Bubble effect: Including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2018, Pages

  Ćurković, Marko ^a   Košec, Andro ^b  

^a Psychiatric Hospital Vrap e   (Croatia)

^b SESTRE MILOSRDNICE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Croatia)

Author keywords

Literature searches; Reporting; Research ethics; Scientific rigor; Web searching

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; HUMAN; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; PROCEDURES; REPRODUCIBILITY; SEARCH ENGINE; SELECTION BIAS; STATISTICAL BIAS;

ALGORITHMS; BIAS; DATABASES, BIBLIOGRAPHIC; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; INTERNET; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEARCH ENGINE; SELECTION BIAS; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85056558557     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0599-2     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Munafò MR, Nosek BA, Bishop DVM, et al. A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat Hum Behav. 2017;1(1):0021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-016-0021.
2. Emanuel E, et al., editors. The Oxford textbook of clinical research ethics. New York: Oxford University; 2008.
3. Bernabe R, Van Thiel G, Van Delden J. What do international ethics guidelines say in terms of the scope of medical research ethics? BMC Med Ethics. 2016;17:23. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-016-0106-4.
4. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols) 2015 checklist: recommended items to address in a systematic review protocol. BMJ. 2015;349(1):7647. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647.
5. Møller MH, Ioannidis JPA, Darmon M, Møller MH, JPA I, Darmon M. Are systematic reviews and meta-analyses still useful research? We are not sure. Intensive Care Med. 2018;44(4):518-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-017-5039-y.
6. 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;5:164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0337-y.
7. 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;5:191. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0371-9.
8. Pariser E. The filter bubble: what the internet is hiding from you. London: Viking; 2011.
9. Mahood Q, Van Eerd D, Irvin E. Searching for grey literature for systematic reviews: challenges and benefits. Res Synth Methods. 2014;5:221-34. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1106.
10. Stevens ML, Moseley A, Elkins MR, Lin CC, Maher CG. What searches do users run on PEDro? An analysis of 893,971 search commands over a 6-month period. Methods Inf Med. 2016;55(4):333-9. https://doi.org/10.3414/ME15-01-0143.
11. Blakeman K. Finding research information on the web: how to make the most of Google and other free search tools. Sci Prog. 2013;96:61-84.
12. Curkovic M. Need for Controlling of the Filter Bubble Effect. Sci Eng Ethics. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0005-1. Epub ahead of print.
13. Curkovic M. The implications of using internet search Engines in Structured Scientific Reviews. Sci Eng Ethics. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-017-0013-1. Epub ahead of print.
14. Briscoe S. A review of the reporting of web searching to identify studies for Cochrane systematic reviews. Res Synth Methods. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1275. Epub ahead of print.
15. 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. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-015-1079-y.
16. Haddaway N, Collins A, Coughlin D, Kirk S. A rapid method to increase transparency and efficiency in web-based searches. Environmental Evidence. 2017;6(1):1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13750-016-0079-2.
17. Yoshii A, Plaut DA, KA KMG, Anderson MJ, Wellik KE. Analysis of the reporting of search strategies in Cochrane systematic reviews. J Med Libr Assoc. 2009;97(1):21-9. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.97.1.004.
18. Cooper C, Booth A, Britten N, Garside R. A comparison of results of empirical studies of supplementary search techniques and recommendations in review methodology handbooks: a methodological review. Syst Review. 2017;6(1):234. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0625-1.
19. Bramer WM, Rethlefsen ML, Kleijnen J, Franco OH. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):245. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y.
20. Cooper C, Booth A, Varley-Campbell J, Britten N, Garside R. Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):85. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0545-3.