Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 9, Issue 2, 2018, Pages 195-223

  Cooper, Chris ^a   Lovell, Rebecca ^a   Husk, Kerryn ^b   Booth, Andrew ^c   Garside, Ruth ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b PLYMOUTH UNIVERSITY PENINSULA SCHOOLS OF MEDICINE AND DENTISTRY   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cochrane systematic reviews; information science; literature searching; public health; sensitivity analysis

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LITERATURE; PROCEDURES; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REPRODUCIBILITY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY;

ALGORITHMS; DATA COLLECTION; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; PUBLIC HEALTH; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85039158231     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1286     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Dicks LV, Hodge I, Randall NP, et al. A transparent process for “evidence-informed” policy making. Conserv Lett. 2014;7(2):119-125.
2. Pullin AS, Knight TM. Effectiveness in conservation practice: pointers from medicine and public health. Efectividad de la Conservación Práctica: Indicadores de Medicina y Salud Pública. Conserv Biol. 2001;15(1):50-54.
3. Fazey I, Salisbury JG, Lindenmayer DB, Maindonald J, Douglas R. Can methods applied in medicine be used to summarize and disseminate conservation research? Environ Conserv. 2004;31(3):190-198.
4. Stewart GB, Coles CF, Pullin AS. Applying evidence-based practice in conservation management: lessons from the first systematic review and dissemination projects. Biol Conserv. 2005;126(2):270-278.
5. Haddaway NR, Bayliss HR. Shades of grey: two forms of grey literature important for reviews in conservation. Biol Conserv. 2015;191:827-829.
6. Bilotta GS, Milner AM, Boyd IL. Quality assessment tools for evidence from environmental science. Environ Evid. 2014;3(1):14
7. Bilotta GS, Milner AM, Boyd I. On the use of systematic reviews to inform environmental policies. Environ Sci Policy. 2014;42:67-77.
8. Kareiva P, Marvier M, West S, Hornisher J. Slow-moving journals hinder conservation efforts. Nature. 2002;420(6911):15-15.
9. Lefebvre C, Manheimer E, Glanville J. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011 (updated March 2011).
10. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, (CRD). Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care In: 2009.
11. Adams J, Hillier-Brown FC, Moore HJ, et al. Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: critical reflections on three case studies. Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):164.
12. 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. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):138.
13. Mahood Q, Van Eerd D, Irvin E. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Res Syn Meth. 2014;5(3):221-234.
14. Husk K, Lovell R, Cooper C, Stahl-Timmins W, Garside R, et al. Participation in environmental enhancement and conservation activities for health and well-being in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013(2). http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD010351/abstract
15. Armstrong RWE, Doyle J. Chapter 21: Reviews in health promotion and public health. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
16. Beahler CC, Sundheim JJ, Trapp NI. Information retrieval in systematic reviews: challenges in the public health arena. Am J Prev Med. 2000;18(4 Suppl):6-10.
17. Grayson L, Gomersall A. A difficult business: finding the evidence for social science reviews. ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. 2003.
18. Bayliss HR, Beyer FR. Information retrieval for ecological syntheses. Res Synth Met. 2015;6(2):136-148.
19. Bayliss SE, Davenport CF, Pennant ME. Where and how to search for information on the effectiveness of public health interventions—a case study for prevention of cardiovascular disease. Health Info Libr J. 2014;31(4):303-313.
20. Husk K, Lovell R, Cooper C, Stahl-Timmins W, Garside R. Participation in environmental enhancement and conservation activities for health and well-being in adults: a review of quantitative and qualitative evidence. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;5. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD010351.pub2/abstract
21. 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 Info Libr J. 2010;27(2):114-122.
22. Garside R. Should we appraise the quality of qualitative research reports for systematic reviews, and if so, how? Innov Eur J Soc Sci Res. 2014;27(1):67-79.
23. Sterne JAC, Egger M, Moher D. Chapter 10: Addressing reporting biases. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Intervention. Oxford: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
24. Armijo-Olivo S, Stiles CR, Hagen NA, Biondo PD, Cummings GG. Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane collaboration risk of bias tool and the effective public health practice project quality assessment tool: methodological research. J Eval Clin Pract. 2012;18(1):12-18.
25. Effective Public Health Practice Project. Effective public health practice project: quality assessment tool for quantitative studies 2009. http://www.ephpp.ca/tools.html, 2017. Accessed on May 2016.
26. Wallace A, Croucher K, Quilgars D, Baldwin S. Meeting the challenge: developing systematic reviewing in social policy. Policy Polit. 2004;32(4):455-470.
27. Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(1):45.
28. Lewin S, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, et al. Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: an approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001895.
