Identification of problems in search strategies in Cochrane Reviews

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2018, Pages 408-416

  Franco, Juan Víctor Ariel ^a   Garrote, Virginia Laura ^a   Escobar Liquitay, Camila Micaela ^a   Vietto, Valeria ^a  

^a HOSPITAL ITALIANO DE BUENOS AIRES   (Argentina)

Author keywords

Cochrane; evidence based medicine standards (MeSH); information storage and retrieval (MeSH); MEDLINE (MeSH); review literature as topic (MeSH); search strategies; systematic review

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LITERATURE; METHODOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; REPRODUCIBILITY;

CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RESEARCH DESIGN; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC;

EID: 85048680036     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1302     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Bastian H, Glasziou P, Chalmers I. Seventy-five trials and eleven systematic reviews a day: how will we ever keep up? PLoS Med. 2010;7(9):e1000326. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000326
2. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide. US: Wiley-Blackwell; 2006. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754887.
3. Ritskes-Hoitinga M, Leenaars M, Avey M, Rovers M, Scholten R. Systematic reviews of preclinical animal studies can make significant contributions to health care and more transparent translational medicine. In: Tovey D, ed. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Vol 3. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2014:ED000078. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.ED000078.
4. Cochrane. Our vision, mission, and principles | Cochrane. http://www.cochrane.org/about-us/our-vision-mission-and-principles. Accessed November 10, 2017.
5. Higgins JPT, Lasserson T, Chandler J, Tovey D, Churchill R. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR). 2016:1–65.
6. Lefebvre AC, Manheimer E, Glanville J, Information C. Chapter 6: Searching for studies. In: Higgins JPT, Green S, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 (Updated March 2011). London: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011:1-46 http://www.handbook.cochrane.org.
7. US National Library of Medicine—National Institute of Health, idem. MEDLINE / Pubmed. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed. Accessed November 10, 2017.
8. National Library of Medicine—NCBI. MeSH. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh. Accessed November 10, 2017.
9. I JC. Biomedical research. https://www.elsevier.com/promo/rd-solutions/embase?p1=P001&p2=embase&pscid=cm_ps_100000188&gclid=Cj0KCQiAuZXQBRDKARIsAMwpUeSQ9pTrsA4oei0hIZxDNIlBPadmVcQRJ82mdEcvTrJdR77mhpbtwNEaAu5ZEALw_wcB. Published 2007. Accessed November 10, 2017.
10. The Cochrane Library. CENTRAL. http://www.cochranelibrary.com/about/central-landing-page.html. Accessed November 10, 2017.
11. EBSCO—Nursing Resources. CINAHL Complete | Full-Text Nursing Journals | EBSCO. https://www.ebscohost.com/nursing/products/cinahl-databases/cinahl-complete. Accessed November 10, 2017.
12. American Psychological Association. PsycINFO. http://www.apa.org/pubs/databases/psycinfo/index.aspx. Accessed November 10, 2017.
13. Biblioteca Virtual en Salud. LILACS. http://lilacs.bvsalud.org/es/. Accessed November 10, 2017.
14. Grey Literature—GreySource, idem, A selection of web-based resources in grey literature. http://www.greynet.org/greysourceindex/aboutgreysource.html. Accessed November 10, 2017.
15. Yoshii A, Plaut DA, McGraw KA, Anderson MJ, Wellik KE. Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009;97(1):21-29. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.004
16. Sampson M, McGowan J. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59(10):1057-1063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.01.007
17. Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(9):944-952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.012
18. McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75(January):40-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2016.01.021
19. Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews standards. http://editorial-unit.cochrane.org/sites/editorial-unit.cochrane.org/files/uploads/MECIR_conduct_standards 2.3 02122013_0.pdf. 2013. Accessed April 18, 2017.
20. Siontis KC, Hernandez-Boussard T, Ioannidis JPA. Overlapping meta-analyses on the same topic: survey of published studies. BMJ. 2013;347(jul19 1):f4501. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.F4501
21. Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, et al. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a cross-sectional study. PLoS Med. 2016;13(5):1-30. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002028
22. Baudard M, Yavchitz A, Ravaud P, Perrodeau E, Boutron I. Impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ. 2017;356:j448. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j448