds.): Chapter 7: Selecting studies and collecting data. in: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors), Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed July 2016.
14. Gibson CA, Bailey BW, Carper MJ, LeCheminant JD, Kirk EP, Huang G, DuBose KD, Donnelly JE. Author contacts for retrieval of data for a meta-analysis on exercise and diet restriction. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22(2):267-70.
15. O'Leary F. Is email a reliable means of contacting authors of previously published papers? A study of the Emergency Medicine Journal for 2001. Emerg Med J. 2003;20(4):352-3.
16. Selph SS, Ginsburg AD, Chou R. Impact of contacting study authors to obtain additional data for systematic reviews: diagnostic accuracy studies for hepatic fibrosis. Systematic Reviews. 2014;3(1):107.
17. Hetherington J, Dickersin K, Chalmers I, Meinert CL. Retrospective and prospective identification of unpublished controlled trials: lessons from a survey of obstetricians and pediatricians. Pediatrics. 1989;84(2):374-80.
18. Reveiz L, Cardona AF, Ospina EG, de Agular S. An e-mail survey identified unpublished studies for systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(7):755-8.
19. Bakkalbasi N, Bauer K, Glover J, Wang L. Three options for citation tracking: Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science. Biomedical Digital Libraries. 2006;3:7-7.
20. Janssens AC, Gwinn M. Novel citation-based search method for scientific literature: application to meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015;15:84.
21. Robinson KA, Dunn AG, Tsafnat G, Glasziou P. Citation networks of related trials are often disconnected: implications for bidirectional citation searches. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(7):793-9.
22. Wright K, Golder S, Rodriguez-Lopez R. Citation searching: a systematic review case study of multiple risk behaviour interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):73.
23. Falagas ME, Pitsouni EI, Malietzis GA, Pappas G. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. FASEB journal: official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. 2008;22(2):338-42.
24. Bramer WM, Giustini D, Kramer BMR, Anderson PF. 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.
25. Adams CE, Power A, Frederick K, Lefebvre C. An investigation of the adequacy of MEDLINE searches for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the effects of mental health care. Psychol Med. 1994;24(3):741-8.
26. Hay PJ, Adams CE, Lefebvre C. The efficiency of searches for randomized controlled trials in the International Journal of Eating Disorders: a comparison of handsearching. EMBASE and PsycLIT Health Libraries Review. 1996;13(2):91-6.
27. Hopewell S, Clarke M, Lusher A, Lefebvre C, Westby M. A comparison of handsearching versus MEDLINE searching to identify reports of randomized controlled trials. Stat Med. 2002;21(11):1625-34.
28. Jadad AR, McQuay HJ. A high-yield strategy to identify randomized controlled trials for systematic reviews. Online J Curr Clin Trials. 1993;Doc No 33.
29. Moher D. The OCG: how good are volunteers at searching for published randomized controlled trials? Fundam Clin Pharmacol. 1995;9(4):384-6.
30. Langham J, Thompson E, Rowan K. Identification of randomized controlled trials from the emergency medicine literature: comparison of hand searching versus MEDLINE searching. Ann Emerg Med. 1999;34(1):25-34.
31. Armstrong R, Jackson N, Doyle J, Waters E, Howes F. It's in your hands: the value of handsearching in conducting systematic reviews of public health interventions. J Public Health. 2005;27(4):388-91.
32. Blumle A, Antes G. Handsearching for randomized controlled clinical trials in German medical journals. Dtsch Med Wochenschr (1946). 2008;133(6):230-4.
33. Croft AM, Vassallo DJ, Rowe M. Handsearching the Journal of the Royal Army Medical Corps for trials. J R Army Med Corps. 1999;145(2):86-8.
34. Glanville J, Cikalo M, Crawford F, Dozier M, McIntosh H. Handsearching did not yield additional unique FDG-PET diagnostic test accuracy studies compared with electronic searches: a preliminary investigation. Research Synthesis Methods. 2012;3(3):202-13.
35. Mattioli S, Farioli A, Cooke RMT, Baldasseroni A, Ruotsalainen J, Placidi D, Curti S, Mancini G, Fierro M, Campo G, et al. Hidden effectiveness? Results of hand-searching Italian language journals for occupational health interventions. Occup Environ Med. 2012;69(7):522-4.
36. Milne R, Thorogood M. Hand searching the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health as part of th Cochrane Collaboration. J Epidemiol Community Health. 1996;50(2):178-81.
37. Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Wieland LS, Coles B, Weightman AL. Methodological developments in searching for studies for systematic reviews: past, present and future? Syst Rev. 2013;2:78.
38. Glanville JM, Duffy S, McCool R, Varley D. Searching ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to inform systematic reviews: what are the optimal search approaches? J Med Libr Assoc. 2014;102(3):177-83.
39. van Enst WA, Scholten RJ, Hooft L. Identification of additional trials in prospective trial registers for Cochrane systematic reviews. PLoS One. 2012;7(8):e42812.
40. Jones CW, Keil LG, Weaver MA, Platts-Mills TF: Clinical trials registries are under-utilized in the conduct of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional analysis. Systematic Reviews 2014, 3 (1) (126).
41. Briscoe S. Web searching for systematic reviews: a case study of reporting standards in the UK Health Technology Assessment programme. BMC Res Notes. 2015;8:153.
42. Stansfield C, Dickson K, Bangpan M. Exploring issues in the conduct of website searching and other online sources for systematic reviews: how can we be systematic? Systematic Reviews. 2016;5(1):191.
43. Godin K, Stapleton J, Kirkpatrick SI, Hanning RM, Leatherdale ST. Applying systematic review search methods to the grey literature: a case study examining guidelines for school-based breakfast programs in Canada. Systematic Reviews. 2015;4(1):138.
44. Mahood Q, Van Eerd D, Irvin E. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Research Synthesis Methods. 2014;5(3):221-34.
45. Eysenbach G, Tuische J, Diepgen TL. Evaluation of the usefulness of Internet searches to identify unpublished clinical trials for systematic reviews. Med Inform Internet Med. 2001;26(3):203-18.
46. McGrath J, Davies G, Soares K. Writing to authors of systematic reviews elicited further data in 17% of cases. BMJ. 1998;316(7131):631.
47. Mullan RJ, Flynn DN, Carlberg B, Tleyjeh IM, Kamath CC, LaBella ML, Erwin PJ, Guyatt GH, Montori VM. Systematic reviewers commonly contact study authors but do so with limited rigor. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(2):138-42.
48. Ogilvie D, Egan M, Hamilton V, Petticrew M. Systematic reviews of health effects of social interventions: 2. Best available evidence: how low should you go? J Epidemiol Community Health. 2005;59(10):886-92.
49. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D (editors). Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011). The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011. Available from www.handbook.cochrane.org. Accessed July 2016.
50. Kostoff RN. The use and misuse of citation analysis in research evaluation. Scientometrics. 1998;43(1):27-43.
51. Seglen PO. Use of citation analysis and other bibliometric methods in evaluation of the quality of research. Tidsskr Nor Laegefore. 1989;109(31):3229-4.
52. JCF d W, Zadpoor AA, Dodou D. The expansion of Google Scholar versus Web of Science: a longitudinal study. Scientometrics. 2014;98(2):1547-65.
53. Kuper H, Nicholson A, Hemingway H. Searching for observational studies: what does citation tracking add to PubMed? A case study in depression and coronary heart disease. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:4-4.
54. Kloda LA. Use Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science for comprehensive citation tracking. Evid Based Libr Inf Pract. 2007;2(3):4.
55. Choong MK, Tsafnat G. Role of citation tracking in updating of systematic reviews. AMIA Summits Transl Sci Proc. 2014;2014:18.
56. Lowe J, Peters J, Shields B. Methods to update systematic literature searches: full update searching vs. forward citation chasing: A case study from a systematic review of diagnostic test accuracy. Poster presented at InterTASC ISSG: 2014; Exeter.
57. PubMed Commons (Elke Hausner) [ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22916163- comments]. Accessed July 2016.
58. De Angelis C, Drazen JM, Frizelle FAP, Haug C, Hoey J, Horton R, Kotzin S, Laine C, Marusic A, Overbeke AJPM, et al. Clinical trial registration: a statement from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med. 2004;351(12):1250-1.
59. Hartung DM, Zarin DA, Guise JM, McDonagh M, Paynter R, Helfand M. Reporting discrepancies between the ClinicalTrials.gov results database and peer-reviewed publications. Ann Intern Med. 2014;160(7):477-83.
60. Ogino D, Takahashi K, Sato H. Characteristics of clinical trial websites: information distribution between ClinicalTrials.gov and 13 primary registries in the WHO registry network. Trials. 2014;15:428.
61. Saleh AA, Ratajeski MA, Bertolet M. Grey literature searching for health sciences systematic reviews: a prospective study of time spent and resources utilized. Evidence based library and information practice. 2014;9(3):28-50.