29. Burls A. People and green spaces: promoting public health and mental health well-being though ecotherapy. J Public Ment Health. 2007;6(3):24-39.
30. Gooch M. Voices of the volunteers: an exploration of the experiences of catchment volunteers in coastal Queensland, Australia. Local Environ. 2005;10(1):5-19.
31. Brooker J, Brooker M. Comparative exercise values of green gym and conventional gym: a personal evaluation. 2008.
32. Brooker J, Brooker M. Comparative heart rates following green gym, other outdoor exercise and conventional gym: a personal evaluation. 2008.
33. BTCV. Wellbeing Comes Naturally: Year One Report. Doncaster: BTCV; 2010.
34. Christie J. Volunteer attitudes and motivations: research findings and their application for sustainable community involvement programs in natural resource management. Effective Sustainability Education: What Works? Why? Where Next? Linking Research and Practice; 2004; 18–20 February 2004, Sydney, Australia.
35. Eastaugh K, Tudge K, Lawes K. Wye Wood Evaluation 2006–2009. Small Woods Association: Telford; 2010.
36. Halpenny EA, Caissie LT. Volunteering on nature conservation projects: volunteer experience, attitudes and values. Tour Recreat Res. 2003;28(3):25-33.
37. Small Woods A. Amazon Woman Hereford SF36 Analysis. Small Woods Association: Telford; 2011.
38. Wilson N. Branching Out. Greenspace and Conservation on Referral. Edinburgh: Forestry Commission Scotland, NHSGGC, Glsgow Centre for Population Health, Glasgow Clyde Valley Green Newtork Partnership; 2009.
39. Yerrell P. National Evaluation of BTCV's Green Gym. 2008.
40. Townsend M, Marsh R. Exploration of the Health and Well-being Benefits of Membership of Truganina Explosives Reserve Preservation Society. Burwood, Australia: School of Health and Social Development, Deakin University; 2004.
41. Moore M, Townsend M, Oldroyd J. Linking human and ecosystem health: the benefits of community involvement in conservation groups. Ecohealth. 2006;3(4):255-261.
42. Barton J. The Effects of Green Exercise on Psychological Health and Well-Being. Colchester: University of Essex; 2009.
43. Birch M. Cultivating wildness: three conservation volunteers' experiences of participation in the Green Gym scheme. Br J Occup Ther. 2005;68(6):244-252.
44. Carter C. Offenders and Nature Schemes: Using Conservation and Forest Management in Rehabilitation. Forest Research: Farnham; 2008.
45. O'Brien L, Burls A, Townsend M, Ebden M. Volunteering in nature as a way of enabling people to re-integrate into society. Perspect Public Health. 2010;
46. O'Brien L, Townsend M, Ebden M. ‘I like to think when I'm gone I will have left this a better place’ Environmental volunteering: motivations, barriers and benefits. Surrey: Scottish Forestry Trust and Forestry Commission; 2008.
47. Pillemer K. Environmental volunteering and health outcomes over a 20-year period. Gerontologist. 2010;50(5):594-602.
48. Reynolds V. The Green Gym Evaluation of a Pilot Project in Sonning Common, Oxfordshire. Oxford: Oxford Centre for Health Care Research and Development (OCHRAD); Oxford Brookes; 1999.
49. Townsend M. Feel blue? Touch green! Participation in forest/woodland management as a treatment for depression. Urban For Urban Green. 2006;5(3):111-120. 30 ref. 2006(Journal Article)
50. Townsend M, Moore M. Research into the health, wellbeing & social capital benefits of community involvement in the management of land for conservation: final report. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University, Trust for Nature; 2005.
51. Lovell R, Husk K, Cooper C, Stahl-Timmins W, Garside R. Understanding how environmental enhancement and conservation activities may benefit health and wellbeing: a systematic review. BMC Public Health. 2015;15(1):864.
52. 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(1):135.
53. Golder S, Loke YK. The contribution of different information sources for adverse effects data. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28(2):133-137.
54. Gibson CA, Bailey BW, Carper MJ, et al. Author contacts for retrieval of data for a meta-analysis on exercise and diet restriction. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22(2):267-270.
55. 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):374-380.
56. McManus RJ, Wilson S, Delaney BC, et al. Review of the usefulness of contacting other experts when conducting a literature search for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1998;317(7172):1562-1563.
57. Selph SS, Ginsburg AD, Chou R. Impact of contacting study authors to obtain additional data for systematic reviews: diagnostic accuracy studies for hepatic fibrosis. Syst Rev. 2014;3(1):107.
58. 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.
59. 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? Syst Rev. 2016;5(1):191.
60. Hausner E, Waffenschmidt S, Kaiser T, Simon M. Routine development of objectively derived search strategies. Syst Rev. 2012;1(1):19.
61. Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2016;16(1):127.
62. Booth A. How much searching is enough? Comprehensive versus optimal retrieval for technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26(4):431-435.
63. Egger M, Juni P, Bartlett C, Holenstein F, Sterne J. How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study. Health Technol Assess (Winchester, England). 2003;7(1):1-76.
64. Helmer D, Savoie I, Green C, Kazanjian A. Evidence-based practice: extending the search to find material for the systematic review. Bull Med Libr Assoc. 2001;89(4):346-352.
65. Lorenc T, Pearson M, Jamal F, Cooper C, Garside R. The role of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence in evaluating interventions: a case study. Res Syn Meth. 2012;3(1):1-10.